Loading...
64-552 - 24 FOREST AVENUE - CONSERVATION COMMISSION ILA Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection DEP File Number: Bureau of Resource Protection -Wetlands WPA Form 7 — Extension Permit for Orders of Conditions 64-552 Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act M.G.L. c. 131, §40 Provided by DEP C. Recording Confirmation The applicant shall record this document in accordance with General Condition 8 of the Order of Conditions(see below), complete the form attached to this Extension Permit, have it stamped by the Registry of Deeds, and return it to the Conservation Commission. Note: General Condition 8 of the Order of Conditions requires the applicant, prior to commencement of work, to record the final Order(or in this case,the Extension Permit for the Order of Conditions)in the Registry of Deeds or the Land Court for the district in which the land is located,within the chain of title of the affected property. In the case of recorded land, it shall be noted in the Registry's Granter Index under the name of the owner of the land upon which the proposed work is to be done. In the case of registered land;itshall also be noted on the Land Court Certificate of Title of the owner of the land upon which the I proposed work is done. Detach this page and submit it to the Conservation Commission prior to the expiration of the Order of Conditions subject to this Extension Permit. To: Salem Conservation Commission Please be advised that the Extension Permit to the Order of Conditions for the project at: 24 Fort Avenue 64-552 Project Location DEP File Number has been recorded at the Registry of Deeds of: Essex South District County for: Footprint Power Salem Harbor Real Estate LP Property Owner and has been noted in the chain of title of the affected property in accordance with General Condition 8 of the original Order of Conditions on: May 23, 2016 34942 316 Date Book Page If recorded land the instrument number which identifies this transaction is: 498 Instrument Number If registered land, the document number which identifies this transaction is: Document Number Signature of Applicant Page 2 of 2 xPaformLtloc•rev.512912014 w SERAFINI, DARLING & CORRENTI , LLP ATTORNEYS AT LAW 63 FEDERAL STREET / _ SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS OI 7% � I��y/ I',. JOHN R. SERAFINI, SR. MAY• 2 I p/�2016 TELEPHONE JOHN E. DARLING 9]S-]44-0212 JOSEPH C. CORRENTI i DEPT. OF PI ' 1,,i ;( a, 9FACSIMILE KRISTIN E. HOLICN COMMUNITY DEVEL(„ � e-gal-ar ea May 24, 2016 VIA HAND DELIVERY Tom Devine, Conservation Agent Salem Conservation Commission 120 Washington Street Salem, Massachusetts 01970 Re: Footprint Power Salem Harbor Development LP 24 Fort Avenue Extension Permit for Order of Conditions No. 64-552 Dear Mr. Devine: Enclosed please find the Recording Confirmation for the Extension Permit for Order of Conditions regarding the above matter, which has been recorded with the Registry of Deeds. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to call me. 'ncerely, oseph C. Gerrenti JCC:dI Enclosure cc: client CITY OF SALEM CONSERVATION COMMISSION May 16, 2016 Joseph Correnti Serafini, Darling& Correnti, L.L.P. 63 Federal Street Salem, MA 01970 Re: Extension Permit for Order of Conditions—DEP #64-552—Footprint Power Dear Attorney Correnti: Enclosed, please find the Extension Permit for the above-referenced Order of Conditions. The attached Extension Permit must be recorded at the South Essex County Registry of Deeds. Once recorded, please return a copy of Page 2 of the Extension Permit, which will indicate to the Commission that the document has been recorded. If you have any further questions,please feel free to contact me at 978-619-5685. Sincerely, Tom Devine Conservation Agent Enclosure r. CC: DEP Northeast Regional Office Footprint Power Salem Harbor Development LP/Footprint Power Salem Harbor Real Estate LP L1Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection DEP File Number: Bureau of Resource Protection - Wetlands 1 WPA Form 7 — Extension Permit for Orders of Conditions 64-552 Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act M.G.L. c. 131, §40 Provided by DEP A. General Information Important: When filling out 1. Applicant: forms on the Footprint Power Salem Harbor Development LP computer, use Name only the tab key to move 1140 Route 22 East, Suite 303 your cursor- Mailing Address do not use the Bridgewater NJ 08807 return key. City/Town State Zip Code 2. Property Owner(if different): Footprint Power Salem Harbor Real Estate LP Name Same Mailing Address Cityfrown State Zip Code B. Authorization The Order of Conditions (or Extension Permit) issued to the applicant or property owner listed above on: 7/31/2013 Issued by: Salem Date Conservation Commission for work at: 24 Fort Avenue 41 271, 273 Street Address Assessor's Map/Plat Number Parcel/Lot Number recorded at the Registry of Deeds for: South Essex 37161 237 County Book Page Certificate(if registered land) is hereby extended until: -7 3 / - D e Date Order was last extended(if applicable) This date can be no more than 3 years from the expiration date of the Order of Conditions or the latest extension. Only unexpired Orders of Conditions or Extension may be extended. This Extension Permit must be signed by a majority of the Conservation Commissi a copy sent to the applicant and the appropriate DEP Regional Office htt ://www.mass. ov/ ea/a encies/massd outicontacts/find-the-mass re I ffice or- our-ci -or- town.html). Signatures: ale I 4 I i� vvpaform7.doc•rev.5/29/2014 Page 1 of 2 Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection Bureau of Resource Protection - Wetlands DEP File Number: WPA Form 7 — Extension Permit for Orders of Conditions 64-552 Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act M.G.L. c. 131, §40 Provided by DEP C. Recording Confirmation The applicant shall record this document in accordance with General Condition 8 of the Order of Conditions (see below), complete the form attached to this Extension Permit, have it stamped by the Registry of Deeds, and return it to the Conservation Commission. Note: General Condition 8 of the Order of Conditions requires the applicant, prior to commencement of work, to record the final Order(or in this case, the Extension Permit for the Order of Conditions) in the Registry of Deeds or the Land Court for the district in which the land is located, within the chain of title of the affected property. In the case of recorded land, it shall be noted in the Registry's Granter Index under the name of the owner of the land upon which the proposed work is to be done. In the case of registered land, it shall also be noted on the Land Court Certificate of Title of the owner of the land upon which the proposed work is done. Detach this page and submit it to the Conservation Commission prior to the expiration of the Order of Conditions subject to this Extension Permit. To: Conservation Commission Please be advised that the Extension Permit to the Order of Conditions for the project at: Project Location DEP File Number has been recorded at the Registry of Deeds of: County for: Property Owner and has been noted in the chain of title of the affected property in accordance with General Condition 8 of the original Order of Conditions on: Date Book Page If recorded land the instrument number which identifies this transaction is: Instrument Number If registered land, the document number which identifies this transaction is: Document Number Signature of Applicant wpaformTdoc•rev.5/2 912 01 4 Page 2 of 2 Footprint Power Salem Harbor Development LP 24 Fort Ave Salem, MA 01970 14 April 2016 Mr.Thomas Devine,AICP Senior Planner City of Salem Conservation Commission Department of Planning& Community Development City Hall Annex 120 Washington Street Salem, MA 01970 Subject: Salem Harbor Power Station Order of Conditions - DEP #64-552 - 24 Fort Avenue Ref.No.: 1700-CL-SHP-COS-0005 Dear Mr. Devine, The Salem Harbor Power Station Construction Project received the referenced approval on July 31, 2013 (copy attached). The Order of Conditions and the Attachment to the Order of Conditions expire on July 31, 2016. The construction project will continue beyond July 31, 2016 so the project requests written extension of the approval until July 31, 2018. Pease do not hesitate to contact the undersigned if you have any questions or comments. Very Truly Yours, Footprint Power Salem Harbor Development LP Majid Yavary,P.Eng. Program Manager RD/rd Cc: DCC Enclosure: as stated Reducing Carbon Emissions One Step at a TimeTM WINTER STREET ARCHITECTS MEMO Date: 3.9.19 Geothermal Approach Project: Footprint Power Administration Building 4103.0000 To: Martin Christensen From: Dana Weeder The decision to utilize closed looped,vertical wells was dictated by two factors— Site and construction sequence logistics: Coordination at the interface of the Berm and Administration Building is simplified if the structure and associated retaining walls were built first, with construction of the Berm to follow. A horizontal approach would require installation of the coiled loops during Berm construction- well beyond the scheduled completion date of Administration Building. Performance: "Vertical wells offer several advantages compared to horizontal. Our design is based on 400' deep, closed loop wells. One of the primary advantages to this method over low depth horizontal design is that the wells are better protected and offer better conductivity to the earth. Horizontal wells typically do not offer high conductivity due to the type and moisture level of the substrate material, whereas the concrete/rock/sand that a vertical well encounters results in a smaller system footprint and less piping. Additionally, the deeper wells(vertical vs horizontal)reach areas of the earth that have more consistent temperature which improves system performance." 3.9.17 e-mail to WSA from CES(geothermal engineer) 27 Congress street Suite 201 Salem, Massachusetts 01970 978.744.7379 4 Notice of Intent Salem Harbor Station Redevelopment Project 24 Fort Avenue Salem, Massachusetts Submitted to: Salem Conservation Commission Footprint Power Salem Harbor Development LP June 13, 2013 OTETRATECH June 13, 2013 City of Salem Salem Conservation Commission Salem City Hall Annex 120 Washington Street Salem, MA 01970 Re: Notice of Intent Salem Harbor Station Redevelopment Project 24 Fort Avenue Salem, MA Dear Commission Members: Tetra Tech is pleased to submit this Notice of Intent (NOI) on behalf of Footprint Power Salem Harbor Development LP for the proposed Salem Harbor Station Redevelopment Project located at 24 Fort Avenue in Salem, Massachusetts. This NOI is submitted in accordance with the Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act and the City of Salem Wetlands Protection and Conservation Ordinance. Please find enclosed one original signed Notice of Intent, seven copies of the Notice of Intent and eight copies of the plans. Abutter notification information is provided in Appendix A. If you have any questions or require any additional information, please contact me at 508-903-2048. Very truly yours, Lisa M. Carrozza Senior Project Manager P\6211T12]-62112-12001\OOCSV PORTSVOCAL\CON COM\NOIWOI REPORT 5-22-13OOCX Engineering and Architecture Services One Grant Strcet ^� Framingham, 01701 Tel 50&903,2000 Fix 5089&9 03.2001 Notice of Intent Salem Harbor Station Redevelopment Project 24 Fort Avenue Salem, MA Submitted to: Salem Conservation Commission • June 13, 2013 ii Table of Contents • Notice of Intent Form 1.0 Introduction......................................................................................................................................l 2.0 Existing Conditions..........................................................................................................................l 3.0 Resource Areas................................................................................................................................2 3.1 Land Under the Ocean........................................................................................................2 3.2 Designated Port Area..........................................................................................................2 3.3 Land Containing Shellfish..................................................................................................2 3.4 Land Subject to Tidal Action..............................................................................................2 3.5 Coastal Bank.......................................................................................................................3 3.6 Land Subject to Coastal Storm Flowage/100 Year Flood Zone .........................................3 3.7 Salem Wetlands Protection and Conservation Ordinance ..................................................3 3.8 Coastal Beach......................................................................................................................3 3.9 Rocky Intertidal Shore........................................................................................................4 3.10 Other Resources..................................................................................................................4 4.0 Project Description...........................................................................................................................4 • 4.1 Facility Layout within Gabion Wall...................................................................................5 4.2 Landscaped Area Outside of Gabion Wall..........................................................................6 5.0 StormwaterManagement.................................................................................................................6 5.1 Existing Drainage System...................................................................................................7 5.2 Proposed Drainage System.................................................................................................8 5.2.1 Facility within Gabion Wall...................................................................................8 5.2.2 Existing Parking and Access Roadway..................................................................9 5.2.3 Landscaped Area Outside of Gabion Wall ............................................................9 5.2.4 Northern and Southern Portions.............................................................................9 5.3 Low Impact Development& Infiltration Limitations....................................................... 10 6.0 Conformance with DEP Stormwater Management Standards.......................................................10 7.0 Demolition and-Remediation.........................................................................................................15 8.0 Impacts and Mitigation..................................................................................................................15 8.1 Temporary Impacts........................................................................................................... 16 8.2 Permanent Impacts............................................................................................................16 8.2.1 100 Foot Buffer Zone to Coastal Bank and LSCSF.............................................17 8.3 Delivery of Materials by Water........................................................................................17 • III 8.4 Measures to Avoid and Minimize Permanent Impacts..................................................... 18 • 9.0 Conformance with Performance Standards.................................................................................... 18 9.1 Land Subject to Coastal Storm Flowage...........................................................................18 9.2 Designated Port Area........................................................................................................18 9.3 Sea Level Rise/Adaptation................................................................................................19 9.3.1 Existing Conditions..............................................................................................19 9.3.2 Establishing a Current Day Flood/Storm Surge Design Basis Elevation.............19 9.3.3 Establishing a Future Flood/Storm Surge Design Basis Elevation......................20 9.3.4 Recommended Future Flood/Storm Surge Design Basis Elevation ....................21 9.4 Redirection/Storm Surge Impacts on Adjacent Areas ......................................................22 10.0 Construction Term Mitigation Measures.......................................................................................24 10.1 Construction Term Erosion Prevention and Sediment Control Mitigation Measures...........................................................................................................................25 10.2 Construction Term Management Plans.............................................................................29 10.2.1 Waste Management Plan......................................................................................29 10.2.2 Soils Management................................................................................................30 11.0 Operation Term Mitigation Measures............................................................................................30 11.1 Stormwater........................................................................................................................30 • 11.2 General O&M...................................................................................................................31 11.2.1 Hazardous Material Management and Storage....................................................31 12.0 Project Phasing and Methods.........................................................................................................32 12.1.1 Early Pre-Construction Activities........................................................................32 12.1.2 Facility Construction............................................................................................33 12.1.3 Commissioning, Testing and Operations.............................................................33 iv List of Figures • Figure 1 USGS Site Location Map Figure 2 Aerial Site Photograph (Overview) Figure 3 Aerial Site Photograph(Detail View) Figure 4 Wetland Resource Area Overview Figure 5 FEMA Flood Zone Figure 6 Flood Zone Based on Ground Survey Figure 7 Natural Heritage and Endangered Species Map Figure 8 Proposed Facility Overview Figure 9 Proposed Facility Detail View Figure 10 Facility Layout Figure 11 Facility Section Views A&B Figure 12 Facility Section Views C& D Figure 13 Existing Site Drainage and Outfalls Figure 14 Demolition Sequencing Plan Figures 15a-f Construction Sequencing Plans List of Plans • Sheet C-100 Record Conditions Plan of Land Sheet C-101 Record Conditions Utility Plan Sheet C-102 Wetland Resource Areas Sheet C-103 Layout and Materials Plan Sheet C-104 Grading, Drainage and Utility Plan Sheet C-105 Civil Detail Sheet Sheet C-106 Civil Detail Sheet Sheet C-107 Planting Plan Sheet C-108 Planting Schedule and Notes Sheet C-109 Planting Details List of Appendices Appendix A Abutter Notification Information Appendix B Stormwater Management Report Appendix C Sea Level Rise Reference Material Appendix D Notice of Intent Plans • Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection Provided by MassDEP: ;~ Bureau of Resource Protection - Wetlands I MassDEP File Number 1 WPA Form 3 - Notice of Intent Document Transaction Number Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act M.G.L. c. 131, §40 andk-.— - -~-- The City of Salem Wetlands Protection and Conservation SALEM Ordinance City/rown Important: When filling out A. General Information forms on the computer,use 1. Project Location (Note: electronic filers will click on button to locate project site): only the tab key to move your 24 Fort Avenue Salem 01970 cursor-do not use the return a.Street Address b.City/Town c.Zip Code key. 42° 31' 37" -70° 52' 36" Latitude and Longitude: d.Latitude e.Longitude r� 41 0271 and 0273 f.Assessors Map/Plat Number g.Parcel/Lot Number 2. Applicant: Scott Silverstein a. First Name b.Last Name Note: Footprint Power Salem Harbor Development LP Before c.Organization completing this form consult 1140 Route 22 East, Suite 303 your local d.Street Address Conservation Bridgewater NJ 08807 Commission e.City/rown f.State g.Zi Code regarding any P municipal bylaw 908-864-4900 ssilverstein@footprintoower.com or ordinance. h.Phone Number i. Fax Number j.Email Address • 3. Property owner(required if different from applicant): ❑ Check if more than one owner a. First Name b.Last Name Footprint Power Salem Harbor Real Estate LP c.Organization Same d.Street Address e.City/Town f.State g.Zip Code h.Phone Number i. Fax Number j.Email address 4. Representative (if any): Lisa Carrozza a.First Name b.Last Name Tetra Tech c.Company One Grant Street d.Street Address Framingham MA 01701-9005 e.City/Tom f.State g.Zip Code (508)903-2000 (508)903-2001 lisa.carrozza@tetratech.com h.Phone Number i. Fax Number j.Email address 5. Total WPA Fee Paid (from NO[Wetland Fee Transmittal Form): • $6,800 $3,387.50 $3,412.50 a.Total Fee Paid b.State Fee Paid c.City/Town Fee Paid wpaform3.doc•rev. 11/16/09 Page 1 of 8 \ Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection Provided by MassXP'}'"-- Bureau Of Resource Protection - Wetlands - MassDEP File Number \`\ WPA Form 3 - Notice of Intent I Document Transaction Number' Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act M.G.L. c. 131, §40 and- --- ----- E The City of Salem Wetlands Protection and Conservation SALEM Ordinance City/Tom A. General Information (continued) 6. General Project Description: Redevelopment of the existing Salem Harbor Station to include the construction of a new state-of-the- art gas fired electric generation facility and related structures and infrastructure 7a. Project Type Checklist: 1. ❑ Single Family Home 2. ❑ Residential Subdivision 3. ❑ Limited Project Driveway Crossing 4. Z Commercial/Industrial 5. ❑ Dock/Pier 6. ❑ Utilities 7. ❑ Coastal Engineering Structure 8. ❑ Agriculture (e.g., cranberries, forestry) 9. ❑ Transportation 10. ❑ Other 7b. Is any portion of the proposed activity eligible to be treated as a limited project subject to 310 CMR • 10.24 (coastal)or 310 CMR 10.53 (inland)? 1. ❑ Yes Z No If yes, describe which limited project applies to this project: 2.Limited Project 8. Property recorded at the Registry of Deeds for: Essex Document No. 449497; 9885A; 25890; 13585A a.County - b.Certificate#(if registered land) 31761/231;23825/102; 15069/350;3856/129;27327/111 ; 410/87 c.Book/Page B. Buffer Zone & Resource Area Impacts (temporary & permanent) 1. ❑ Buffer Zone Only—Check if the project is located only in the Buffer Zone of a Bordering Vegetated Wetland, Inland Bank, or Coastal Resource Area. 2. ❑ Inland Resource Areas (see 310 CMR 10.54-10.58; if not applicable, go to Section B.3, Coastal Resource Areas). Check all that apply below. Attach narrative and any supporting documentation describing how the project will meet all performance standards for each of the resource areas altered, including standards requiring consideration of alternative project design or location. For all projects Resource Area Size of Proposed Alteration Proposed Replacement(if any) affecting other Resource Areas, please altacha a. ❑ Bank 1.linear feet 2.linear feet narrative Aftlarcing how b. ❑ Bordering Vegetated resource Wetland 1.square feet 2.square feet rea was c. ❑ Land Under delineated. Waterbodies and 1.square feet 2.square feet wpaform3.doc•rev. 11/16/09 Page 2 of 8 Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection Provided by MassDEP: Bureau of Resource Protection - Wetlands r ` MassDEP File Number„ WPA Form 3 - Notice of Intent ocument Number Transaction Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act M.G.L. c. 131, §40 and' D- The City of Salem Wetlands Protection and Conservation SALEM Ordinance city/Town Waterways 3.cubic yards dredged B. Buffer Zone & Resource Area Impacts (temporary & permanent) (cont'd) Resource Area Size of Proposed Alteration Proposed Replacement(if any) d. ❑ Bordering Land Subject to Flooding 1.square feet 2.square feet 3.cubic feet of flood storage lost 4.cubic feet replaced e. ❑ Isolated Land Subject to Flooding 1.square feet 2.cubic feet of flood storage lost 3.cubic feet replaced f. ❑ Riverfront Area 1. Name of Waterway(if available) 2.Width of Riverfront Area (check one): ❑ 25 ft. - Designated Densely Developed Areas only ❑ 100 ft. - New agricultural projects only • ❑ 200 ft. -All other projects 3. Total area of Riverfront Area on the site of the proposed project: square feet 4. Proposed alteration of the Riverfront Area: a.total square feet b.square feet within 100 ft. c.square feet between 100 ft.and 200 ft. 5. Has an alternatives analysis been done and is it attached to this NOI? ❑ Yes❑ No 6.Was the lot where the activity is proposed created prior to August 1, 1996? ❑ Yes❑ No 3. ® Coastal Resource Areas: (See 310 CMR 10.25-10.35) Check all that apply below. Attach narrative and supporting documentation describing how the project will meet all performance standards for each of the resource areas altered, including standards requiring consideration of alternative project design or location. Online Users: Include your Resource Area Size of Proposed Alteration Proposed Replacement(if any) document transaction number a. ® Designated Port Areas Indicate size under Land Under the Ocean, below (provided on your receipt page) b. ❑ Land Under the Ocean 1.square feet with all supplementary information you 2.cubic yards dredged submit to the �artment. c. ❑ Barrier Beach Indicate size under Coastal Beaches and/or Coastal Dunes below d. ❑ Coastal Beaches 1.square feet 2.cubic yards beach nourishment wpaform3.doc•rev. 11/16/09 Page 3 of 8 Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection Provided by MassoEP:'ar Bureau Of Resource Protection - Wetlands MassDBPFile Number. WPA Form 3 - Notice of Intent I Document Transaction Number Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act M.G.L. c. 131, §40 andre, �- - The City of Salem Wetlands Protection and Conservation SALEM Ordinance City/Town e. ❑ Coastal Dunes 1.square feet 2.cubic yards dune nourishment B. Buffer Zone & Resource Area Impacts (temporary & permanent) (cont'd) Size of Proposed Alteration Proposed Replacement(if any) f. ❑ Coastal Banks 1.linear feet g. ❑ Rocky Intertidal Shores 1.square feet h.❑ Salt Marshes 1.square feet 2.sq ft restoration,rehab.,creation i. ❑ Land Under Salt Ponds 1.square feet 2.cubic yards dredged j. ❑ Land Containing Shellfish 1.square feet k. ❑ Fish Runs Indicate size under Coastal Banks, inland Bank, Land Under the Ocean, and/or inland Land Under Waterbodies and Waterways, above • 1.cubic yards dredged I. Z Land Subject to 541,000 (12.4 acres) Coastal Storm Flowage 1.square feet 4. ❑ Restoration/Enhancement If the project is for the purpose of restoring or enhancing a wetland resource area in addition to the square footage that has been entered in Section B.2.b or B.3.h above, please enter the additional amount here. a.square feet of BVW b.square feet of Salt Marsh 5. ❑ s Project Involves Stream Crossings 9 a. number of new stream crossings b.number of replacement stream crossings C. Other Applicable Standards and Requirements Streamlined Massachusetts Endangered Species Act/Wetlands Protection Act Review 1. Is any portion of the proposed project located in Estimated Habitat of Rare Wildlife as indicated on the most recent Estimated Habitat Map of State-Listed Rare Wetland Wildlife published by the Natural Heritage and Endangered Species Program (NHESP)?To view habitat maps, see the Massachusetts Natural Heritage Atlas or go to htti)://www.mass.gov/dfwele/dfw/nhesp/regulatory review/priority habitat/online viewer.htm. a. ❑ Yes Z No If yes, include proof of mailing or hand delivery of NOI to: • Natural Heritage and Endangered Species Program Division of Fisheries and Wildlife 2008 (MassGIS) Route 135, North Drive b.Date of map Westborough, MA 01581 wpaformIdoc•rev. 11/16/09 Page 4 of 8 Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection Provided by MassDEP._ Bureau of Resource Protection - Wetlands MassDEP Pile Number- WPA Form 3 - Notice of Intentk Document Transaction Number Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act M.G.L. c. 131, §40 and - - -�-- The City of Salem Wetlands Protection and Conservation SALEM Ordinance City/Tom C. Other Applicable Standards and Requirements (cont'd) If yes, the project is also subject to Massachusetts Endangered Species Act(MESA) review(321 CMR 10.18). To qualify for a streamlined, 30-day, MESANVetlands Protection Act review, please complete Section CAL, and include requested materials with this Notice of Intent(NOI); OR complete Section CAA, if applicable. If MESA supplemental information is not included with the NOI, by completing Section 1 of this form, the NHESP will require a separate MESA filing which may take up to 90 days to review(unless noted exceptions in Section 2 apply, see below). 1. c. Submit Supplemental Information for Endangered Species Review' 1. ❑ Percentage/acreage of property to be altered: (a)within wetland Resource Area percentage/acreage (b)outside Resource Area percentage/acreage 2. ❑ Assessor's Map or right-of-way plan of site 3. ❑ Project plans for entire project site, including wetland resource areas and areas outside of wetlands jurisdiction, showing existing and proposed conditions, existing and proposed • tree/vegetation clearing line, and clearly demarcated limits of work**" (a)❑ Project description (including description of impacts outside of wetland resource area & buffer zone) (b) ❑ Photographs representative of the site (c)❑ MESA filing fee(fee information available at: http://www.mass.gov/dfwele/dfw/nhesp/regulatory review/mesa/mesa fee schedule.htm). Make check payable to "Commonwealth of Massachusetts - NHESF and mail to NHESP at above address Projects altering 10 or more acres of land, also submit. (d)❑ Vegetation cover type map of site (e)❑ Project plans showing Priority& Estimated Habitat boundaries d. OR Check One of the Following 1. ❑ Project is exempt from MESA review. Attach applicant letter indicating which MESA exemption applies. (See 321 CMR 10.14, http://www.mass.goy/dfwele/dfw/nhesp/regulatory review/mesa/mesa exemptions.htm; the NOI must still be sent to NHESP if the project is within estimated habitat pursuant to 310 CMR 10.37 and 10.59.) Some projects not in Estimated Habitat may be located in Priority Habitat,and require NHESP review(see `p://www.mass.goy/dfwele/dfw/nhesp/nheso.htm, regulatory review tab). Priority Habitat includes habitat for state-listed plants and ctly upland species not protected by the Wetlands Protection Act. " MESA projects may not be segmented(321 CMR 10.16).The applicant must disclose full development plans even if such plans are not required as part of the Notice of Intent process. wpaform3.doc•rev. 11/16/09 Page 5 of 8 Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection Provided by MassDEP: Bureau of Resource Protection - Wetlands MassDEP File Number g WPA Form 3 - Notice of Intent 4 Document Transaction Number Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act M.G.L. c. 131, §40 and -- The City of Salem Wetlands Protection and Conservation SALEM S3 Ordinance City/Town 2. ❑ Separate MESA review ongoing. a.NHESP Tracking# b.Date submitted to NHESP C. Other Applicable Standards and Requirements (cont'd) 3.❑ Separate MESA review completed. Include copy of NHESP "no Take" determination or valid Conservation & Management Permit with approved plan. 2. For coastal projects only, is any portion of the proposed project located below the mean high water line or in a fish run? a. ❑ Not applicable—project is in inland resource area only b.❑ Yes ® No If yes, include proof of mailing or hand delivery of NOI to either: South Shore-Cohasset to Rhode North Shore-Hull to New Hampshire: Island, and the Cape&Islands: Division of Marine Fisheries- Division of Marine Fisheries- Southeast Marine Fisheries Station North Shore Office Attn: Environmental Reviewer Attn: Environmental Reviewer 1213 Purchase Street-3rd Floor 30 Emerson Avenue New Bedford, MA 02740-6694 Gloucester, MA 01930 Also if yes, the project may require a Chapter 91 license. For coastal towns in the Northeast Region, please contact MassDEP's Boston Office. For coastal towns in the Southeast Region, please contact MassDEP's Southeast Regional Office. 3. Is any portion of the proposed project within an Area of Critical Environmental Concern (ACEC)? Online users: a. ❑ Yes No If yes, provide name of ACEC (see instructions to WPA Form 3 or MassDEP Include your Website for ACEC locations). Note: electronic filers click on Website. document transaction b.ACEC number (provided on your 4. Is any portion of the proposed project within an area designated as an Outstanding Resource Water receipt page) (ORW)as designated in the Massachusetts Surface Water Quality Standards, 314 CMR 4.00? with all supplementary a. ❑ Yes ® No information you submit to the 5. Is any portion of the site subject to a Wetlands Restriction Order under the Inland Wetlands Department. Restriction Act(M.G.L. c. 131, § 40A)or the Coastal Wetlands Restriction Act (M.G.L. c. 130, § 105)? a. ❑ Yes ® No 6. Is this project subject to provisions of the MassDEP Stormwater Management Standards? a. ® Yes. Attach a copy of the Stormwater Report as required by the Stormwater Management Standards per 310 CMR 10.05(6)(k)-(q)and check if: 1.❑ Applying for Low Impact Development(LID)site design credits (as described in Stormwater Management Handbook Vol. 2, Chapter 3) 2. ® A portion of the site constitutes redevelopment • 3. 0 Proprietary BMPs are included in the Stormwater Management System. b.❑ No. Check why the project is exempt: wpaform3.doc•rev. 11/16/09 Page 6 of 8 Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection ;Provided byMassDEP: Bureau of Resource Protection - Wetlands LD: assDEP File Number 1 WPA Form 3 - Notice of Intent ocument Transaction Number Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act M.G.L. c. 131, §40 and The City of Salem Wetlands Protection and Conservation SALEM Ordinance city/Town 1. ❑ Single-family house C. Other Applicable Standards and Requirements (cont'd) 2.❑ Emergency road repair 3.❑ Small Residential Subdivision (less than or equal to 4 single-family houses or less than or equal to 4 units in multi-family housing project)with no discharge to Critical Areas. D. Additional Information Applicants must include the following with this Notice of Intent(NOI). See instructions for details. Online Users: Attach the document transaction number(provided on your receipt page)for any of the following information you submit to the Department. 1. 0 USGS or other map of the area (along with a narrative description, if necessary)containing sufficient information for the Conservation Commission and the Department to locate the site. (Electronic filers may omit this item.) 2. ® Plans identifying the location of proposed activities (including activities proposed to serve as a Bordering Vegetated Wetland [BVW] replication area or other mitigating measure) relative to the boundaries of each affected resource area. • 3. ❑ Identify the method for BVW and other resource area boundary delineations(MassDEP BVW Field Data Form(s), Determination of Applicability, Order of Resource Area Delineation, etc.), and attach documentation of the methodology. 4. ❑ List the titles and dates for all plans and other materials submitted with this NOI. SEE TABLE OF CONTENTS a. Plan Title , Tetra Tech Brian R. Marchetti b.Prepared By c.Signed and Stamped by d. Final Revision Date e.Scale f.Additional Plan or Document Title g.Date 5. ❑ If there is more than one property owner, please attach a list of these property owners not listed on this form. 6.❑ Attach proof of mailing for Natural Heritage and Endangered Species Program, if needed. 7. ❑ Attach proof of mailing for Massachusetts Division of Marine Fisheries, if needed. 6. ® Attach NOI Wetland Fee Transmittal Form 9. ® Attach Stormwater Report, if needed. • wpaform3.doc•rev. 11/16/09 Page 7 of 8 Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection Provided by MassDEP �- Bureau of Resource Protection-WetlandsMessDEP PileNumber WPA Form 3 - Notice of Intent E onaent Transaction Number Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act M.G.L. c. 131, §40 and The City of Salem Wetlands Protection and Conservation SALEM Ordinance Cky/rown E. Fees 1. ❑ Fee Exempt: No filing fee shall be assessed for projects of any city, town,county, or district of the Commonwealth, federally recognized Indian tribe housing authority, municipal housing authority, or the Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority. Applicants must submit the following information (in addition to pages 1 and 2 of the NOI Wetland Fee Transmittal Form)to confirm fee payment: 1093 June 7, 2013 2.Municipal Check Number 3.Check date 1094 June 7; 2013 4.Slate Check Number - 5.Check date Footprint Power Salem HarborOevl LP S.Payor name on check:First Name 7.Payor name on check:Last Name F. Signatures and Submittal Requirements I hereby certify under the penalties of perjury that the foregoing Notice of Intent and accompanying plans, documents, and supporting data are true and complete to the best of my knowledge. I understand that the Conservation Commission will place notification of this Notice in a local newspaper at the expense of the applicant in accordance with the wetlands regulations,310 CMR 10.05(5)(a). • I further certify under penalties of perjury that all abutters were notified of this application, pursuant to the requirements of M.G.L. c. 131, §40. Notice must be made by Certificate of Mailing or in writing by hand delivery or certified mail (return receipt requested)to all abutters within 100 feet of the property line of the project location. Footprint Power Salem Harbor Development LP By Footprint P wer SW DevCo GP LLC; its General Partner By Scott S' er` P sic &COO 2.Date ature of pplica ` Footprint Power Salem Harbor Real Estate LP By Footprint Power SH RealCo GP LLC, its General Partner By Scott Sily te' siden ,COO _ 3.AnatueUProperty. er(ifdifferent) 4.Date 5.Signature of Representative(if any) 6.Date For Conservation Commission: Two copies of the completed Notice of Intent(Form 3), including supporting plans and documents, two copies of the NOI Wetland Fee Transmittal Form, and the city/town fee payment, to the Conservation Commission by certified mail or hand delivery. For MassDEP: One copy of the completed Notice of Intent(Form 3), including supporting plans and documents, one copy of the NOI Wetland Fee Transmittal Form, and a copy of the state fee payment to the MassDEP . Regional Office(see Instructions) by certified mail or hand delivery. wpaforrn3.doc•rev. 11/16/09 Page 8 of 8 Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection Bureau of Resource Protection - Wetlands NOI Wetland Fee Transmittal Form Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act M.G.L. c. 131, §40 Important:When A. Applicant Information filling out forms on the computer, 1. Location of Project: use only the tab key to move your 24 Fort Avenue Salem cursor-do not a.Street Address b.City/Town use the return key. #1094 $3,387.50 c.Check number d. Fee amount d 2. Applicant Mailing Address: Scott Silverstein �^ a. First Name b.Last Name Footprint Power Salem Harbor Development LP c.Organization 1140 Route 22 East, Suite 303 d. Mailing Address Bridgewater NJ 08807 e.City/Town I.State g.Zip Code 908-864-4900 ssilverstein@footprintpower.com h.Phone Number i. Fax Number j.Email Address 3. Property Owner(if different): a. First Name b. Last Name • Footprint Power Salem Harbor Real Estate LP c.Organization Same d. Mailing Address e.City/Town f.State g.Zip Code h. Phone Number i. Fax Number I. Email Address To calculate B. Fees filing fees,refer to the category fee list and Fee should be calculated using the following process &worksheet. Please see Instructions before examples in the filling out worksheet. instructions for filling out WPA Step 1/Type of Activity: Describe each type of activity that will occur in wetland resource area and buffer zone. Form 3(Notice of Intent). Step 2/Number of Activities: Identify the number of each type of activity. Step 3/Individual Activity Fee: Identify each activity fee from the six project categories listed in the instructions. Step 4/Subtotal Activity Fee: Multiply the number of activities(identified in Step 2)times the fee per category (identified in Step 3)to reach a subtotal fee amount. Note: If any of these activities are in a Riverfront Area in addition to another Resource Area or the Buffer Zone,the fee per activity should be multiplied by 1.5 and then added to the subtotal amount. Step 5/1rotal Project Fee: Determine the total project fee by adding the subtotal amounts from Step 4. Step 61Fee Payments:To calculate the state share of the fee,divide the total fee in half and subtract$12.50.To calculate the city/town share of the fee,divide the total fee in half and add$12.50. noifeetl.d. •Wetland Fee Transmittal Form•rev.10/17/11 Page 1 of 2 Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection Bureau of Resource Protection - Wetlands 1 NOI Wetland Fee Transmittal Form Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act M.G.L. c. 131, §40 B. Fees (continued) Step 1/Type of Activity Step 2/Number Step Step 4/Subtotal Activity of Activities 3/Individual Fee Activity Fee Category 3b (each building) 5 $1,050.00 $5,250.00 Category 2 (any other activity- 1 $500 $500.00 demolition ) Catgegory 3d (hazardous clean up) 1 $1,050 $1,050.00 Step 5rrotai Project Fee: $6,800.00 • Step 6/Fee Payments: Total Project Fee: $ 6,800.00 Total Fee e T a.Total Ffrom Step 5 State share of filing Fee: $3387.50 b. 1/2 Total Fee less$12.50 City/Town share of filling Fee: c. 1/2 T 50 c. 1/2 Total Fee plus$12.50 C. Submittal Requirements a.) Complete pages 1 and 2 and send with a check or money order for the state share of the fee, payable to the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. Department of Environmental Protection Box 4062 Boston, MA 02211 b.) To the Conservation Commission: Send the Notice of Intent or Abbreviated Notice of Intent;a copy of this form; and the city/town fee payment. To MassDEP Regional Office(see Instructions):Send a copy of the Notice of Intent or Abbreviated Notice of Intent;a copy of this form;and a copy of the state fee payment. (E-filers of Notices of Intent may submit these electronically.) • noifeetf doc•Wetand Fee Transmittal Form•rev.10/17/11 Page 2 of 2 FOOTPRINT POWER SALEM HARBOR DEVL LP' �` 1094 ' .:,1140 US HWY 22 EAST; - - 5533/212 NJ BRIDGEWATER NJ 08807. - x .v. ..Zgy�3 . 9oz46 M_' f/ DATE PAY TO THE ORDER OF (/q/f!////�1a✓If'+"E7CG� $ 331s7 � „s�dC�r` �t�/moo -DO L-LA RS ' BankofAmerica�W W AC Ra 021200339 FOR 110001094u' A:&212003391:m 38L01160,6$ 59111, FA PRINT POWER SALEM HARBOWDEVL LP ' X1093 1140 USHWY 22 EAST 303' - �5533/2R NJ.BRIDGEWATER NJ 08807_ " - 90246DATE B/ G� ORDER OF / (i�i'J/��A'/�i��o� 7/ 1/eL' DOLLARS 8 BankofAmerica ACH RR 021200339 FOR 11600 L09311' i:q'2 L 200-3391: -38103 L.60:6 859111 1 1.0 Introduction • This Notice of Intent (NOI) is being submitted on behalf of Footprint Power Salem Harbor Development LP (the Applicant) pursuant to the Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act (MAWPA; MGL Ch. 131, s. 40) and regulations (3 10 CMR 10.00 et seq.) and the City of Salem Wetlands Protection and Conservation Ordinance (Chapter 50) for the redevelopment of Salem Harbor Station located at 24 Fort Avenue. The Applicant proposes to revitalize the old, coal and oil-fired electric generation facility located on the 65 +/- acre parcel (the Site); a site location map is included as Figure 1 and aerial photographs of the site are included as Figures 2 and 3. The Site is bordered by the South Essex Sewage District (SESD) wastewater treatment plant to the north, Salem Harbor and Cat Cove to the east and northeast; the Blaney Street Ferry terminal and several mixed-use buildings to the southeast; and by Derby Street and Fort Avenue to the west. Residential neighborhoods and the Bentley Elementary School are located to the west across Fort Avenue and Derby Street. 2.0 Existing Conditions The 65+/- acre Site is currently occupied by the Salem Harbor Station (the Station), a coal and oil-fired electric generation facility. The Station is a secure, continuously occupied facility, with chain-link fenced land boundaries on three sides and Salem Harbor on the fourth. Major structures and infrastructure associated with Station operations include a 108,067 square foot (sf) power house building(which houses generating Units 1 through 4, fan house, boiler room and turbine room); an aboveground fuel oil tank farm and associated piping transfer system; a coal • storage pile, coal runoff basin and coal moving equipment; a marine terminal; and a wastewater treatment system. A 115 kV National Grid (NGRID) switchyard occupying 7 +/- acres is located to the west of the Station's main powerhouse building. Three smaller warehouse buildings are located north of the main building. Ocean vessels or barges deliver coal and fuel oil for Station operations. Dockage and off-loading facilities are located at the marine terminal in the south-southeastern portion of the property. Coal unloading is accomplished utilizing self-unloading vessels. The marine terminal is connected to the aboveground oil storage tanks via a network of pumps and aboveground pipes. Coal for the Station is stored in a large pile (approximately five acres) on the southern portion of the Site. Coal is transferred from the pile to the powerhouse via an enclosed conveyor. Runoff from the coal pile collects in a perimeter concrete drainage channel which conveys flows into a manmade 3 +/- foot deep asphalt-lined basin that occupies approximately 1 acre of the Site. Water is pumped from the coal pile runoff basin to the wastewater treatment system and discharged to Salem Harbor through an existing outfall permitted to discharge such flows under the Environmental Protection Agency's National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Multi Sector General Permit (EPA NPDES MSGP). The Site varies in elevation from approximately 9 feet North American Vertical Datum of 1988 (NAVD 88) to approximately 16 feet in elevation. According to a review of historic maps and records, much of the Site was developed by filling tidal marsh areas within stone seawalls. With • 2 the exception of a large grassed area and smaller landscaped areas throughout the Site, the majority of the Site consists of impervious surfaces. 3.0 Resource Areas The state and local jurisdictional wetland resources located on and adjacent to the Site are listed below. Resource areas are illustrated on Figure 4. There are no impacts proposed within resource areas identified below with the exception of Land Subject to Coastal Storm Flowage (LSCSF) or the 100 year flood zone, and the 100 foot local buffer to LSCSF. Work is also proposed within the 100 foot buffer zone of Coastal Bank. The following resource areas are located on the Site: 3.1 Land Under the Ocean Land Under the Ocean is the land extending from the mean low water line(elevation -5.2 feet) seaward to the boundary of the municipality and includes land under estuaries. Land Under the Ocean is located within the discharge channel on the eastern portion of the Site and adjacent to the southern and northeastern portions of the Site within Salem Harbor. 3.2 Designated Port Area Designated Port Areas are those designated in 301 CMR 25.00 of the Coastal Zone Management Regulations. The majority of the Site and a portion of the adjacent ocean are located within the Salem Harbor Designated Port Area. Within Designated Port Areas (DPAs), only Land Under • the Ocean is considered likely to be significant to the protection of marine fisheries, storm damage prevention and flood control. Other resource areas, including Rocky Intertidal Shores and Land Containing Shellfish are not likely to be significant to marine fisheries, storm damage prevention and flood control. 3.3 Land Containing Shellfish Land Containing Shellfish is found within Land Under the Ocean, tidal flats (Coastal Beach), Rocky Intertidal Shores, Salt Marshes and Land Under Salt Ponds. The Massachusetts Division of Marine Fisheries has mapped Land Under the Ocean, tidal flats and Rocky Intertidal Shores within and adjacent to the Site as designated shellfish growing areas; the areas are classified as prohibited or closed for the harvest of shellfish. Land Containing Shellfish is coincidental with Land Under the Ocean within the discharge channel and the adjacent Harbor. 3.4 Land Subject to Tidal Action Land Subject to Tidal Action (LSTA) is land subject to the periodic rise and fall of a coastal water body, including spring tides. Areas adjacent to the south, east and northeast of the Site and eastern portions of the Site qualify as LSTA. LSTA is located between mean low water (elevation-5.2 feet) and spring high tide(elevation 6.5 feet). 3 3.5 Coastal Bank • Coastal Banks are defined at 310 CMR 10.30(2) as: "the seaward face or side of any elevated landform, other than a Coastal Dune, which lies at the landward edge of a Coastal Beach, Land Subject to Tidal Action, or other wetland." The toe or bottom of the Coastal Bank begins at elevation 6.5 feet which is the landward limit of LSTA. The landward boundary of a Coastal Bank is "the top of, or first major break in, the face of the coastal bank." The entire length of the waterfront along Salem Harbor qualifies as Coastal Bank. In several areas along the shoreline, the upper and lower limit of Coastal Bank is coincidental with the vertical seawalls and sheetpile bulkhead walls. The remainder of the shoreline contains rip rap embankment areas, where the slopes are steeper than 4:1 and transition to slopes less than 10:1. In these areas Wetlands Program Policy 92-1: Coastal Banks was used to delineate the landward boundary of Coastal Bank. The rip rap areas follow Figure 4 of the Policy and are further described under Section D of the Policy which states "top of Coastal Bank" will fall below the 100-year flood elevation and is the point where the slope ceases to be greater than or equal to 10:1. Therefore, along these areas, the top of bank was delineated at the landward edge of the rip rap which is coincidental with the break in slope. 3.6 Land Subject to Coastal Storm Flowage/100 Year Flood Zone On the Project Site, Land Subject to Coastal Storm Flowage (LSCSF) is coincident with the limits of the 100-year floodplain mapped by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) on the Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM), Panel 25009CO419F (July 3, 2012). A portion of the Site located along Salem Harbor is mapped as Zone VE12, a velocity zone or coastal high hazard area where wave height is greater than or equal to 3 feet above the base 100- year elevation. As mapped by FEMA, the majority of the LSCSF on the Site is Coastal Zone AE elevation 10 (NAVD 88) and represents the area landward of the VE12 zone, where the principal source of flooding is astronomical tides or storm surges. The location of the flood zones mapped by FEMA is shown on Figure 5. A topographic survey was performed to determine the actual location of elevation 10 feet on the Project Site and is shown on Figure 6 and represented on the Project Plans as the 100 year flood zone or LSCSF. 3.7 Salem Wetlands Protection and Conservation Ordinance The City of Salem has promulgated a Wetlands Protection and Conservation Ordinance (Chapter 50 of the Salem City Ordinance) that fundamentally mirrors the Wetlands Protection Act jurisdiction and procedures with the exception that jurisdiction includes the area extending 100 feet from LSCSF or the 100 year floodplain. The following resource areas are located adjacent to the Site: 3.8 Coastal Beach Coastal Beaches are defined as unconsolidated sediment subject to tidal and coastal storm action which form the gently sloping shore of a body of salt water and includes tidal flats. They extend • from the mean low water line(elevation-5.2 feet) landward to the dune line, Coastal Bank or the 4 seaward edge of existing man-made structures, when these structures replace one of the above lines, whichever is closest to the ocean. 310 CMR 10.27(2). Coastal Beach is located east and northeast of the Site. 3.9 Rocky Intertidal Shore Rocky Intertidal Shore is defined as naturally occurring rocky areas, such as bedrock or boulder- strewn areas between the mean high water line and the mean low water line. 310 CMR 10.31(2). Rocky Intertidal Shore is located northeast of the Site. 3.10 Other Resources The Massachusetts Natural Heritage and Endangered Species Program's (NHESP) Massachusetts Natural Heritage Estimated Habitat and Priority Habitat Data Layers (dated October 2008, MassGIS) do not identify any Estimated Habitat of Rare Wildlife or Priority Habitat of Rare Species at the Site; refer to Figure 7, Massachusetts Natural Heritage and Endangered Species Program Map. 4.0 Project Description The Project includes the demolition of the unwanted components at the existing Salem Harbor Station facility and related structures and infrastructure; environmental assessment and any remediation as may be required under Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 21E (Chapter 21 E) and the Massachusetts Contingency Plan (the MCP); and construction of a new state-of-the-art Combined Cycle Gas fired electric generation facility and related structures and infrastructure on a 20+/- acre portion of the Site (the Facility). The Project will also enable future construction on the remaining 38 +/- acres' of the Site. Since the existing facility will remain operational while the CCG Facility is under construction, the demolition will occur in two stages. The first stage will be the demolition and removal of structures required to build the proposed Facility. The second major stage of demolition is scheduled to occur when the existing facility operations cease in June, 2014. Construction of the proposed Facility is scheduled to begin in June 2014 and continue for a period of 23 months. The Facility is expected to commence commercial operations in June 2016. The existing storage tanks, power plant building', stacks, coal pile and coal conveyor and other unused ancillary facilities will be demolished and replaced with a lower profile power plant ' Until ongoing Site investigation is complete and sufficient data is available to support MCP Risk Characterization in the context of final design plans, it is premature to identify particular remediation activities. Accordingly,the references to"remediation"throughout the document are specific to the Site and will ultimately depend upon completing data collection and analysis. Mitigation measures over all or most of the Site may take the form of administrative, land-use or engineering controls designed to limit high intensity or high frequency direct access to particular site soils after the Project is complete. Note that all discussion regarding site investigation, characterization and potential remediation excludes the area within the existing switchyard that is controlled by National Grid. 'The Site consists of 65+/-acres, of which, 7+/_is occupied by NGRID and 20 +/-acres will be occupied by the Facility. Therefore 38+/-acres of land will remain to the north and south of the proposed facility for future development. 3 The Applicant is currently investigating reuse of the structural steel of the Turbine Hall building within the existing Power House to form the structural steel of a new building. This structure will also be demolished if it is not reused. 5 building. A gabion wall will surround the Facility and encompass the plant facilities on approximately 13+/- acres and the outside face of the wall will be a landscaped acoustic earthen • berm that will be placed to shield the view of the new Facility from abutting residential areas. The remaining 7+/- acres outside of the gabion wall will consist of landscaped areas. Viewshed analysis and architectural design elements are incorporated into the Facility. Among other things, building heights have been staged so that structures are lowest near Fort Avenue and Derby Street. In addition, architectural and landscaping elements will be used to reduce the view of the Facility and its day-to-day operations. The acoustic landscaped berm wraps around the Facility and rises to a peak height of 25 feet on the western and southern sides of the site. When viewed from Derby Street and Fort Avenue, the landscaping measures will shield a larger portion of the plant and its components from view. On the eastern side of the site, the landscaped berm will be 15 feet in height and coastal plantings will mitigate the visual impact of the Facility from the Harbor and the opposite shore. The Facility will continue to use the existing access at the intersection of Derby Street and Fort Avenue as the primary entrance to the Facility. The existing gated entrance.at Fort Avenue at the northern end of the Site will be used as secondary emergency access. An internal perimeter access road provides circulation within the Facility Area. The proposed Facility will interconnect with the NGRID system at two locations within the existing NGRID switchyard. Natural gas will be delivered to the Site via a new 16-inch pipeline owned and operated by Algonquin Gas Transmission (Algonquin), an affiliate of Spectra Energy(Spectra). For description purposes, the 20 +/-acre Facility is discussed as two areas: the 13+/- acre portion containing the Facility within the gabion wall, including the administration building; and the remaining 7 +/- acres, described as the landscaped area located outside of the gabion wall. 4.1 Facility Layout within Gabion Wall The proposed Facility is a nominal 630 MW natural gas-fired electric generation facility with "Quick Start" capability. With duct firing under summer conditions, the Facility will be capable of generating an additional 62 MW, for a total of 692 MW. The major Facility components include: two (2) quick-start natural gas combustion turbine generators (CTG); two (2) heat recovery steam generators (HRSG) including pollution control equipment; two (2) steam turbine generators (STG); an administrative building; an Operations Building with warehouse/shop space; Air Cooled Condenser Mechanical/Electrical Buildings; gas compressor facilities; transformers; an ammonia storage tank; two water tanks; air-cooled condensers; a facility switchyard and other structures and infrastructure. An overview of the Proposed Facility Layout is provided on Figure 8 and a Detailed Overview is provided on Figure 9. The CTG buildings total 30,388 +/- (sf) and the HRSG buildings will total 39,804+/- sf. Together the CTG buildings and the HRSG buildings make up the Main Building which totals approximately 70,192 +/- square feet. The Main Building, is comprised of several distinct functional areas, and ranges in height between 76 feet and 125 feet. The STGs will be located in a weather-controlled environment, housed in an approximate 23,400 +/- sf building, with a height of approximately 76 feet. A 7,020+/- sf Operations Building is attached to the STG Building. Two Air Cooled Condensers (ACCs) are elevated above grade • 6 and total 74,250 sf. Other supporting equipment includes a 2,400 sf ammonia tank enclosure; two Air Cooled Condenser Mechanical/Electrical Buildings totaling 6,400 sf(located beneath the elevated ACCs); and a Main Power Distribution Center totaling 1,800 sf. The 8,168 +/- sf Administration Building, including warehouse space, is located within the western edge of the landscaped berm and the topography of the landscape berm wraps around and over the roof of the Administration Building. The adjacent landscape is planted with a layer of coastal grasses at the lower level and a coastal woodland mix on the upper level including the roof of the Administration Building. These two layers of native planting types wrap up and over the Administration Building creating a green roof on top of the Building. The depth of the green roof varies from a minimum of 8" on the lower roof above the staff offices to a maximum of 30" above the shop and conference space. This range of soil depth and soil type supports a diverse collection of mostly native grasses, perennials, shrubs and small trees. 4.2 Landscaped Area Outside of Gabion Wall Landscape design elements including plantings and topographic variations are intended to create a layering of vegetation, grading and building. A landscaped berm around the Facility has been designed to form an acoustic barrier as well as a visual transition between the street and the Facility itself. The berm rises to a peak height of 25 feet on the western and southern sides of the Facility and decreases to 15 feet along the eastern edge. On the western and southern sides of the Facility, the landscaping measures will shield a larger portion of the plant and its components from the surrounding neighborhood. Groups of trees will be planted at the crest of the berm, providing an additional 30-40 feet of screening capacity upon the plants reaching maturity. Additional groves of trees and groups of native shrubs and grasses will be planted across the slope of the berm to create layers of foliage between the pedestrians and the Facility at Derby Street and along the southern boundary of the Site. Most plantings will be native, including a collection of species specific to the region. A series of narrow gardens planted with small trees, shrubs and groundcover plantings located along the toe of the berm forms a ribbon of bird habitat. See Figures 10, 11 and 12 for landscape plan and sections. On the eastern side, associated hardy native coastal plantings will visually raise the ground plain from which the Facility emerges, thus visually reducing the overall height before ending in a low landscape wall. Additionally, on the eastern side, the supporting structure of the bank of Air Cooled Condensers will be clad with an architectural building enclosure, screening a large piece of industrial equipment that is typically left exposed. 5.0 Stormwater Management There are a series of existing outfalls on the project Site, some of which will be reused in conjunction with the Facility. The following section describes the existing and proposed stormwater management systems. • 7 5.1 Existing Drainage System There are six (6) outfalls located on the Site, all of which are permitted under the EPA's Multi- Sector General Permit (MSGP). These outfalls, identified as Outfall 001, 005, 006, 007, 014 and 015, are shown on Figure 13 and described in detail below. Of the 6 MSGP outfalls, there are two that convey stormwater runoff in addition to pretreated process water. The first conveys stormwater from the existing parking area via catch basin to a series of catch basins located in the main entrance driveway and eventually discharges to Outfall 001, the discharge channel. The second conveys storm water from yard drains and the coal pile runoff basin and discharges to Outfall 006, located approximately halfway along the discharge channel near the bridge walkway. All of the outfalls, including those co-mingled with stormwater as described above, receive process water and are considered industrial activity stormwater discharges authorized by the EPA under the MSGP. The facility maintains an on-site waste water treatment system (WWTS) which is used to pretreat process water prior to discharge to Salem Harbor via Outfall 006. Three of the six outfalls will be reused, namely 001, 014 and 015. The remaining outfalls, 005, 006 and 007 will be removed and/or cut and capped. In addition to the Station's drainage system, the City owns a 48-inch storm drain line that traverses the site from west to east and discharges to Salem Harbor. A portion of the storm drain line must be relocated and such relocation is being coordinated with the City Engineer. There are no existing or proposed connections to the City's drain line. Reused Outfall 001 - Outfall 001 consists of two concrete culverts (13 feet high by 8 feet wide and 13 feet high by 14 feet wide) and a 30 inch pipe, located at the point where condenser cooling water flow enters the discharge channel. Condenser cooling water from Units-1 through 4, boiler blowdown, reboiler blowdown, service water,boiler blowdown tanks, and stormwater runoff from the yard are permitted discharges from this outfall. The existing parking area drains to a catch basin within the lot and to a series of catch basins located in the main entrance driveway and also discharges to Outfall 001 through the 30 inch pipe. The two concrete culverts associated with Outfall 001 will be retained and reused to discharge all stormwater runoff associated with the Facility, including the landscaped area. The 30 inch pipe will be removed. Runoff will be treated by a water quality structure prior to discharge to Salem Harbor. Removal Outfalls 005 and 007- Discharges allowed from Outfalls 005 and 007 are intake screen wash waters from Unit 1 and Unit 2, respectively. Both of these outfalls are located on the eastern side of the screen house and discharge directly to Salem Harbor. These outfalls will be removed as part of the demolition of the screen house. Removal Outfall 006-The permitted discharge from Outfall 006 is WWTS effluent, which includes Unit 4 seal water,building floor drains, equipment drains, equipment wash water systems,bottom ash recycle system blowdown, storm water from yard drains, and coal pile runoff. The 12 inch pipe is located approximately halfway along the discharge canal near the bridge walkway. This outfall will not be reused and the pipe will be cut and capped at the nearest manhole upstream of the outfall. 8 Reused Outfall 014 - Condenser cooling waters and intermittent heat recycle cooling water(i.e., thermal backwash from Units 1 through 4) is discharged through Outfall 014, a 12 foot by 14 foot concrete structure. This outfall is located on the eastern side of the screen house and discharges directly to Salem Harbor. This outfall will be reused to convey existing runoff from the paved areas on the north side of the Facility to the Harbor. Runoff will be treated by a water quality structure prior to discharge to Salem Harbor. Reused Outfall 015 - Outfall 015 is an emergency spillway for the existing facility's coal pile runoff basin. The outfall flows directly into Salem Harbor, and the discharge permitted to flow when a storm flow exceeds the basin's "designed storm" (a 10-year, 24-hour rainfall event). The spillway will be retained and reused to discharge overflow from the southern portion of the Site. 5.2 Proposed Drainage System The proposed drainage and stormwater management system is comprised of four distinct components: the area inside of the gabion wall; the existing parking area and access roadway; the landscaped area outside of the gabion wall; and the remaining 38 +/- acres to the north and south of the Facility. Three of the areas, namely inside of the Facility berm, the existing parking area and access roadway, and the landscaped area, will be conveyed to a new tide gate structure and discharged to Salem Harbor through the existing culverts at the discharge channel (Outfall 001). The remaining land to the north of the Facility will be conveyed to a new tide gate structure and discharged to Salem Harbor through the existing screen well house discharge pipe (Outfall 014). The remaining land to the south of the Facility will discharge to the existing overflow spillway (Outfall 015) and into Salem Harbor. • Reuse of existing point source discharges is proposed and no new discharge points will be constructed. The reuse of the outfalls will not require any work within resource areas. Also, note that at the time of any future development of the remaining 38+/- acres, portions of the now- existing impervious surfaces (including without limitation the tanks and buildings) will consist of stabilized pervious surfaces. Accordingly, any future build out development of the remaining 38+/- acres will assume that the pre-demolition state of the Site is the existing condition. That is, any site work that is conducted in connection with the proposed Project would be considered an interim step in any future development of the remaining 38+/- acres. The stormwater management system is described below: 5.2.1 Facility within Gabion Wall The Facility layout includes impervious surfaces such as the roofs and perimeter access driveway, while pervious surfaces include a layer of clean washed stone underlain with filter fabric and placed in all areas not occupied by buildings, the access roadway and supporting facilities. Roofing materials will consist of non-metal surfaces and as such the"clean"roof runoff from the Main, STG and Operations Buildings will be directed to a subsurface 30,000 cubic foot stormwater vault and used for landscape irrigation. The ground cover on top of the vault will be loam and seed. Excess water in the vault will be discharged to the Facility drainage infrastructure and into Salem Harbor via the existing culvert at the discharge channel (Outfall 001). • 9 Runoff from the paved access perimeter roadway, gravel surfaces and grassed area will be collected in a series of catch basins, routed through water quality structures and conveyed to a new tide gate structure and discharged to Salem Harbor via the existing culvert at the discharge channel (Outfall 001). 5.2.2 Existing Parking and Access Roadway Runoff from portions of the main access driveway and the existing parking area to the north of the proposed redevelopment is currently collected by a series of catch basins and discharged into Salem Harbor via the existing discharge channel (Discharge 001). The existing system will be upgraded with a series of deep sump/hooded catch basins, manholes, storm drainage pipes, and water quality structures. Under proposed conditions, runoff from the existing parking lot and portions of the main access driveway will be collected in a series of deep sump/hooded catch basins, routed through a water quality structure, conveyed to a new tide gate structure and discharged to Salem Harbor via the existing culvert at the discharge channel (existing Discharge 001). 5.2.3 Landscaped Area Outside of Gabion Wall In total, the landscaping initiative will provide approximately 7 acres of vegetation consisting of native species of trees, shrubs, perennials, grasses, seeded lawn and an upland wildflower meadow. Landscape walls and paths will also be an integral feature. Paths will be located on the west and south sides of the berm. A series of drop inlets will be located within the landscaped areas on both sides of the path. The drop inlets will convey runoff to a new drain line which will enter Salem Harbor via the existing culvert at the discharge channel (existing Discharge 001). Both the gabion wall and landscape walls will have under drain systems. The gabion wall under drain system will connect to the Facility drainage system; the landscaped wall system will connect the landscape drainage system located on both sides of the path. Both systems will discharge to the existing culvert at the discharge channel (existing Discharge 001). 5.2.4 Northern and Southern Portions The northern and southern portions of the Site will be stabilized upon the completion of demolition and construction. The goal is to leave the condition of these portions of the Site as close to existing as possible in terms of grade changes. On the northern portion, several existing buildings will be removed and the areas will be backfilled with a stabilized surface treatment such as clean washed stone. Runoff from this portion of the Site will be collected in a series of deep sump/hooded catch basins installed in select low points, routed through a water quality structure, conveyed to a new tide gate structure and discharged to Salem Harbor via the existing screen well house discharge pipe (existing Discharge 014). On the southern portion of the Site, minor regrading will occur to fill in areas where the tanks and coal pile will be removed and some soil will be placed in areas requiring remediation based on the MCP compliance. The area will be regraded to drain to a stormwater collection area in the site interior. The stormwater collection area will consist of a large shallow depression, approximately V deep, that is sized to control all storm events up to and including the 100-year storm event. The stormwater collection area will be loamed and seeded, with the exception of the 10 outer 75 foot wide perimeter of the bottom of the stormwater collection area which will consist of a 6" deep crushed stone reservoir. The stone reservoir will be sized to retain and recharge all storm events up to the 2-year storm so that the central portion of the stormwater collection area will normally remain dry. The stormwater collection area was sized to retain and recharge all rainfall events up to and including the 25- year storm event. Only the 100-year storm event will result in a discharge to the existing spillway(existing Discharge 015) at the southeastern edge of the Site into Salem Harbor. There are no provisions to pretreat this runoff prior to discharge since it will consist of pervious surface such as loam and seed and/or stone and will not come in contact with pollutants. 5.3 Low Impact Development & Infiltration Limitations The project has been designed with numerous Low Impact Development (LID) techniques to manage rainfall. Specific LID techniques in this project include green roofs, storm water recapture and reuse, permeable surfaces, and the use of native species. The Administration Building will have a green roof(an area of approximately 8,100 sf), and the roofs of the HRSG, CTG and STG Buildings (an area of approximately 100,000 sf) will be designed to collect and pipe rainwater to a 30,000 cubic foot(224,416 ga) underground tank located next to the Facility entrance. This water will be reused for landscape irrigation. The amount of pavement was reduced to the maximum extent practical by reusing the existing parking area. The ability to recharge groundwater on the Site is limited due to environmental constraints, including contamination and Activity and Use Limitations. The opportunity to provide infiltration of stormwater runoff is limited to the proposed pervious areas both within and outside of the Facility berm. Within the Facility berm, pervious areas will consist of a layer of clean washed stone underlain with filter fabric and placed in locations between the buildings, access roadway and supporting facilities. Direct precipitation and runoff from the access roadways will be directed to a series of catch basins within the gravel areas, with some of the runoff infiltrating through the gravel and underlying 6 foot layer of fill. Other pervious areas in the Facility Area consist of the acoustic landscaped berm and landscaped area to the southwest. Direct precipitation will infiltrate the acoustic landscaped berm and landscaped areas and any residual runoff will flow to a series of drop inlets located on both sides of the path. The drop inlet system will tie into the Facility system, which discharges to Salem Harbor via an existing culvert at the discharge channel. The landscaped area is located within an area where mitigation measures have been implemented in the past to address historic releases of oil or hazardous material (OHM). Although these releases have been closed under the MCP, residual OHM may be present at these locations consistent with the closure documents. Therefore, to minimize the potential for mobilization of potential OHM, infiltration in this particular area is minimized to the extent possible while still allowing for limited runoff and infiltration. 6.0 Conformance with DEP Stormwater Management Standards The project will result in several benefits compared to existing conditions, most significant is the net decrease of approximately 14.8 acres in the amount of impervious surface; the improvement • of the quality of stormwater runoff by upgrading the existing parking lot and entrance roadway 11 system by routing stormwater through water quality treatment units; eliminating all process water discharges and most significant, eliminating the source of pollutants exposed to rainfall • including the coal pile and runoff basin. The redevelopment project will clearly improve existing conditions. A Stormwater Management Report is provided in Appendix B and demonstrates the Project's consistency with the MassDEP Stormwater Standards. This Project is considered re- development and according to Massachusetts Stormwater Management Standard 7, a redevelopment project is required to meet the following standards to the extent practicable: Standards 2 and 3, and the pretreatment and structural best management practice requirements of Standards 4, 5, and 6. The standards are described below. Standard No. 1 - Untreated Stormwater Standard: No new stormwater conveyances may discharge untreated stormwater directly to or cause erosion in wetlands or waters of the Commonwealth. No new point discharges of untreated stormwater to resource areas associated with the Project are proposed. Stormwater quality control for the Project includes deep sump/hooded catch basins and water quality structures. Runoff from portions of the main access driveway and the existing parking area to the north of the proposed Facility is collected and conveyed via upgraded stormwater management system within the main site access driveway, consisting of deep sump/hooded catch basins, manholes, • storm drainage pipes, and water quality structures. Runoff from the former plant area to the north of the proposed redevelopment is collected and conveyed via new stormwater management system consisting of deep sump/hooded catch basins, manholes, storm drainage pipes, and a water quality structure. The proposed Facility will include a new stormwater management system consisting of catch basins, manholes, storm drainage pipes, and water quality structures. All stormwater will be routed through water quality structures with the exception of those areas where direct precipitation will infiltrate. Standard No. 2 - Peak Attenuation Rate Standard: Stormwater management systems shall be designed so that post development peak discharge rates do not exceed pre-development discharge rates. The Standard may be waived for discharges to Land Subject to Coastal Storm Flowage. Runoff hydrographs were generated for the 2, 10, 25, and 100-Year, 24-hour storm events using the SCS TR-20 Method and Type III rainfall distribution to determine the peak rate of discharge for existing and proposed conditions. Under proposed conditions for all storm events, the peak discharge rates for all post development storm events will not exceed pre-development discharge rates. • 12 Standard No. 3 - Recharge to Groundwater • Standard: The loss of annual recharge to ground water shall be eliminated or minimized through the use of infiltration measures, including low impact development techniques, stormwater best management practices and good operation and maintenance. The ability to recharge groundwater on the Site is limited due to environmental constraints, including contamination and Activity and Use Limitations. The opportunity to provide infiltration of stormwater runoff is limited to the proposed pervious areas both within and outside of the Facility berm. Within the Facility berm,pervious areas will consist of a layer of clean washed stone underlain with filter fabric and placed in locations between the buildings, access roadway and supporting facilities. Direct precipitation and runoff from the access roadways will be directed to a series of catch basins within the gravel areas, with some of the runoff infiltrating through the gravel and underlying 6-foot layer of fill. Other pervious areas in the Facility Area consist of the acoustic landscaped berm and landscaped area to the southwest. Direct precipitation will infiltrate the acoustic landscaped berm and landscaped areas and any residual runoff will flow to a series of drop inlets located on both sides of the path. The drop inlets will be routed directly to the existing outlet at the discharge channel. The landscaped area is located within an area where mitigation measures have been implemented in the past to address historic releases of oil or hazardous material (OHM). Although these releases have been closed under the MCP, residual OHM may be present at these locations consistent with the closure documents. Therefore, to minimize the potential for mobilization of • potential OHM, infiltration in this particular area is minimized to the extent possible while still allowing for limited runoff and infiltration. Standard No. 4—Water Quality Standard: Stormwater management systems shall be designed to remove 80% of the average annual post construction load of Total Suspended Solids (TSS). Best Management Practices (BMPs) will be used to provide water quality. The following BMPs will be provided on-site: deep sump/hooded catch basins and Stormceptor® treatment structures. Deep Sump/Hooded Catch Basins All proposed catch basins within the main site drive and the northern site area will be deep sump/hooded catch basins, which will serve to trap sediment and floatables before entering the stormwater management system. Sumps will be four-feet deep. Catch basins will be inspected monthly and, if necessary, cleaned when sediment reaches half full depth to ensure that the catch basins are working in their intended fashion and that they are free of debris. Sediments and hydrocarbons shall be properly handled and disposed of, in accordance with local, state, and federal requirements. In accordance with DEP Standards a 25% total suspended solids (TSS) removal rate is credited for this BMP. • 13 Stormceptor® Treatment Structures Stormceptor structures are proposed to treat runoff from the Facility Area, existing parking area and former plant area to the north of the Facility. These structures are located such that stormwater runoff will be routed through the water quality structures prior to discharging to Salem Harbor. In accordance with DEP Standards the MASTEP laboratory study found the Stormceptor STC 900 achieved 75% removal of"Bulk TSS" which MASTEP considers equivalent to suspended sediment concentration (SSC). While this information references the STC 900, the performance of the structures can be scaled upward or downward based on the size of the units, and areas and flows to be treated. The TSS Removal Calculations in Appendix F of the Stormwater Management Report are representative of the MASTEP 75% removal rate. However, according to the Stormceptor sizing program based upon independent test data, the Stormceptor structures specified on the plans will achieve TSS removal rates in excess of 80% (Refer to Appendix E of the Stormwater Management Report for Water Quality Structure Efficiency Calculations). Although redevelopment projects are not required to achieve 80%removal of TSS, the incorporation of these BMPs will achieve a cumulative TSS removal rate of greater than 80% where practicable. Additionally, it should be noted that the potential generation of TSS from the post construction plant operations is relatively low due to its intended function, as operations are relatively clean, and exterior equipment/structures require little maintenance. All Facility components within the gabion wall will be surfaced with either pavement or clean washed stone, • providing minimal sources for TSS. (Refer to Appendix F of the Stormwater Management Report for TSS Removal Calculations and a copy of the MASTEP Report). Standard No. 5 - Higher Potential Pollutant Loads Standard: For Land Uses with Higher Potential Pollutant Loads (LUHPPLs), source control and pollution prevention measures implemented to eliminate or reduce the discharge of stormwater runoff from such land uses to the maximum extent practicable. The Project is considered a land use with higher potential pollutant loads (LUHPPL) since it is classified as an industrial sector regulated by the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Multi-Sector General Permit. Conformance with LUPPHL requirements includes the provision of a detailed source control and pollution prevention plan which will be prepared in conjunction with the NPDES permit coverage. All runoff in contact with potential pollutants will be routed to water quality structures prior to discharge. Standard No. 6- Protection of Critical Areas Standard: Stormwater discharges within a Zone II or interim Wellhead Protection Area of a public water supply, and stormwater discharges near to any other critical area, require the use of specific source control and pollution prevention measures and specific structural BMPs determined by the DEP to be suitable for managing such discharges. 14 The Site will not discharge stormwater within a Zone II or Interim Wellhead Protection Area. Critical areas include shellfish growing areas which are located in Salem Harbor. Construction term pollution controls will include the implementation of the Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan. Operation term source control and pollution prevention measures will be implemented as part of Facility operations through the implementation of the Operations and Maintenance Plan. The stormwater management system is designed to treat the required 1 inch water quality volume. Standard No. 7 - Redevelopment Projects Standard: A re-development project is required to meet the Massachusetts Stormwater Management Standards as follows: Standard 2 and 3, and the pretreatment and structural best management practice requirements of Standards 4, 5, and 6- only to the extent practicable. Existing stormwater discharges shall comply with Standard 1 only to the maximum extent practicable.A redevelopment project shall comply with all other requirements of the Stormwater Management Standards and improve existing conditions. Redevelopment projects include development, rehabilitation, expansion and phased projects on previously developed sites,provided the redevelopment results in no net increase in impervious area. As such, the proposed Project qualifies as a redevelopment project. The Project results in a reduction of impervious surface of approximately 14.8 acres. Standard No. 8- Erosion/Sediment Control • Standard: A plan to control construction-related impacts, including erosion, sedimentation, and other pollutant sources during construction and land disturbance activities shall be developed and implemented. The Project will result in the disturbance of greater than one acre of land and discharges to a Water of the U.S. and therefore requires the preparation and implementation of a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) in accordance with the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System General Permit for Discharges from Construction Activities, effective date February 16, 2012. As more detailed demolition and construction information is still being developed, the Checklist for Stormwater Report is checked as "The project is highly complex and information is included in the Stormwater Report that explains why it is not possible to submit the Construction Period Pollution Prevention and Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan with the application. A Construction Period Pollution Prevention and Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan has not been included in the Stormwater Report but will be submitted before land disturbance begins." Standard No. 9 - Operation/Maintenance Plan Standard: A long term operation and maintenance plan shall be developed and implemented to ensure that the stormwater management system will function as designed. The Stormwater Management System will be the responsibility of the Applicant. A project specific Operation and Maintenance Plan is included in the Stormwater Management Report. 15 Standard No. 10 - Illicit Discharge • Standard: All illicit discharges to the stormwater management system are prohibited. An illicit discharge certification statement is included with the Stormwater Management Report. 7.0 Demolition and Remediation Demolition of the Salem Harbor Station facilities is expected to commence in August, 2013. Following retirement of generating Units 3 and 4 on June 1, 2014, all unwanted above ground features of Salem Harbor Station will be removed, including: power plant buildings and equipment; stacks and precipitators; coal handling equipment; storage tanks and associated appurtenances such as spill prevention berms; and intake screen and pumphouse structures. The Applicant is in discussion with stakeholders concerning the possible retention and full renovation of the structural steel of the turbine hall, for a new, non-power generating use. The on-site 7 +/- acre switchyard, which is operated by NGRID, will remain in place. While the Applicant owns the land on which the NGRID Switchyard is located, NGRID holds an exclusive easement over this land and owns the switchyard equipment. It is anticipated that some structures will remain on the Site including buildings that will continue to be used or repurposed; all National Grid (NGRID) owned facilities will remain. Buildings that will continue to be used include the existing guard house and some small buildings associated with the existing docking facility. Repurposed buildings include the renovation of an existing unoccupied building near the Site entrance into a visitor's center. • In addition to the demolition of unnecessary components, remediation will occur in select areas of the Site. A subsurface investigation was performed to obtain a broad-based assessment of soil and groundwater conditions across areas of the Site that may have been affected by historic activities and power plant operations. Prior releases of oil and/or hazardous materials have been assigned Release Tracking Numbers (RTNs) under the Massachusetts Contingency Plan (MCP). All of these RTNs have been closed with Permanent Solutions under the MCP. Areas of investigation overlapped the footprints of some of these past releases, although the investigation was also intended to provide general Site coverage of those areas not previously investigated. A review of the soil and groundwater analytical results indicates that there are no imminent risks associated with conditions at the Site, nor are there conditions at the Site that warrant the MCP's 2-hour or 72-hour reporting requirements. None of the targeted compounds were detected at levels above applicable MCP reporting levels in any of the groundwater samples collected. There are some exceedences of applicable MCP reporting standards in the soil, primarily elevated concentrations of select metals, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) and petroleum-related carbon compounds. Remediation activities will be performed in conjunction with demolition activities under the direction of a Licensed Site Professional. 8.0 Impacts and Mitigation Under the MA WPA, demolition and construction activities will be performed within the Designated Port Area(DPA) and Land Subject to Coastal Storm Flowage (100 year flood zone). In addition, work will be performed within the 100 foot buffer zone to Coastal Bank. The same • 16 impacts are proposed under the local ordinance, with the addition of activities to be performed within the 100 foot buffer zone to Land Subject to Coastal Storm Flowage (LSCSF) or the 100 • year flood zone. LUO located in a DPA could be considered significant to the protection of marine fisheries, storm damage prevention or flood control. Although the work is proposed within the DPA, it will be limited to the upland portion and no dredging, filling, removing, or altering of LUO will occur. The project will not result in any direct temporary or permanent impacts to the other resource areas located on or adjacent to the Site including Land Under Ocean, LSTA, Rocky Intertidal Shore, Coastal Beach, Coastal Bank, and Land Containing Shellfish. In general, demolition activities will proceed from south to north and will include removal of the existing power plant tanks, the coal pile, existing coal pile runoff basin, unwanted buildings and containment areas and select utilities. Figure 14 provides a general demolition sequencing plan. 8.1 Temporary Impacts The entire southern portion of the site within LSCSF will be temporarily occupied by construction worker vehicle parking, material storage and laydown, and additional construction trailers during Project demolition and construction. In addition, the area at the marine terminal in the south-southeastern portion of the property will be used for the unloading of materials transported to the Site by water borne vessels. As part of the final phase of construction, when the area is no longer needed for temporary use, the area will be regraded for stormwater • management purposes and fully stabilized with loam and seed or stone. Since this area will be regraded as part of the full project build out, impacts are identified as permanent and described in the following section. The entire 65+/- acre site will be temporarily occupied during concurrent demolition and construction activities; all areas temporarily disturbed and not covered by permanent Facility features will be stabilized. 8.2 Permanent Impacts The only permanent wetland impacts resulting from the construction of the Facility will be the permanent alteration of approximately 12.4 acres of LSCSF on the Project Site as it involves raising the elevation of the Facility above the floodplain and expected sea level rise. Approximately 6 feet of fill will be placed within the 13+/- acre Facility limit within the gabion wall. Additional fill will be placed on the 7+/- acres outside of the gabion wall in conjunction with the acoustic landscaped berm. Minor fill to facilitate vegetative plantings will be added to the southwest corner in the landscaped area. LSCSF on the southern portion of the Site will be impacted by minor regrading to fill in areas where the tanks will be removed and by the placement of soil in selected areas requiring remediation based on the MCP compliance. The area will also be regraded to drain to a stormwater collection area. In addition, transitional grading will occur between the landscaped area and the remaining southern parcel. On the remaining land to the north, minor regrading will occur in conjunction with the installation of the new catch basins to direct sheet flow from the existing paved surfaces to the • 17 basins. There will be no impacts to LSCSF on the remaining northern portion of the property in conjunction with this work. • The demolition and construction activities will require the use of the existing marine terminal facility in order to load and off load materials. In order to accommodate the land-based operation of equipment such as cranes, a pile supported concrete deck will be installed in the vicinity of the existing dock. There is no in-water work associated with the placement of the platform as all work will occur in the upland portion of the Site. The platform will be located within the 100 year flood zone, or LSCSF and will remain in service for future use in the marine industrial port. All areas disturbed during demolition and construction activities will be stabilized with a combination of loam and seed and/or stone. 8.2.1 100 Foot Buffer Zone to Coastal Bank and LSCSF From south to north, the following demolition activities will occur within the 100 foot buffer zone to Coastal Bank: the removal of unwanted utilities, removal of the coal pile, demolition of existing buildings and warehouses, and soil remediation. Construction activities will include the regrading of the southern portion of the site, installation of the main drain line to Outfall 001; portions of the landscaped berm; relocation of the City's 48- inch drain line, new gas line; and the new drainage system components to the north of the facility. All disturbed areas within the 100 foot buffer zone to Coastal Bank will be restored, stabilized with loam and seed, stone and/or pavement. The remaining project components will be located within the 100 foot buffer to LSCSF under the by-law. • 8.3 Delivery of Materials by Water The operation of equipment including the unloading of facility equipment from the barges will occur along the Harbor's edge in conjunction with the marine-based deliveries. Although final equipment designation and quantities are subject to final design requirements, the majority of the Facility components will be delivered via water to the existing off- loading facilities at the marine terminal in the southeastern portion of the Site. Most of these materials will be stored and preassembled at an off-site marshaling yard. The yard location has not been identified at this time; however the criteria established for the marshaling site will limit the impacts to neighborhoods around such areas. The selection of the marshaling site will be based upon the following criteria: • An approximate limit of 8 hours steaming time between the marshaling area and the project site would be ideal but longer distances will be evaluated if required. • An existing deep water industrial facility including navigable water access of approximately 32 feet or more. • Access, on site or nearby, to intermodal transportation links including highway and rail. • Existing wharves capable of handling barges and ships. • 18 • On-site open laydown areas for material storage and sorting. Covered storage would be a plus but not absolutely required. • Existing Maritime Security perimeter. • Electrical power, water and sewerage. The final selection will be made from either operating port facilities such as the Port of New Hampshire, Port of Providence (ProvoPort) or existing private industrial facilities that are either shutdown or with underutilized facilities. An inventory and investigation of potential industrial facilities is ongoing and site selection will be made later this year. 8.4 Measures to Avoid and Minimize Permanent Impacts The footprint of the proposed Facility has been minimized to the greatest extent practicable while meeting the need for operations and associated mitigation measures relative to air and noise. Since the flood zone is located throughout the Site, complete avoidance was not feasible. The Facility location was primarily based on balancing the proximity to the neighbors and the existing switchyard, while leaving larger contiguous portions of the Site for future development. 9.0 Conformance with Performance Standards 9.1 Land Subject to Coastal Storm Flowage The Massachusetts Wetlands Regulations do not specify performance standards for LSCSF. Because the Site is located in a coastal environment adjacent to Salem Harbor and all flood water • from the site drains to the ocean, accordingly, fill within the 100-year floodplain is not subject to a requirement to provide compensatory flood storage as would be the case in inland areas. In order to protect the Facility from potential flooding, the construction of structures and appurtenances must be in compliance with the state Board of Building Regulations and Standards Design Requirements in floodplains, with the first floor elevation above the 100-year flood zone elevation. As such, the project has been designed so that the facility buildings and ancillary structures will be elevated 6 feet above the existing flood zone, for a minimum elevation of 16 feet NAVD 88. This increase in elevation achieves more than sufficient compliance with the state building code requirements. In addition, the 6 feet of fill accounts for the projected sea level rise over the life span of the Facility. A further discussion of sea level rise determination and storm surge is described below. 9.2 Designated Port Area Land Under the Ocean in Designated Port Areas may be significant to the protection of marine fisheries, storm damage prevention or flood control. The project does not include dredging, filling, removing or altering Land Under the Ocean in the DPA and there will be no adverse effects to marine fisheries, storm damage prevention or flood control. By elevating the Facility above the 100-year flood zone and projected sea level rise, the project will provide long term protection from storm damage. • 19 9.3 Sea Level Rise/Adaptation Since the Facility is located within LSCSF, it must be designed to comply with Massachusetts • State Building Code requirements for structures within the floodplain. In addition, Mass DEP and Massachusetts Office of Coastal Zone Management require that g q at sea level rise be factored into the Facility design. 9.3.1 Existing Conditions 1. Currently the existing project site varies in elevation. 2. The existing grades throughout the site range in elevation from approximately 9 feet to approximately 16 feet. 3. Existing generating assets are sited at elevations ranging from 10.5 feet to 15.5 feet. 4. The National Grid Substation is at approximately 14.5 to 15.5 feet in elevation. 5. The floor of the existing entry guard house is at elevation 15.5 feet. 6. The elevation of Derby Street is approximately 12.7 feet near the plant entrance decreasing to approximately 8.2 feet to the southerly end of the Site. 7. The FEMA 100-year flood elevation is elevation 10 feet. This flood elevation would include storm surge. • 8. The NOAA/National Weather Service Surge Model from the Ocean Prediction Center was also examined for its modeling ofNor'easter storm surge in the Salem, MA area. The model examined predicts a possible stone surge for Salem Harbor in the range of 6-8 feet above Mean Sea Level. 9. NOAA Sea Level Trend Data for Boston Area (closest data published on the NOAA website) records sea level rise from 1921 to 2006. This rise averages to 2.63 ram/yr. with 95% confidence. 10. University of Colorado data compiling and analyzing actual sea level data between 1993 and 2011 indicating an average annual rise of 3.2 mm/year. 9.3.2 Establishing a Current Day Flood/Storm Surge Design Basis Elevation Generally, the 100-year flood level is used as the design basis elevation for minimum floor level elevations. However, for this location several additional factors were included in the design basis as follows: 1. Water elevation at a normal MHW (Mean High Water) is approximately 4.6 feet above the MSL(Mean Sea Level). • 20 2. A VE12 storm surge occurring concurrent with MHW would add 6 to 8 feet to the normal • tide; an AE 100-year flood concurrent with MHW would add 4 to 5 feet to the normal tide. 3. Wave action topping the site perimeter should be accounted for. Since the orientation of the Facility does not allow direct wave action from the open ocean, an average wave height of 2 feet was considered (note that this is the height of the wave top above the actual water level not the height difference between the peak and the valley of the wave). 4. The addition of MHW level and the anticipated storm surge would result in a current design basis elevation of 10.6 feet to 12.6 feet to prevent the entrance of storm surge occurring at the MHW condition. 5. The addition of wave action to these considerations would result in a current design basis elevation of 12.6 to 14.6 feet to prevent not only the entrance of storm surge but also significantly reduce probability of the topping of roadways and structural foundations by waves likely to occur concurrently with the storm surge. 9.3.3 Establishing a Future Flood/Storm Surge Design Basis Elevation The design life of the Facility will be specified as 30 years. This would result in the requirement to account for sea level rise from the current year to 2042. Given the possibility of plant life extensions, an additional 10 years will be added for a total life of 40 years or until 2052. Several methods of arriving at a project of sea level rise are: 1) extrapolation based upon historical data and; 2) analyzing the various studies available and deriving a statistical mean and average value • of the potential sea level rise. 1) Using several sources of historical data would result in an estimated rise over the next 40 years of approximately 5 inches. This is significantly less than that predicted by various models but does have a statistical data as its basis. As can be seen from Appendix C, Figure 1 —University of Colorado 2001 Rev 4, the trend line over the last 20 years has been reasonably consistent. a) Calculation of the estimated sea level rise based upon the NOAA level trend data would result in the following additional allowance to the above data: 2.63 mm X 40 years results in an increase in the sea level of 4.1 inches. b) Calculation of the estimated sea level rise based upon the University of Colorado level trend data would result in the following additional allowance to the above data: 3.22 mm X 40 years results in an increase in the sea level of 5.1 inches. c) The above methods are based on data but do not address the issues revolving around predictions of accelerated sea level rise. 2) A second method would be to use a compilation of multiple models of sea level rise promulgated by the scientific community. Again from the University of Colorado (included as Appendix C) the following information is quoted. • 21 Sea level rise from any given source varies based on which model was implemented. The most often cited models that predict sea level rise are MPI, CCCma, GFDL and Hadley-CM3. The range of data arises from many uncontrollable and unpredictable factors that influence sea level rise. Such factors include climate, global warming, thermal expansion,future development of technology and amount of greenhouse emissions. Each model makes different assumptions which add to some uncertainty in the results. However, to have the most accurate number, the average of the ranges was calculated. Sixteen different sources of sea level rise predictions a hundred years from now or 2100 were compiled. Primary sources included reports from the International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and NOAA. The data ranged from extremes of.02 meters of sea level rise (Walsh, 2002) to 6 meters (AGI, 1994). After omitting the upper and lower outliers, the average of the ranges indicate that sea level will rise.944 meters.... The median is .55 meters, while the average is .944 meters. This analysis indicates a possible sea level rise of.944 meters over a period of 100 years. Reviewed against our design basis period of 40 years this results in an estimated sea rise of 0.38 meters or 15 inches. 3) Adopting a conservative approach, the higher of the two methods is recommended, that being the addition of a minimum 15 inches (or 1.25 feet) to the recommended present day design basis site elevation. 4) This would result in a calculated design basis elevation of 15.85 feet. For purposes of implementation we are recommending that this be set at the elevation of the existing guard house which is 15.5 feet. 9.3.4 Recommended Future Flood/Storm Surge Design Basis Elevation Based upon the above discussion, the recommendations for storm surge protection and sea level rise are as follows: 1) The minimum elevation of the crown of perimeter roadways around the Facility should be set at elevation 15.5 feet. Design provided: The minimum elevation of the roadway crown elevation is shown at 16.0 feet. 2) The minimum elevation of building ground floor levels should be set at elevation 15.5 feet. Design provided: The minimum elevation of the building ground floor levels are shown at elevation 16.0 feet. 3) The minimum elevation of equipment and electrical equipment foundations should be set at elevation 16.0 feet. Design provided: The minimum elevation of equipment and electrical equipment foundations are shown at elevation 16.0 feet. 4) The general grade of the site around the building foundations should be set at no higher than 6 inches below the elevation of the building ground floor levels. • 22 Design provided: The minimum elevation of the site around the building foundations is shown at elevation 15.5 feet. • 5) The areas between the perimeter roadways and the building foundations should be properly graded to drain stormwater from the area and from the existing parking facilities. As such they will vary in elevation between elevation 15 feet and elevation 12 feet. Design provided: The areas between the perimeter roadway and buildings are designed to vary between 15 feet and 12 feet. 6) Storm drains leaving the perimeter should be equipped with one-way storm valves to prevent the entry of water into the lower graded areas inside the site perimeter. Design provided: The stormwater discharge from the Facility will be controlled via tidegate structures. 7) The outside perimeter roadway facing the harbor(East) should be provided with basic erosion protection in the form of rip-rap or other stabilization means to reduce the opportunity for wave action to erode away the site roadways. These stabilization materials may be treated with landscaping or other visual enhancements. Design provided: Stabilization materials are incorporated into the seaward face of the landscaped berm. The lower portion of the landscaped berm will include rip rap to prevent erosion during potential wave action. r9.4 Redirection/Storm Surge Impacts on Adjacent Areas The only potential flooding to be considered is a tidal event with or without wind generated waves. Therefore the sources of potential stormwater flooding in this coastal environment include one or both of the following: 1) elevated water levels from ocean stormwater surge as Nor'easter winds "pack" Salem Harbor resulting in an abnormally high tide; or 2) wave action caused by high winds, when overtopping land features moves water inland and causes flooding at elevations higher than the actual tidal level. Floodwaters based upon elevated water levels caused by ocean stormwater surge would flow into and out of the area from any lower elevation area connecting with the Harbor. The raising of the area of the new Facility would have no effect on the water level at adjacent properties as it is currently not the lowest elevation through which water would flow to any of the abutting areas. Looking more closely at surrounding properties, the abutting site elevations are generally as follows: To the north of the Facility is remaining property owned by the Applicant. It is under easement to National Grid for the Salem Harbor Substation. This property varies in elevation between 15.3 and 15.7 feet, which is well above the existing flood zone (elevation 10 feet). This elevation is only nominally less than the proposed Site elevation of 16.0 feet and is not impacted by the raised elevation of the Site. • 23 Further north is the SESD treatment plant. Elevations at the interface between the SESD property line and the Site property vary between 9.3 feet and 16.5 feet, which is well above the existing • 100-year flood zone at elevation 10 feet. The elevation of this property boundary would not be changed by the Facility. Tidal water currently would enter from Cat Cove at the northern side of SESD. This condition would not be affected by the raised Site elevation of the Facility which is approximately 1,000 feet south of the SESD property. To the northwest is the existing parking lot which will be reused. It varies in elevation between 15.7 and 10.4 feet. This area will remain essentially unchanged and could potentially flood from existing low elevations to the northeast. There would be no impact to the flooding of this area based.upon raising the property to elevation 16.0. It is anticipated that tidal water would enter this area from the northeast along the vicinity of the SESD/Salem Harbor property line. To the west is Fort Avenue, transitioning to the south into Derby Street. Fort Avenue varies from 16.4 feet near the northwest corner of the Station Site, gradually decreasing to 11.3 feet at the intersection with Derby Street. Derby Street then continues to decrease in elevation from 11.3 feet to approximately 9.5 feet to the south at the intersection of Webb Street. To the south of the Facility bermed area is remaining land owned by the Applicant which will be regraded (minor cuts and fills) to create a stormwater collection area. This area is currently at the same or lower grades than the area to be raised to 16.0 feet. The second potential source of flooding would be the wave action caused by wind: Winds from the north and northeast would cause wave break on Winter Island before reaching • Cat Cove and the Facility. Because of this there would be no adverse effects caused by the impact of waves upon or wave refraction from the new Site elevation. Winds with sufficient fetch to provide the 2 foot waves used in the design basis would come from the cast to southeast. As winds from the east to southeast would not tend to "pack"the Harbor with surge, tidal elevations would not be expected to reach the levels used as the design basis for raising the site to elevation 16.0. From these directions the wave action would be interrupted by the existing outfall channel breakwater and bulkheads. Because of this there would be no adverse effects caused by the impact of waves upon or wave refraction from the new Site elevation. Winds from the south and west would not cause wave action along the Project shoreline. Because of this there would be no adverse effects caused by the impact of waves upon or wave refraction from the new Site elevation. Elevation 16.0 is shown as the minimum elevation for all building floors, crowns of roadways and equipment foundations. The only anticipated exceptions will be the existing parking area to the north which will be reused, the existing guardhouse to remain and the existing building to be renovated to accommodate a proposed visitor's center building at the Facility entrance, all of which are non-critical facilities and will remain at their existing elevations. As mapped by FEMA, the majority of the LSCSF on the Site is Coastal Zone AE elevation 10 • and represents the area landward of the VE12 zone, where the principal source of flooding is 24 astronomical tides or storm surges. During base flood conditions, the potential for wave height in the AE zone is between 1.5 and 3 feet. The lateral extent of storm surge is directly influenced • by the Site's position relative to adjacent land formations and open waters, or its "open exposure." The Site in particular is closed to direct exposure to the Atlantic Ocean. This has a direct effect on the wave heights that could be experienced. The coastal flood hazard zone elevation 12 was determined by FEMA and takes into account the height and extent of wave run- up beyond the limit of tidal inundation, topography, land cover and historic flood damage. 10.0 Construction Term Mitigation Measures The demolition of the Salem Harbor Station facility and construction of the new Facility will result in a total land disturbance of greater than one acre and discharges to a Water of the U.S. and therefore requires the preparation and implementation of a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) in accordance with the EPA NPDES General Permit for Discharges from Construction Activities, effective date February 16, 2012 (the CGP), which authorizes discharges from construction activities. A SWPPP will be prepared describing the specific practices, installation methods and inspection requirements for temporary and permanent erosion prevention and sediment control practices. The SWPPP will be prepared and filed with the Salem Conservation Commission prior to the start of demolition, and at a minimum,will include the following measures: • Minimize the extent and time of exposed soils; • Provide perimeter sediment control, including silt fence and/or compost filter tubes; • • Provide catch basin inlet protection including geotextile filter fabric and gravel drop; • Minimize sediment track out with stabilized construction exits; • Control discharges from soil stockpiles, include temporary erosion control measures and perimeter sediment controls; • Minimize dust; • Temporary stormwater management practices including basins, traps and swales; • Dedicated concrete washout areas; • Minimize soil compaction; • Provide temporary storage of runoff, including basins, traps and conveyance swales; • Dewatering requirements; • Stabilization requirements, including seeding, mulching and matting; • Inspection and reporting requirements; • Good housekeeping pollution prevention measures; • Maintenance requirements; • Temporary and permanent stabilization requirements; and • Recordkeeping/inspection requirements. It is expected that the project will be demolished and constructed in phases and specific measures for each phase will be included in the SWPPP. As more detailed information will be forthcoming once the demolition and construction contractors are selected, the Checklist for Stormwater Report is checked as "The project is highly complex and information is included in the Stormwater Report (as described above) that explains why it is not possible to submit the • 25 Construction Period Pollution Prevention and Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan with the application. A Construction Period Pollution Prevention and Erosion and Sedimentation Control • Plan has not been included in the Stormwater Report but will be submitted before land disturbance begins." Figures 15a through 15f provide Conceptual Construction Phasing. 10.1 Construction Term Erosion Prevention and Sediment Control Mitigation. Measures Specific practices for construction term erosion and sediment controls, and pollution prevention measures will be provided in the SWPPP. A summary of the key erosion and pollution prevention, sediment control practices to be included in the SWPPP are as follows: Stabilized Construction Exit Points. In order to minimize track-out from vehicles, stabilized construction exit(s) will be installed at the locations where vehicles will exit the Site. The Contractor will restrict vehicle use to the proposed design exit locations. Additional controls to remove sediment from tires may be required if tracking occurs; such methods may include wheel wash stations, rumble strips or rumble plates. No visible signs of soil tracking from vehicles should be present on public roadways exiting the site. Street sweeping may be implemented if sediment is tracked onto the public way. Tree Protection. To the extent possible, to avoid soil compaction within the root zone, construction activities including, but not limited to, vehicle movement, excavation, embankment, staging and storage of materials or equipment shall not occur underneath the canopy(drip line) of trees to remain. The trees along Derby Street and Fort Avenue will be protected with a barrier during demolition and construction. Perimeter Controls. Perimeter stormwater controls may consist of silt fence, fiber roll and/or compost filter socks which will be installed prior to commencing earth disturbing activities on Site. Perimeter controls will be installed along the Harbor's edge. Perimeter control measures must be used around soil stockpiles as a sediment control measure. Control Discharges from Sediment or Soil Stockpiles. For any stockpiled debris composed, in whole or inart, of sediment or soil, the following measures will be followed: P g • Designate specific areas for stockpiling; • Protect them from contact with stormwater(including run-on)using a temporary perimeter sediment barrier; • Cover or provide appropriate temporary stabilization to avoid direct contact with precipitation or to minimize sediment discharge; • Soil or sediment accumulated on pavement or other impervious surfaces will not be hosed down or swept into any stormwater conveyance(unless connected to a sediment basin, sediment trap, or similarly effective control), storm drain inlet, or surface water; and • Unless infeasible, contain and securely protect from wind. • 26 Stormwater Conveyance Channels/Diversion Berms. Stormwater conveyance channels and berms divert concentrated flows to stabilized areas. Temporary conveyance channels may • contain velocity dissipation devices including stone check dams to enhance runoff storage, improve pollutant removal and decrease flow rates. Conveyance channels will be used as necessary to convey runoff around work areas to stabilized temporary basins or traps. Sediment Basins/Traps. Temporary sediment basins or traps are a sediment control practice consisting of an excavated or natural depression that detains/retains stormwater runoff allowing sediments to settle out of suspension prior to discharge via suitably stabilized outlet. Properly constructed and maintained temporary sediment basins are very effective at treating sediment- laden stormwater runoff. A series of basins and traps will be used throughout demolition and construction to manage stormwater runoff. As required by the EPA Construction General Permit, discharges from temporary basins must utilize outlet structures that withdraw water from the surface. Storm Drain Inlet Control. Inlet protection measures remove sediment from the discharge prior to entry into the storm drain inlets. Inlet protection practices typically function by slowing and detaining sediment-laden runoff and allowing sediment to settle out of suspension. Inlet protection will be installed in new storm drain inlets immediately upon installation, and installed in existing stone drain inlets before adjacent areas are disturbed. Types of controls may include block and gravel and woven filter fabric. Minimize Dust. In order to avoid pollutants from being discharged into surface waters to the extent feasible, dust generation and off-site tracking will be minimized through the appropriate • application of water or other dust suppression techniques. Dust suppression includes various means and methods of preventing soil erosion by wind. During all phases of the Project, generation of dust will be minimized to prevent air and water pollution as well as minimize risks to human health. To reduce potential impacts from diesel construction equipment emissions, the Applicant proposes that contractors associated with the construction of the Facility adopt the goal of compliance with the DEP's Clean Air Construction Initiative. The main requirements of the Clean Air Construction Initiative that will be applied to the Facility are: • All contractors shall use ultra- low sulfur diesel ("ULSD") fuel in diesel-powered non- road vehicles; • All non-road engines used on the construction Site shall meet the applicable non-road engine standard per 40 CFR 89.112 or 40 CFR 1039 (as applicable); • All contractors shall turn off diesel combustion engines on construction equipment not in active use and on dump trucks that are idling for five minutes or more while waiting to load or unload materials; and • All contractors shall establish a staging zone for trucks that are waiting to load or unload materials at the work zone in a location where diesel emissions from the trucks will not be noticeable to the public. 27 During the demolition phase of the Project, the following specialized dust control measures for demolition are expected to be used: • • Pre-cleaning of large surfaces and structural members to remove large concentrations of dusting materials prior to demolition; • Water suppression sprays and misting of potential dust-creating situations to prevent spreading of airborne particulates; and • Enclosure of areas with tarps and screening when necessary to prevent the migration of dust. As a general practice, no large surface spray painting will be used during construction. Off-site fabrication of structural steel and other components will be used to virtually eliminate almost all sand blasting and prime coat painting operations at the Site. Any sand blasting operations that may be required at the Site will use containment or"dustless" systems. Earthmoving activities are the primary source of dust generation during construction, but traffic on unstabilized access roads and sediment transport by wind blowing across exposed soil surfaces can also be contributing factors. The most effective dust control practices for preventing wind erosion involve temporary or permanent stabilizing of exposed soils. However, where soil stabilization is not practical, techniques that increase soil moisture and encourage the formation of soil clods, or that reduce wind velocity at the soil surface, are also effective. Specialized dust control measures for construction will be used and include watering of exposed surfaces, and soil stabilization. Also of note, there is an existing dust suppression system surrounding the existing coal pile. Stockpiled material stored in this location and the suppression system used to wet the pile surface and reduce fugitive dust. With implementation of the mitigation measures discussed above combined with additional fugitive dust control measures it is expected that the Facility construction will result in no adverse air quality impacts in any of the areas surrounding the Site. Concrete Washout Areas. Concrete washout areas consist of prefabricated or site-built impermeable containment areas sized to hold concrete wastes and wash water. Concrete washouts will be used to contain concrete and liquids when the chutes of concrete mixers and hoppers of concrete pumps are rinsed out after delivery. Washout areas will be signed and delivery drivers will be instructed to use the areas. Dewatering. The Contractor will be prohibited from discharging groundwater or accumulated stormwater that is removed from excavations, trenches, foundations, vaults, or other points of accumulation associated with a construction activity, unless such waters are first treated by an appropriate control for sediment. Appropriate controls include, but are not limited to, sediment basins or traps, dewatering tanks, weir tanks, or filtration systems (e.g., bag or sand filters)that are designed to remove sediment. Uncontaminated, non-turbid dewatering water can be discharged without being routed to a control. • 28 Pollution Prevention Standards. The SWPPP will incorporate pollution prevention standards in accordance with the CGP for the following activities: • Fueling and maintenance of equipment or vehicles; • Washing of equipment and vehicles; • Staging, handling and disposal of construction materials, products and wastes; and • Washing of applicators, containers used for paint, concrete, or other materials. Spill Prevention and Response Procedures. Spill control/containment equipment will be kept locally in the area of construction. Materials and equipment necessary for spill cleanup will be kept in the material storage area on-site. Equipment and materials will include but not be limited to absorbent booms or mats, brooms, dust pans, mops, rags, gloves, goggles, sand and plastic and metal trash containers specifically for this purpose. The Contractor will be responsible to ensure the inventory will be readily accessible and maintained. The SWPPP inspector will be responsible for detection of spills or leaks and the Contractor will be responsible for response to spills or leaks. Spill Containment and Clean-up Measures. Spills will be contained with granular sorbent materials, sand, sorbent pads,booms, or all of the above to prevent spreading. Catch basins will be plugged and drainage channels should be protected from the spill. Manholes will not be entered unless personnel are trained in confined space entry and have the appropriate safety equipment and backup personnel. Spill clean-up should be completed by trained certified clean- up professionals. Manufacturer's recommended methods for spill cleanup will be maintained and • the Contractor must inform site personnel of the procedures and the location of the information and cleanup supplies. Stabilization Practices. The Contractor will be required to immediately initiate soil stabilization measures whenever earth-disturbing activities have permanently or temporarily ceased on any portion of the Site. Earth-disturbing activities have temporarily or permanently ceased when clearing, grading and excavating within any area of the Site that will not include permanent structures, will not resume for a period of 14 or more calendar days, but will resume in the future. For vegetative stabilization, all activities necessary to initially seed or plant the area to be stabilized and for non-vegetative stabilization the installation or application of all such non- vegetative measures must be completed as soon as practicable, but no later than 14 calendar days after the initiation of soil stabilization measures. Maintenance of Controls. The SWPPP will also include installation and maintenance specifications requiring complete installation of stormwater controls by the time each phase of earth-disturbance has begun and the use of good engineering practices and will follow manufacturer's specifications. The Contractor will be required to ensure that all stormwater, erosion and sediment controls for the project remain in effective operating condition during permit coverage and are protected from activities that would reduce their effectiveness. The Contractor will also be required to inspect all erosion and sediment controls and if the Contractor discovers a problem such as erosion and sediment controls need to be replaced, • 29 repaired, or maintained, the necessary repairs or modifications must be made in accordance with the following schedule: • Initiate work to fix the problem immediately after discovering the problem, and complete such work by the close of the next work day, if the problem does not require significant repair or replacement, or if the problem can be corrected through routine maintenance. When installation of a new erosion or sediment control or a significant repair is needed, the new or modified control must be installed and made operational, or the repair completed, by no later than 7 calendar days from the time of discovery where feasible. If it is infeasible to complete the installation or repair within 7 calendar days, document in the forms why it is infeasible to complete the installation or repair within the 7-day timeframe and document the schedule for installing the stormwater control(s) and making it operational as soon as practicable after the 7- day timeframe. The Project SWPPP will incorporate inspection and reporting requirements and record keeping requirements in accordance with the CGP. 10.2 Construction Term Management Plans Before construction begins, the contractor will develop a safety plan for the Facility to ensure compliance with all applicable federal, state, and local safety and health standards. A construction waste management plan to manage solid waste generated during demolition and construction will be developed. A Soils Management Plan will be developed that outlines screening and management measures to be implemented during construction earthwork • activities. 10.2.1 Waste Management Plan A construction waste management plan will be prepared as part of the construction planning and specification preparation process. In general, relatively high proportions of construction waste can be recycled, but the percentage is dependent on the types and relative amounts of materials used in construction. Construction waste will be sorted on site in accordance with the waste management plan. Plans will be developed with a minimum recycling/reuse goal of 50%. Prior to demolition, asbestos containing materials will be abated in accordance with all applicable notification and work plan requirements and removed from the facility. Asbestos waste will be disposed of at a licensed asbestos landfill. Universal waste such as mercury containing lamps, light ballasts, and batteries will be recycled or disposed of at a licensed facility. Demolition debris that cannot be recycled will be disposed of at a licensed construction and demolition debris (C&D) landfill. Re-use of crushed asphalt, brick, or concrete may proceed without a Beneficial Use Determination (BUD) if the materials are not coated or otherwise impacted with potential contaminants. The project will consider a BUD for the reuse of masonry materials such as brick and concrete generated during dismantlement of the current facility, if such materials are coated. 30 The expected types of metals to be reused or recycled during the dismantling of the existing Salem Harbor Station facility include the following: • Oil tanks and berms/containment are primarily carbon steel, and can be recycled off-site or re-used on-site. Turbine part and components are composed of high alloy steels. While there is value in this material as stock, higher value and use may come from sales to the reconditioned equipment market. Structural steel composition varies (boiler house, precipitator I-beams, girders, etc.),but being a ferrous metal, has value in the scrap metal market. Coal pulverizer equipment and components may be reused or recycled as high alloy scrap to the manufacturer. Boiler tubes are also constructed of high alloy steel, and will have resale value if not re-use opportunity. . Wiring and electrical systems contain copper, which has considerable value in the scrap metal market. 10.2.2 Soils Management • A Soils Management Plan(SMP) will be developed that outlines screening and management measures to be implemented during construction earthwork activities. The SMP will include provisions for managing previously identified chemicals of concern, as well as any new MCP release conditions that may be encountered during earthwork, or construction-related spills. It will outline general provisions for decontamination of equipment, dust monitoring and suppression requirements, and response to site circumstances that may represent new MCP reporting obligations or conditions of MCP Imminent Hazard. Representatives of the Licensed Site Professional of Record will be on site during relevant demolition and construction activities to obtain confirmatory samples, as warranted, and document conditions at the limit of excavation for purposes of supporting required MCP submittals. 11.0 Operation Term Mitigation Measures Operation Term mitigation measures will include an O&M plan for the stormwater management system and a plant operations manual for health and safety. 11.1 . Stormwater The stormwater management system will be maintained through the implementation of a long term Stormwater Management System Operations and Maintenance(O&M) Plan, provided in the Stormwater Management Report. The O&M Plan will be prepared to ensure that the stormwater management and porous pavement systems function as designed. The Operations Manager will be the primary responsibile party for overseeing and implementing the O&M Plan • 31 and will be responsible for the proper operation and maintenance of the stormwater structures. In case of transfer of property ownership, future property owners shall be notified of the presence • of the stormwater management system and the requirements for proper implementation of the O&M Plan. The Project O&M plan: • Identifies individual components of the stormwater system; • Includes a log for tracking inspections and maintenance; • Identifies the key responsible party for maintaining the system; and • Identifies maintenance requirements and manufacturer recommendations for cleaning. In addition, general good housekeeping measures include: • Removal of all trash and litter debris from Site, particularly parking areas, service areas, landscaped areas, stormwater management basins, and drainage outlets; • Pavement sweeping of conventional paved parking areas, driveways and service areas; and • Removal of sediment and pollutants trapped in catch basins, and water quality treatment units. 11.2 General O&M The proposed Facility will be permitted to operate up to 8,760 hours per year. The Applicant will retain qualified and experienced O&M staff to run the Facility. All O&M workers will be • trained and qualified in accordance with industry standards and state requirements. Facility operators will receive classroom training as well as hands on training during the commissioning and testing phases of the project. These operators also will be trained in the areas of environmental compliance, safety and fire protection. A full set of operating, maintenance and safety procedures will be developed and issued, including community_outreach and communications procedures designed to ensure that any issues that may arise during the operations of the Facility can be addressed in a satisfactory and timely manner. Major maintenance and repairs will be performed by local and regional contractors as well as by the equipment manufacturer and contractor as required by their contracts and warranties. 11.2.1 Hazardous Material Management and Storage All potentially hazardous materials will be stored inside of the berm and gabion walled perimeter and at elevations above 16.0 feet. Within the berm, all materials will be stored indoors, within buildings, including the use, storage and delivery of 19% aqueous ammonia which will be used for emissions control processes. The ammonia will be stored in a 34,000 gallon above-ground storage tank, which will be constructed and permitted in accordance with the Massachusetts Department of Public Safety requirements for storage tanks greater than 10,000 gallons containing product other than water. • The storage tank will be constructed of steel and will be approximately 12 feet in diameter and 32 40 feet high. The ammonia storage tank will have single-wall construction, which provides for more effective monitoring and reparability than a double-wall tank. The tank will be leak tested • prior to operation. The tank, as well as the ammonia transfer pumps, valves and piping, will be located within a concrete containment structure (or dike) which will be designed to provide containment of any ammonia spills from ammonia unloading or handling operations, as well as 110% of the volume of the tank. All equipment will be subject to daily, weekly, and annual inspections. The dike will be 24 feet by 19 feet and have 11-foot high walls to provide the necessary containment volume. The dike will contain plastic spheres (or the equivalent) in order to limit the exposed liquid surface area by 90% in the event of a spill. In order to further mitigate the potential impacts of an accidental ammonia release, the entire tank and diked area will be located within an enclosure(or building) 25 feet long, 21 feet wide, and 45 feet high. The walls of the enclosure will be fully sealed, and the only ventilation of the structure to the atmosphere will be by means of roof vents. This will allow a designed level of ventilation to prevent migration of odors. Aqueous ammonia will be delivered by a tanker truck. A typical tanker has a capacity of 8,000 gallons. The routing of these deliveries will be reviewed and approved with City emergency responders in advance of the start of commercial operation. On average Footprint expects to require between six and ten truck deliveries a month depending on the operational profile of the Facility. Transfer from the delivery trucks to the storage tank will take place within a contained concrete unloading area with drainage design such that any spills will drain into the enclosed diked containment area. Delivery trucks will be required to have fast acting shutoff valves in the • unlikely event that a leak or other problem should arise. A hose from the top of the tank connected back to the truck will return displaced vapor to the truck, or an equivalent method for control of transfer losses will be used. The storage and use of hazardous materials will be secure from storm surge and the flooding over the useful life of the plant. 12.0 Project Phasing and Methods The Project includes two major phases: early pre-construction activities including demolition of existing facilities and construction of the new Facility. The following sections provide details on the Project demolition and construction phases. 12.1.1 Early Pre-Construction Activities Early pre-construction activities will include the installation of security features, stormwater management and pollution prevention measures, and establishment of the physical and administrative means required for the safe and environmentally responsible execution of the work. At all times during construction, administrative procedures and equipment will be in place and available so that the Proponent can respond to: any release of oil or pollutants from malfunctioning equipment, dust or airborne pollutants from activities including general traffic, and emergency medical or fire conditions. Emergency planning will be coordinated with local fire and police at an early stage of the Project. • 33 The early activities will also include the demolition and remediation as required for areas of the existing Salem Harbor Station not required for the operation of Salem Harbor Station. Initial • activities will include the establishment of temporary office trailers for staff, change trailers for the craftspeople, and other temporary features including construction electrical power distribution. 12.1.2 Facility Construction Construction activities for the Facility will include the continuation and enhancement of any stormwater pollution prevention and safety features followed by the installation of structural pilings required for equipment foundations. Another early activity will be the construction of the concrete stack. This stack, expected to be approximately 55 feet in diameter and 230 feet above grade, will be constructed of concrete using slip or jack forming methods. Generally, construction is expected to proceed radially outward from the concrete stack shell. As the foundation and underground features are completed, some of the building structural steel will be installed to the extent practical. This work will include the administration building area complex and the STG area enclosure. 12.1.3 Commissioning, Testing and Operations Beginning in late 2015, the contractor will begin a program of pre-commissioning, commissioning and testing that will ensure the safe and efficient operation of the proposed Facility in accordance with design standards and applicable permits. The CCG Facility is expected to commence commercial operations in June 2016. • • 1 , ® '�w"tP TIMi MwOr w; WIA7 MCI mg 4 • .� era � � 4 „-��c>� �,� .. 46 ism 4 400 �� qx, KR �`— A " Y1® s:.'S .®��f9� �,/ IY•y". Lj . 51, 'esu r ,� gq M NOF iN Rj�( IA I� e V �� p���`� \��� / 44{�. Mm �ffl jp �bjR'�fsp��n HSV. O ®` i �mmg® ® t Ill ttt - �,�' � ��_ HY ^+^a \�4 fixx.�.. �a� �.1°+ "e:C�r"✓� j .3 n �` MJ�S .° . �� pJ ��x�R„��L'��3K °�P/CkY�'.,'�7 J� 4 R'4. .�o♦ �., �y -\ - ; T ^- < Collins acility Areaj Facility Area COVQ v1 a w+ �Fi y�p0�amyROgjroHAti k.u, Beverly �� � y�ktirvrt 4ti/� RgS Fits. STREET " Harbor WUMN - �'-:. / �KEFrR4>•`aa��. Ky A � ,. `t'�a "� nT� /q .^+ ' �>>� � °• 3t 1 ,ter � L .duh Cm � V/ t - r ahY.�a�!«w�R/UE .y�rl , � `_ 9 �fny ."`jr 'R.r Z�:+� F�♦,..,. �, ,r+a^C{pR a,'.) , �y .!/ •a .FORT 4IVFN � RFS'TAURq ':. u Iq a� j � ,i � l,Ri +"�f 1£ -...I ♦. ♦ ��� R t )rTZ P ll,, r < a cot�fit v CatJunl e, M ha�G' Cove Smith oCa Pool FoeSalem Harbor " P t} ♦ �c .n A ® 1 11 111 1 ' - 1 • •� . � • r O �... (,., ! 1 W„. W Iv k.:lyrf�.i: wM1 ... E rt •il 1•►”. �y .. • - RRpY_ ,�• s a��. m°�a m4� �1 ' .�, � pA`��,..$��+ � R..: 1 � at K,: • . •aTR"c n .r a'�°� yy ? ^ ,'..T •' r#`s 4 b�P�' r fa9R� '`+' ` +: lc�. �: W _-. + F y • w ♦ _ pP ` _ �� RAN Q. "" • '• WWw �.W t k, „ .j ALLEN STREET A — ��Y /��YY � r s. <qNR :�.,; Sile Nk; ep.. _ '�. ` ...ems y�, .,'1nrYW + .... ~__w. +�1...s.A ,I f~} ".. F °"i f , t .Vi Torr ,*w, �� •�+jjsy�T Area t LU 41 X�w �• �, r+a ��"„�. �„ 11 l��i'. f 1 ^,E !J' �� +FTJ�1'tI•fa y[ ' � ],d I b ' 1 • f ♦ r _` �-�y, 71i,�1f �'1.f�k`-. tik.•.' ./r-��s ('r� 1, t. �}rr.r ,r �°I_,y.r��,., � r SIG♦ ,•k �f" ..�} Ilk- Cat Cove Salem 1 Harbor o t Jr I rc 1 � ® 1 11 X11 , � � • � �/ .� � PAIN:Pesnv w.10 I t(nialwill NO frose a W.a.na ori O—Mir m.a Adak Ask lap Legen r' 4 4.7 Cay®��''4 • < d.: f 1'(, f u _ % ®Site +i , .(r! . vA{aJ�F� + .` ^N �'"' Y d' XS4 • Facility Area . P - 1 _:.-- > 1�.1 c»- —+•- _+. �- -C ,� MLw Designated Pod Area ^ MHW 44 ` �v 01 --' 100 e.Baaer Ir ,�f .•. �.ti r� r• •`y ,i^ '' �••• 100 ft.Buffer Salem Bylaw. y Bank Beach rill Land Subject to Tidal Action �re O Land Under Ocean "Till '4.,.+,d,.: Rocky Inter is al Shore At' '��•�, A Sewage District V oV Pill r �+ ? "�°�;►+ �,� °t� �__� , � � . � '4 i' ..yu"°`" Vim-., i, N M Ferry Landing �.�`• _ "�cR '—" � ..`-� " -,,. + ' t Y Cat 1 Cove Salem< ` Q lHazbor. E !r. I. t land: ® Note wetlands based on field Salem Harbor Station Redevelopment Protect' observations Salem, Massachusetts O TETRATECH o 200 400 Wetland Resource Areas MENIMMol Base Map:Bing Feet June 201OAirphoto Overview Figure 4 F _ gend r 'yr 9r , $• w }�* y� ' w.. m ♦ r v . ' FFr jd'Y Wye ' _:F P n� ^ M 11� 9W ~ W rf Y b ti - Site �w m � >y ��' � � ti w ,� � fid'° ��m + � ,.rin � „�„•'� a � v `icT r r , ,. -�+�y@ ,+ . W�,yp� y� �'W t- ;W � .�/ , !�• . ♦'�`b � �f°' �oq�.o4, �.! '�,�./��.y� ' , , . ZONE AE 10 �•lJyr �a'f'.kH r S�� � " !F N�" ° ? � � ••w�w � i i �gi. r Tem dra i h \ ��.�tp ,•.)t +„�,,, ^' ° M2 ° r;cjn ' ' d�. F�R,Tq�ENv ' '�• f�fff ZONE AE 9 ZONE VE12 e.+ �, •`fir � )].� � ai �+ � F" �°'� '� �...�-rte'^" 5�( •� �� i� ' ����'�{ y� r Wr -,. . • ,mow '"\ < ff r - _ _ vs ` Cat - Cove Z- Salem Harbor1 31`1 ;►- - off I _ _ r • �G r . L 7eg e n d -i-�''9,p*- 7"41 4b, Site Z�ALIE-N- TIREd. it ity Area u Facil !ON • 00� ALv. 44 4 tef/ 3Sr ;; fx'i- 1,4 '4 Ank' -4 z Z!� Cat Cove Salem Harbor toL '-AY=E. M of ' 'lfC- 4U !1;711 VV 0. dDry' v " Legend� � \1 : Site sT* 'k !?Ea°i] GlEW{S�TR'E Collins � -� - • 11: .p {yS� � vBRIGG'l �k.v4�L'aT t4 � FT'l�t ii �ifi .�' y xGS, EE Cove . - • 11: 9.p 1 � p ms Eo_ e{�D^2a7vsTNHESP Certified Vernal Pools(June , s .. -,. Beverly AN Harbor _ 4�LGo� { `\`4 Rpys'R F�,.�S,f� • M=��9� t� �rC A �"' MEMO � � . r T it IFpRT 41VENVE < . 1 �RESTAV zL ,., p ��, i �, x [«, � � `.�`.. r ts' i C y8`P.•P S c.1 'iv � t rYfr[ Cat =,y Jumper ,�..,�ly Cove SmltFi . Cove { FO hK irPS, Salem •9� �iii e � ''' Harborr a 4� y `Ir p S •11: 1 . 1 '/ 1• 1 Fde Name.PK 7+ 117-120016GSVBSB COnnicof'onne<3 5 1-2 Ex,h no Sire Ofmi. aid OuAaPs mm `- Adak Leged fe ♦ Stat ion NODES Outten j ♦ City of Salem Ovtlall "Nllt y `t f��� w.1 •'r- O ✓_1 �;1, ® Catch Basin }._ 10 wwrs Loov 4 —4_LOOP 1 —4—Looe z B Dhectlon of Drainage s yl IRkS • SwalePile) Dreinl nis ne r E •- ` l� r,+ � 1 1,1a �tI}tfy,"'.1- .... y,,sm C� �� l �y��. ®WasteWaterTreavnentBLDG Me,Thaatho.m - lac. � waar'f���y' '[� i~° "" , �^Containmtnreaenas ns ii��ryf�1 ( "Rk,�'i f ,1`,1,`4141 .. { r .. 11 8p d Y T QR C�.., r ! 'w.. I tB +ir �. ® Plant• '- {I �r n' g � • ,u�. � 1� y � i .��� j w`I' a• i1 t`�' ��'� 1 a�M" _ � B 1 t y���, � �•� �r af T Cat N P D E SitOUTFAA L it 1, r r 4 , k w rtaN r 015 alis nt ; Wastewater Treatment + ` ; "z "�` `n"?'r. ebb" r OYe �� NPDES OUTFAL s u r k 'i e44 4 mti✓� 1 -° {ryt"'&� a n'Y 1r 1 In I " �'"� "^'tt �• ` ~ ° ° y1 y'v'"Y>a w t { &T rt" i4 1 s��" - �' d ��tit ✓1 Y fit'� vy 1 x 1 t P�a. ks �>'s� ffi, u+ .Sat@Ol'� ' � r . u', ' t� w*„k�9'T+ 1a Harbor CITY OF SALEM °d�� lati'` '4" �� #* jf z 007 d� � it � as x w �� � � ONPDES OUTFAL ql` ��, NODE UTFAL 'k, Y YX.y($, I`f�Mo IY1V✓ VV 'u t•R' 'r" .Y•'r�' a t y' �`+ ea "�'�'1# '"g}r ,;.,•f...e �,f{g.. I Ala k_ Salem Harbor Station Redevelopment Project ® Salem, Massachusetts TETRA TECH o zoo 400 Existing Site Drainage eool�Fet June APhoto and Outfalls Figure 13 q 1p i� PRELIMINARY l STAGING PLAN .x�#r , Stage 1 Initial Site.Prepa ration Starts:8/13 E.nds:3 14 DEMOLITION 'AREA _ a r; w cid c �.� Ica f". 8'5.?2,.' � a.'., 3 .•� - - Figure 15a, " I PRELIMINARY STAGING PLAN Y Stage 1 Initial Site Preparation 4 R Starts:8/13 End's:3/14 . . v Stage 2 Site Preparation e Starts:3/14 Ends:1/15 DEMOLITION � AREA. 1 � � � 01 � M yy .P •R 3�p+5 - e t Figure 15b rTiT K r Or ♦ � s to PRELIMINARY STAGING PLAN vA Stage 1 TRUCKACCESS .�. Initial Site Preparation d .e cONSTu TION,{ Sta.rts:8/13 Ends:3/14 MANAGEMENT `", Stage 2 g Site Preparation ' �•° GATE: a Starts:3/14 Ends:1/15 Stage 3 PARKING Foundation Construction �� / ',: . o F o = a d Starts:7/14 Ends:12/14 AREA ' MATERIAL p LAYDOWN k � 3 f5 _ 4 � � 0 , f AREA a x� a M V �5 MARINEACCESS �10 ;ioO K Figure 15C "ANI j 1 7, PRELIMINARY I N js STA G G PLAN 4 Stage I TRUCKACCEss U OM/ a J Initial Site Preparation i 1 F O,'d iLI pY Y WNW f` `i ®® CONSTUCTION � Starts:8/13 Ends:3/14 MANAREA ENT . Stage 2 x 1114 ONST. O Site Preparation E' is Rd s GATE Starts:3/14 Ends:1/15 Stage 3 asci ' q Foundation Construction Ki PARKING AREAg ', F ° Starts':7/14 Ends:12/14 MATERIAL r Stage 4 LAYDOWN > AREA " "{ Above Ground Construction Starts:12/14 Ends:4/16 MA-RINE ACCESS . Figure 15d 4e PRELIMINARY AL ` STAGING PLAN Stage 1 m °Oyu 3 : .t a Initial Site Preparation � �- Sta rts:8/13 Ends:3/14' FM1 j .� Stage 2 C Site Preparation Starts:3/14 Ends:1 15 % o Stage 3 foundation Construction a o ® Starts:7/14 Ends:12/14 Stage 4 f q ht Above Ground Construction ' Starts:.12/14 Ends:4/16 n c Stage 5 facility Operations Begin April 2016 Figure 15e bQ, �. PRELIMINARY STAGING PLAN g Sta e 1 PHASE �,� '� os b 2 ! ` .'Y �_. Initial Site.Preparation `'`T r r t • Starts:8/13 Ends:3/14 \ F Stage 2 Site Preparation % y. ¢_ o Starts:3/14 Ends:1/15 / E �. ` 15 Stage 3 ` ; 3 �` 'ip Foundation Construction Starts-7/14 Ends:12/14 ' PHASE 2 �� a _ Stage 4 Above Ground Construction Starts: 12/14 Ends:4/16 Stage 5 & r + g - ,- Facility OperationsBegin ' t_s �6 zz A- April 2016 Phase 2 Figure 15f a x C • d CL CL Q , Appendix A Abutter Notification Information Affidavit of Service • Under the Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act 1, Lisa M. Carrozza, hereby certify under the pains and penalties of perjury that on June 13, 2013, I gave notification to abutters in compliance with the second paragraph of Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 131, Section 30, and the DEP Guide to Abutter Notification dated April 8, 1994, in connection with the following matter: A Notice of Intent filed under the Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act and the City of Salem Wetlands Protection and Conservation Ordinance with the Salem Conservation Commission on June 13, 2013 for the redevelopment of the Salem Harbor Station Site including the construction of a new construction of a new state-of-the-art Combined Cycle Gas (CCG) fired electric generation facility and related structures and infrastructure (the CCG Facility) on a 20+/- acre portion of the Site at 24 Fort Avenue in Salem, Massachusetts. The form of the notification and a list of the abutters to whom it was given, and their addresses, are attached to this Affidavit of Service. • Signature f Date • \\INES0I IFSI\Projects\62117\127-62117-12001\Docs\Reports\Local\Con ComMEAFFIDAVI.doc • CITY OF SALEM ASSESSOR'S CERTIFICATION OF ABUTTERS AND PROPERTY OWNERS BOARD/COMMISSION: Conservation Commission PROJECT SITE: 24 Fort Ave DATE: 5/24/2013 DESCRIPTION OF REQUIREMENT: All abutters and any property owner within 100 feet of the property line of the land where the activity is proposed including if land is separated by a public or private street or a body of water and not unreasonably distant from the project site. This is to certify that the time of the last assessment for taxation made by the City of Salem, the names and addresses of those listed on the attached sheets are "abutters and property owners" (as defined by Wetlands Protection Act 310 CMR 10.05(4)(a)) to the parcel(s) of land listed above as the project site. • Assessor's Signature: Date: sal (j Number of initialed pages attached: Once Certified, Return to: Tom Devine, Department of Planning and Community Development 41_0097_0 42_0082_0 .�RwaS ,Wan.54� y'�^ 0337 CASEY NOREEN A wieE1 3 Tet sz1 ! J W,,, 1 i w�^'� P-ro l 123 BAY VIEW AVENUE 31 FORT AVE SALEM,MA 01970 SALEM,MA 01970 6B W 6 k M- 41 r • y�y S fir, ✓K A O til Zn 41_0096801 42_00830 j'�r � 'J HAVEN_CHARLES R y6TY _ $+ 74 DERBY ST 33FORTAVE Id(rl w0(Ki�SJ-Fh SALEM,MA 01970 SALEM,MA 00p1970 5v 169 (. f 441 rM BHat�FL 33Yo`� 41_0094_0 42_0084_0 STEFFEN GREGORY A SZYMANSKI JOSEPH J 78 DERBY STREET 35 FORT AVE SALEM,MA 01970 SALEM,MA 01970 41_0262_0 - 42_0085_0 DEL PUERTO GUSTAVO KORRIKU ILIR 8 DERBY ST i 37 FORT AVENUE SALEM,MA 01970 SALEM,MA 01970 1 41_0275_0 42_00860 . DRACZUK JEAN PIERRE LEMIEU_X LYN-ANNE M 5 RUE DU MONT 39 FORT AVE 93800 EPINAY SUR SEINE, FRANCE SALEM,MA 01970 �_0093_0 41_0258_0 Rctd�cd -lJlh AHILL JON SALEM CITY OF 41 G,z(�S 198 LOCUST STREET ,( DANVERS,MA 01923 Ian -r l4uh kt- S2raGr I R fUrf r1u.a '\ 41_0276_0 420087_0 � � I 141A141AO)976 SAVICKEY RICHARD E SOUTH_ ESSEX SEWERAGE DISTRICT 36 DEARB ORN STREET 50 FORT AVE SALEM,MA 01970 SALEM,MA 01970 41_0271_0 FGOJL pry M, r 420088_0 r D ee- SO_UTH ESSEX SEWERAGE DISTRICT 5w- T-r 700 ✓ ,p 50FORTAVE PIT'FSBiHl6i3','L�A"t521240___ f2✓d' fs SALEM,MA 01970, WP'll 42_0098_0 42_0089_0 SOUTH ESSEX SEWERAGE BOARD SOUTH ESSEX SEWERAGE DISTRICT 50FORTAVE 50 FORT AVE SALEM,MA 01970 SALEM,MA 01970 42_0081_0 42_0090_0 �LEM CITY OF SOUTH ESSEX SEWERAGE DISTRICT RK&RECREATION BUILDING 50 FORT AVENUE v- SALEM,MA 01970 .SR,C✓vp 1 ✓ntF Ole{�-t'� UJ 41_0146_0 41_0134_0 41_0142_0 JARMUSIK MICHAEL R SAVICKEY RICHARD E CRAWFORD JOHN 1 ALLEN ST - 36 DEARBORN STREET 44 DERBY STREET SALEM,MA .01970 SALEM,MA 01970 SALEM,MA 01970 • 41_0151_0 41_0278_0 41_0141_0 CHALIFOUR FAM LIM PARTNERSHIP CITY OF SALEM THE DEARSTYNE WILLIAM 96 NORTH ST 93 WASHINGTON STREET 48 DERBY STREET SALEM,MA 01970 SALEM,MA 01970 SALEM,MA 01970 41_0147_0 41.0277_0 41_0140_0 HARPER KATHRYN H D E T REALTY TRUST CORNEAU VINCENT R 3 ALLEN STREET P O BOX 366 50 DERBY STREET SALEM,MA 01970 SALEM,MA 01970 SALEM,MA 01970 41_0148_0 41_0264_0 41_0139_0 WG S frop41VT1s HIGGINS JAMES J VHLLARREAL LUZ ( S�Y7XtQME 5 ALLEN STREET 1 BLOCK HOUSE SQUARE SALEM,MA 01970 SALEM,MA 01970 ZILAM-M£0,- M70 Mar6tf-k¢AlI rQ4- O�F4s 41_0149_0 41_0321_0 - - 41_0138_0 HAZELTON BRIAN SALEM CITY OF �srs 6:k r G la r 6c - 7 ALLEN STREET CITY HALL 58 DERBY STREET SALEM,MA 01970 SALEM,MA 01970 SALEM,MA 01970 0150_0 41_0260_0 41_0263_0 EENEY VERONICA ANN COTE THOMAS P ANTUNES SANDRA E 9 ALLEN STREET 54 MEMORIAL DRIVE 6 DERBY ST SALEM,MA 01970 SALEM,MA 01970 SALEM,MA 01970 41_0136_801 41_0259_0 41 Ir,�a,(ZQ sn j3rx& MORRISON GLENN S MORRISEY BROOKE D ET ALI A_ _ 3 112 BECKET AVE U-1 244 HIGH STREET 60 DERBY STREET SALEM,MA 01970 TOPSFIELD,MA 01983 SALEM,MA 01970 41_0136_802 41_0145_0 41_0099_0 KALP ERICA JARMUSIK MICHAEL GAJEWSKI HELEN 3 112 BECKET STREET U2 1 ALLEN ST 47 ESSEX STREET SALEM,MA 01970 SALEM,MA 01970 SALEM,MA 01970 41_0136_803 41_0144_0 0 41_0273_0 r- h POMEROY MELISSA SMITH JEFFREY R 1515 HALL STREET 4 GREENLEAF DRIVE 50 Tfil�'�LA EST STE 500 MANCHESTER,NH 03104 DANVERS,MA 01923 PITT it 40 9,,-4e. 2z Fall- 9 c 3a3 .A:j,ao&4er)NJ og$'0-7 41_0096_802 41_0143_0 41_0098_0 —T"'ha-S IUTZ HEIDI B JODRIE RICHARD A 6 BECKET AVE U2 40 DERBY ST '"`^ s9- few De✓�y Sl- SALEM,MA 01970 SALEM,MA 01970 BskElRt-r'-N�5� (Q,m10I 9 0 Notification to Abutters Under the Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act and • Salem Wetlands Protection and Conservation Ordinance In accordance with the second paragraph of Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 131, Section 40, you are hereby notified of the following. A. The name of the applicant is Footprint Power Salem Harbor Development LP. B. The applicant has filed a Notice of Intent with the Conservation Commission for the municipality of Salem seeking permission to remove, fill, dredge or alter an Area Subject to Protection Under the Wetlands Protection Act (General Laws Chapter 131, Section 40) and the City of Salem Wetlands Protection and Conservation Ordinance. C. The address of the lot where the activity is proposed is 24 Fort Avenue D. Copies of the Notice of Intent may be examined at Salem Conservation Commission Office between the hours of 8:00 am and 4:00 pm on the following days of the week: Monday through Wednesday' Thursday 8.00 am and 7:00 pm and Friday 8:00 am and 1200 pm For more information, call: 978-619-5685. Check one: This is the applicant ❑ , representative ❑ , or other ® (specify): Salem Conservation Commission Office, 120 Washington Street, Salem,MA 01970 • E. Copies of the Notice of Intent may be obtained from either (check one) the applicant ❑ , or the applicant's representative ® , by calling this telephone number ( 508 ) 903 - 2048 between the hours of 9 and 5 on the following days of the week: Monday-Friday F. Information regarding the date,time, and place of the public hearing may be obtained from Salem Conservation Commission Office, 120 Washington Street, Salem, MA 01970 by calling this telephone number 978-619-5685 between the hours of 8:00 am and 4:00 pm on the following days of the week: Monday through Wednesday; Thursday 8:00 am and 7:00 pm and Friday 8:00 am and 12:00 pm. Check One: This is the applicant ❑, representative ❑, or other ® (specify): Salem Conservation Commission Office, 120 Washington Street, Salem,MA 01970 NOTE: Notice of the public hearing, including its date, time, and place, will be published at least five(5) days in advance in: The Salem News NOTE: Notice of the public hearing, including its date, time, and place, will be posted in the City or Town Hall not less than forty-eight (48)hours in advance. NOTE: You also may contact your local Conservation Commission or the nearest Department of Environmental Protection Regional Office for more information about this application or the Wetlands Protection Act. To contact DEP, call: Northeast Region: 978-694-3200 • P:\62117\127-62117-12001\Docs\Reports\Local\Con Com\NOl\Abutt_Note.doc m x 'v c m a CL Q • Appendix B Stormwater Management Report (under separate cover) U x •c m a a Q • Appendix C Sea Level Rise Reference Material REFERENCE MATERIALS CITED IN.THE,TEXT INCLUDE THE_FOLLOWING: . Global. Warming : Sea Level Rise Written by YeSeul Kim, Erika Granger, Katie Puckett, Cankutan Hasar, and EeifFranceL Sea. Level Rise Causes The main factors affecting sea level rise are thermal expansion of the oceans, melting glaciers, and melting icecaps. These are all symptoms of global warming. As the ocean, or any liquid, increases intemperature, it increases in volume as well. This process is known as thermal expansion. Glacial and icecap melting occurs when there is net loss of water from the body of snow and ice; that is,if more water melts off of the glacier or icecap during the summer than is accumulated through precipitation(snow)during the winter.(EPA, 2000) • Types of Sea Level Rise - According to Barry R. Lewis (2000), there are two types of sea level rise: eustatic and isostatic. Eustatic sea level rise responds to major climatic change and possibly affected by global warming. Isostatic sea level rise is a localized representation of vertical displacements of land surface with respect to sea level. Global Sea Level Prediction Sea level rise from any given source varies based on which model was implemented. The most often cited models that predict sea level rise are MPI, CCCma, GFDL and Hadley-CM3. The range of data arises from many uncontrollable and unpredictable factors that influence sea level rise. Such factors include climate, global warming, thermal expansion, future development of technology and amount of greenhouse emissions. Each model makes different assumptions which add to some uncertainty in the results. However, to have the most accurate number, the average of the ranges was calculated. Sixteen different sources of sea level rise predictions a hundred years from now or 2100 were compiled. Primary sources included reports from the International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and NOAA. The data ranged from extremes of.02 meters of sea level rise (Walsh, 2002)to 6 meters (AGI, 1994). After omitting the upper and lower outliers, the average of the ranges indicate that sea level will rise .944 meters. • • .48 .55 .94 1 .94 od :I--* . 0 Meters 1 2 EBoxd Whisker PloR Averages Ooutliers (Kim, 2006) This box and whisker plot delineates,,the 50% range of the compiled sea level rise is .48 meters • to 1.94 meters. The plot omitted the outliers, which were indicated with red circles. The median is .55 meters, while the average is .944 meters. Models and Their Uncertainties Hadley-CM3 is considered "one of the most state-of-the art greenhouse models" that predict positive temperature trends (Douglass, 2004). However, existing observational data shows the contrary trend since 1979. The authors of this report believe one of two alternatives that could explain this phenomenon. First, the Hadley-CM3 is correct and all observational data sets must then be incorrect. Otherwise,the `'[model does] not fully capture the multitudinous climate effects (including various feedbacks of an increase in greenhouse gases" (Douglass, Pearson, and Singer, 2004)_ Sovolok and Stone, researchers at MIT who developed the MIT-2D model, believe that uncertainty in heat uptake by the deep ocean is a key factor for the uncertainty in models. The uncertainty in the rate of heat uptake by the deep ocean has not been included in the projects of climate change made by. the IPCC [model] (Houghton, Jenkens, and 'Ephraums, 1990). The following table shows the variability in four different models. • Table 1. Response of different AOGCMs and matching versions of the MIT 2D model to a gradual increase of CO, concentration. Model - AT�q('C) AT.artitne of CO,.doubling(`C) Fraction of equilibrium response (%) GFDL 2D,K=2.5 3.5 2.3 66 3.5 2.5 71 UK-MO 2D, K= 1.2.5 2.8 1.7 61 2.9 1.8 62 MPI 2D. K= 12.5 2.5 1.6 64 2.5 1.7 -. - - 68 NCAR 2D. K=0 4.6 3.8 83 4.5. 3.6 80 • Solowk,Andrei P.,Stone,Peter H.Global Warming Projections:Sensitivity to Deep Ocean Mixing.Center for Global Change Science,Massachusetts,Institute of Technology. Figure 1-University of Colorado 2001 Rev 4 From: http://www.skepticalscience.com/sea-leve1-rise-predictions.htm WTw" A Ak an - , uoptee;aAoonstne 30 00 E d y - 20 . 1 co 8' to vI 0 i Rate3.2i0.4m". 1 o a Seasonal signals removed -10 B unaamq or 1=0201,>_Iwa • 1992 1994 1998 1998 2000 2002 2004 2008 2008 2010 2012 The mean sea level trend is 2.63 mm/year with a 95% confidence interval of +/- 0.18 mm/year based on monthly mean sea level data from 1921 to 2006 which is equivalent to a change of 0.86 feet in 100 years. NOAA historical Tide data for Salem area. Monthly Means (W5) .. _ Station -- Unique seven character identifier for the station Year -- Year of data Mo -- Month of data MHHW -- Mean Higher-High Water MHW -- Mean High Water -- DTL -- Mean ofMHHW and MLLW MTL -- Mean of MHW and MLW MSL -- .Mean Sea Level - - - - MLW -- Mean Low Water • -- MLLW -- Mean Lower-Low Water GT -- Difference e ence between MHHW and MLLW MN Difference between MHW and MLW DHQ -- Difference between MHHW and MHW DLQ -- Difference between MLW and MLLW HWI _ -- -Greenwich Mean High Water Interval in Hours LWI -- Greenwich Mean Low Water Interval in Hours Data are in Feet above MHW - Times are onLITC(GMT) - - - - - - - MHHW MHW DTL MTL , -MSL - MLW MLLW GT. MN_ .-DHQ DLQ HWI. .LWI - - - 0.27 -0.10 -4.54 -4.62 -4.57 -9.13 -9.34 9.61 9.03 0.37 .0.21 3.71. 9.85 NOAA SEA LEVEL TREND DATUM: - - - - - -- The mean sea level trend is 2.63 mm/year with a 95%confidence interval of+/-0.18 mm/year based on monthly mean sea level data from 1921 to 2006 which is equivalent to a change of 0.86 feet in 100 years. 0 x C Q Q a • • Appendix D Notice of Intent Plans (under separate cover) NOI Status Sheet Address: a H Fw^ Au DEP #: 6- k Application Type: A16, Date Submitted: �( __aContact Name: I Phone: Proposed activity: PVII� application Complete 725Correct Fee Received [�)Abutters List Requested aReceived >tegal Ad Sent &LCegal Ad Confirmed ' Dnline Added to Agenda Benda to Applicant Agent Comments to Commission gDEP Commentsk._ Hearing Opened: y/ Continued-16P 3Site Visit: abutters Notice Confirmed rKpermit Sent to Applicant and DEP confirmation of Delivery Expiration date added to calendar '6Added to database �1 Applicant Recorded OoC with Registry Preconstruction Meeting: certificate of Compliance Sent to Applicant and DEP 'N-Confirmation of Delivery +-Applicant Recorded CoC with Registry Notes: -711 ( fit L.� I HACON COMM\Administrative\projeet status sheet\NOI status sheet 2012-12-27.doc sem- 'J- r . SEF 0 3 20413 SERAFINI , DARLING & CORRENTI, LLP ATTORNEYS AT LAW DEPT.OF PLl-,?%!! r3& 63 FEDERAL STREET '0MMUNIN DEVELOPWfEPi SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS 01970 JOHN R. SERAFINI. SR. TELEPHONE JOHN E. DARLING 978-744-0212 JOSEPH C. CORRENTI FACSIMILE 978-741-4683 September 3, 2013 VIA HAND DELIVERY Tom Devine, Conservation Agent Salem Conservation Commission 120 Washington Street Salem, Massachusetts 01970 Re: Footprint Power Salem Harbor Development LP 24 Fort Avenue Order of Conditions No. 64-552 Dear Mr. Devine: Enclosed please find the Recording Confirmation for the Order of Conditions regarding the above matter, which has been recorded with the Registry of Deeds. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to call me. Sincerely, doIspp h C. Co-renti JCC:dI Enclosure cc: client L� Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection Provided by MassDEP: Bureau of Resource Protection - Wetlands 64-552 WPA Form 5 — Order of Conditions MassDEP File# 'i Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act M.G.L. c. 131, §40 eDEP Transaction# Salem I City(Town `? G. Recording Information i 0 Prior to commencement of work, this Order of Conditions must be recorded in the Registry 9� Y of Deeds or the Land Court for the district in which the land is located, within the chain of title of " the affected property. In the case of recorded land, the Final Order shall also be noted in the Registry's Grantor Index under the name of the owner of the land subject to the Order. In the case of registered land, this Order shall also be noted on the Land Court Certificate of Title of the owner of the land subject to the Order of Conditions.The recording information on this page shall be submitted to the Conservation Commission listed below. Salem :} Conservation Commission Detach on dotted line, have stamped by the Registry of Deeds and submit to the Conservation Commission. To: Salem Conservation Commission Please be advised that the Order of Conditions for the Project at: 24 Fort Avenue 64-552 Project Location MassDEP File Number Has been recorded at the Registry of Deeds of: 1 Essex South District 'I County Book Page for: Footprint Power Salem Harbor Real Fstate TP { Property Owner i j and has been noted in the chain of title of the affected property in: 'j 37161 237 tT Book Page and Ddc>7mdnt;iNo. 534837 on Certificate of Title-21[o. 85999 In accordance with the Order of Conditions issued ort: j July 31 , 2013 1; Date If recorded land, the instrument number identifying this transaction is: #186 (Book 32785, Page 474) Instrument Number If registered land, the document number identifying this transaction is: Document Number Signature of Applicant '.. tj wpabrm5.tloc• rev.05/19/2010 Page 12 of 12 CITY OF SALEM CONSERVATION COMMISSION July 31, 2013 Joseph Correnti Serafini, Darling & Correnti, L.L.P. 63 Federal Street Salem, MA 01970 Re: Order of Conditions—DEP #64-552-24 Fort Avenue Dear Mr. Correnti: Enclosed, please find the Order of Conditions for the above-referenced project. Following the 10-business-day appeal period (as of July 31, 2013), this document and the attached Special Conditions must be recorded at the Essex County Registry of Deeds (Shetland Park 45 Congress Street, Suite 4100 Salem, Massachusetts). Once recorded, please return a copy of Page 12 of the Order, which will indicate to the Commission that the document has been recorded. As indicated in the Order, prior to any work commencing: 1. this Order must be recorded, 2. contact me at least 48 hours prior to any activity to schedule a pre-construction . meeting to review the Order with your hired contractor. If you have any further questions, please feel free to contact me at 978-619-5685. Sincerely, "Com De Conservation Agent/Staff Planner Enclosures CC: DEP Northeast Regional Office Footprint Power Salem Harbor Development LP Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection Provided by MassOEP: Bureau of Resource Protection - Wetlands 64-552 WPA Form 5 - Order of Conditions MassDEP File# Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act M.G.L. c. 131, §40 eDEP Transaction R Salem City/Town A. General Information Please note' Salem this form has t. From: been modified Conservation Commission with added 2. This issuance is for space to a.®Order of Conditions b.❑ Amended Order of Conditions accommodate (check one): the Registry of Deeds 3. To: Applicant: Requirements Scott Silverstein Important: a. First Name b.Last Name When filling Footprint Power Salem Harbor Development LP out forms on c.Organization the 1140 Route 22 East, Suite 303 computer, use only the d. Mailing Address tab key to Bridgewater NJ 08807 move your e.City/Townf.State Zi Code cursor-do g P not use the 4. Property Owner(if different from applicant): return key. rd a. Fvst Name b.Last Name Footprint Power Salem Harbor Real Estate LP c.Organization Same d.Mailing Address e.Cit Wown f.State g.Zip Code 5. Project Location: 24 Fort Avenue Salem a.Street Address b.CityrTown 41 271, 273 c.Assessors Map/Plat Number d.Parcel/Lot Number Latitude and Longitude, if known: 42d31m37s 70d52m36s d. Latitude e.Longitude wpatorm5.doc- rev.05/192010 Page 1 of 12 Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection Provided by MassoEP: Bureau of Resource Protection - Wetlands 64-552 WPA Form 5 - Order of Conditions MassDEP File# Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act M.G.L. c. 131, §40 eDEP Transaction# Salem City/Town A. General Information (cont.) 6. Property recorded at the Registry of Deeds for(attach additional information if more than one parcel): Southern Essex Doc. #449497, 9885A, 25890, 13585A a.County b.Certificate Number(if registered land) 31761, 23825, 15069, 3856, 27327, 410 - 231, 102 350 129 111 87(respectively) c.Bookd.Page 7. Dates: 6/13/13 7/25/13 7/31/13 a.Date Notice of Intent Filed b.Date Public Hearing Closed c.Date of Issuance 8. Final Approved Plans and Other Documents (attach additional plan or document references as needed): See attached a. Plan Title b. Prepared By c.Signed and stamped by d. Final Revision Date e.Scale I.Additional Plan or Document Title g.Date B. Findings t: Findings pursuant to the Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act: Following the review of the above-referenced Notice of Intent and based on the information provided in this application and presented at the public hearing, this Commission finds that the areas in which work is proposed is significant to the following interests of the Wetlands Protection Act(the Act). Check all that apply: a. ❑ Public Water Supply b. ® Land Containing Shellfish c' ❑ Prevention of Pollution d. ❑ Private Water Supply e. ® Fisheries f• ® Protection of Wildlife Habitat g. ❑ Groundwater Supply h. ® Storm Damage Prevention i. ® Flood Control 2. This Commission hereby finds the project, as proposed, is: (check one of the following boxes) Approved subject to: a. ® the following conditions which are necessary in accordance with the performance standards set forth in the wetlands regulations. This Commission orders that all work shall be performed in accordance with the Notice of Intent referenced above, the following General Conditions, and any other special conditions attached to this Order. To the extent that the following conditions modify or differ from the plans, specifications, or other proposals submitted with the Notice of Intent, these conditions shall control. wpaform5.dw- rev.05/19/2010 Page 2 of 12 Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection Provided by MassDEP: Bureau of Resource Protection - Wetlands 64-552 WPA Form 5 - Order of Conditions MassDEP File 4 Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act M.G.L. c. 131, §40 eDEP Transaction it Salem City/Town B. Findings (cont.) Denied because: b. ❑ the proposed work cannot be conditioned to meet the performance standards set forth in the wetland regulations. Therefore, work on this project may not go forward unless and until a new Notice of Intent is submitted which provides measures which are adequate to protect the interests of the Act, and a final Order of Conditions is issued. A description of the performance standards which the proposed work cannot meet is attached to this Order. c. ❑ the information submitted by the applicant is not sufficient to describe the site, the work, or the effect of the work on the interests identified in the Wetlands Protection Act. Therefore, work on this project may not go forward unless and until a revised Notice of Intent is submitted which provides sufficient information and includes measures which are adequate to protect the Act's interests, and a final Order of Conditions is issued. A description of the specific information which Is lacking and why It is necessary is attached to this Order as per 310 CMR 10.05(6)(c). 3. ❑ Buffer Zone Impacts: Shortest distance between limit of project disturbance and the wetland resource area specified in 310 CMR 10.02(1)(a) a. linear feet Inland Resource Area Impacts: Check all that apply below. (For Approvals Only) Resource Area Proposed Permitted Proposed Permitted Alteration Alteration Replacement Replacement 4. ❑ Bank a.linear feet b.linear feet c.linear feet d.linear feet 5. ❑ Bordering Vegetated Wetland a.square feet b.square feet c.square feet d,square feet 6. ❑ Land Under Waterbodies and a.square feet b.square feet c.square feet d.square feet Waterways e.c/y dredged f.Gy dredged T El Bordering Land Subject to Flooding a,square feet b.square feet c.square feet d.square feet Cubic Feet Flood Storage e.cubic feet f.cubic feet g.cubic feet h.cubic feet e. El Isolated Land Subject to Flooding a.square feet b.square feet Cubic Feet Flood Storage c.cubic feet d.cubic feet e.cubic feet f.cubic feet e. ❑ Riverfront Area a.total sq.feet b.total sq.feet Sq If within 100 It Sq It between 100- c.square feet d.square feet e.square f. feet squarefeet 200 It g,square feet h.-square feet i.square feet I.square feet wpafcrm5.doc• rev.mimoto Page 3 of 12 Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection Provided by MassDEP: Bureau of Resource Protection - Wetlands 64-552 WPA Form 5 — Order of Conditions MasSDEP File N Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act M.G.L. c. 131, §40 eDEPT ran Salem section# City/Town B. Findings (cont.) Coastal Resource Area Impacts: Check all that apply below. (For Approvals Only) Proposed Permitted Proposed Permitted Alteration Alteration Replacement Replacement 10. Ar Designated Port Areas Indicate size under Land Under the Ocean, below 11. ® Land Under the 5 5 Ocean a.square feet b.square feet c.c/y dredged d.c/y dredged 12. ❑ Barrier Beaches Indicate size under Coastal Beaches and/or Coastal Dunes below 13. ❑ Coastal Beaches cu yd cu yd - a.square feet b.square feet c.nourishment d.nourishment 14. ❑ Coastal Dunes cu yd cu yd a.square feet b.square feet c.nourishment d.nourishment 15. ❑ Coastal Banks a.linear feet b.linear feet 15. ❑ Rocky Intertidal . . Shores a.square feet b.square feet 17. ❑ Salt Marshes a.square feet b.square feet c.square feet - d.square feet 1a. El Land Under Salt Ponds a.square feet b.square feet c.c/y dredged d.c/Y dredged ed 19. ❑ Land Containing Shellfish a.square feet b.square feet c.square feet d.square feet 20. ❑ Fish Runs Indicate size under Coastal Banks, Inland Bank, Land Under the Ocean, and/or inland Land Under Waterbodies and Waterways, above a.c/y dredged b.c/y dredged 21. .® Land Subject to 541,000 541,000 Coastal Storm a.square feet b.square feet Flowage wpaform5.d=- rev.05/19/2010 Page 4 of 12 ILIMassachusetts Department of Environmental Protection Provided by MassDEP: Bureau of Resource Protection - Wetlands 64-552 WPA Form 5 — Order of Conditions MassDEP File# Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act M.G.I. c. 131, §40 eDEP Transaction# Salem City/Town B. Findings (cont.) '#22. If the project is for 22. [1Restoration/Enhancement*: the purpose of restoring or a.square feet of BVW enhancing a b.square feet of salt marsh wetland resource area 23• ❑ Stream Crossing(s): in addition to the square - footage that a.number of new stream crossings b.number of replacement stream crossings has been entered in C. General Conditions Under Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act Section B.5.c BBVW)or .ITc(Salt The following conditions are only applicable to Approved projects. pea elan ere, 1. Failure to comply with all conditions stated herein, and with all related statutes and other the additional regulatory measures, shall be deemed cause to revoke or modify this Order. amount here. 2. The Order does not grant any property rights or any exclusive privileges; it does not authorize any injury to private property or invasion of private rights. 3. This Order does not relieve the permittee or any other person of the necessity of complying with all other applicable federal, state, or local statutes, ordinances, bylaws, or regulations. 4. The work authorized hereunder shall be completed within three years from the date of this Order unless either of the following apply: a. the work is a maintenance dredging project as provided for in the Act; or b. the time for completion has been extended to a specified date more than three years, but less than five years, from the date of issuance. If this Order is intended to be valid for more than three years, the extension date and the special circumstances warranting the extended time period are set forth as a special condition in this Order. 5. This Order may be extended by the issuing authority for one or more periods of up to three years each upon application to the issuing authority at least 30 days prior to the expiration date of the Order. 6. If this Order constitutes an Amended Order of Conditions, this Amended Order of Conditions does not extend the issuance date of the original Final Order of Conditions and the Order will expire on 7/31/2016 unless extended in writing by the Department. 7. Any fill used in connection with this project shall be clean fill. Any fill shall contain no trash, refuse, rubbish, or debris, including but not limited to lumber, bricks, plaster, wire, lath, paper, cardboard, pipe, tires, ashes, refrigerators, motor vehicles, or parts of any of the foregoing. 8. This Order is not final until all administrative appeal periods from this Order have elapsed, or if such an appeal has been taken, until all proceedings before the Department have been completed. wpatarm5.do • rev.o5/19/2o10 Page 5 at 12 Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection Provided by MassDEP: Bureau of Resource Protection - Wetlands 64-552 WPA Form 5 — Order of Conditions MassDEPFIIe# Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act M.G.L. c. 131, §40 eDEP Trans-action# Salem City/Town C. General Conditions Under Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act (cont.) 9. No work shall be undertaken until the Order has become final and then has been recorded in the Registry of Deeds or the Land Court for the district in which the land is located, within the chain of title of the affected property. In the case of recorded land, the Final Order shall also be noted in the Registry's Grantor Index under the name of the owner of the land upon which the proposed work is to be done. In the case of the registered land, the Final Order shall also be noted on the Land Court Certificate of Title of the owner of the land upon which the proposed work is done.The recording information shall be submitted to the Conservation Commission on the form at the end of this Order, which form must be stamped by the Registry of Deeds, prior to the commencement of work. 10. A sign shall be displayed at the site not less then two square feet or more than three square feet in size bearing the words, "Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection" [or, "MassDEP"j :'File Number 64-552 " 11. Where the Department of Environmental Protection is requested to issue a Superseding Order, the Conservation Commission shall be a party to all agency proceedings and hearings before MassDEP. 12. Upon completion of the work described herein, the applicant shall submit a Request for Certificate of Compliance (WPA Form 8A)to the Conservation Commission. 13. The work shall conform to the plans and special conditions referenced in this order. 14. Any change to the plans identified in Condition #13 above shall require the applicant to inquire of the Conservation Commission in writing whether the change is significant enough to require the filing of a new Notice of Intent. 15. The Agent or members of the Conservation Commission and the Department of Environmental Protection shall have the right to enter and inspect the area subject to this Order at reasonable hours to evaluate compliance with the conditions stated in this Order, and may require the submittal of any data deemed necessary by the Conservation Commission or Department for that evaluation. 16. This Order of Conditions shall apply to any successor in interest or successor in control of the property subject to this Order and to any contractor or other person performing work conditioned by this Order. 17. Prior to the start of work, and if the project involves work adjacent to a Bordering Vegetated Wetland, the boundary of the wetland in the vicinity of the proposed work area shall be marked by wooden stakes or flagging. Once in place, the wetland boundary markers shall be maintained until a Certificate of Compliance has been issued by the Conservation Commission. wpaform5.tloc• rev.95/1912010 Page 6 of 12 Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection Provided by MassDEP: Bureau of Resource Protection - Wetlands 64-552 WPA Form 5 - Order of Conditions MassDEP File# Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act M.G.L. c. 131, §40 eDEP Transaction# Salem City/Town C. General Conditions Under Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act (cont.) 18. All sedimentation barriers shall be maintained in good repair until all disturbed areas have been fully stabilized with vegetation or other means. At no time shall sediments be deposited in a wetland or water body. During construction, the applicant or his/her designee shall inspect the erosion controls on a daily basis and shall remove accumulated sediments as needed. The applicant shall immediately control any erosion problems that occur at the site and shall also immediately notify the Conservation Commission, which reserves the right to require additional erosion and/or damage prevention controls it may deem necessary. Sedimentation barriers shall serve as the limit of work unless another limit of work line has been approved by this Order. NOTICE OF STORMWATER CONTROL AND MAINTENANCE REQUIREMENTS 19. The work associated with this Order(the"Project") is(t)® is not 121 ❑ subject to the Massachusetts Stormwater Standards. If the work is subject to the Stormwater Standards, then the project is subject to the following conditions: a) All work, including site preparation, land disturbance, construction and redevelopment, shall be implemented in accordance with the construction period pollution prevention and erosion and sedimentation control plan and, if applicable, the Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan required by the National Pollution Discharge Elimination System Construction General Permit as required by Stormwater Condition 8. Construction period erosion, sedimentation and pollution control measures and best management practices (BMPs) shall remain in place until the site is fully stabilized. b) No stormwater runoff may be discharged to the post-construction stormwater BMPs unless and until a Registered Professional Engineer provides a Certification that: i. all construction period BMPs have been removed or will be removed by a date certain specified in the Certification. For any construction period BMPs intended to be converted to post construction operation for stormwater attenuation, recharge, and/or treatment, the conversion is allowed by the MassDEP Stormwater Handbook BMP specifications and that the BMP has been properly cleaned or prepared for post construction operation, including removal of all construction period sediment trapped in inlet and outlet control structures; ii. as-built final construction BMP plans are included, signed and stamped by a Registered Professional Engineer, certifying the site is fully stabilized; iii. any illicit discharges to the stormwater management system have been removed, as per the requirements of Stormwater Standard 10; iv. all post-construction stormwater BMPs are installed in accordance with the plans (including all planting plans) approved by the issuing authority, and have been inspected to ensure that they are not damaged and that they are in proper working condition; v. any vegetation associated with post-construction BMPs is suitably established to withstand erosion. wpaform5.doc• rev.05A9/2010 Page l of 12 _ I Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection Provided by MassDEP: Bureau of Resource Protection - Wetlands 64-552 WPA Form 5 - Order of Conditions MassDEP File# Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act M.G.L. c. 131, §40 eDEP Transaction# Salem Citylrown C. General Conditions Under Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act (cont.) c) The landowner is responsible for BMP maintenance until the issuing authority is notified that another party has legally assumed responsibility for 8MP maintenance. Prior to requesting a Certificate of Compliance, or Partial Certificate of Compliance, the responsible party (defined in General Condition 18(e)) shall execute and submit to the issuing authority an Operation and Maintenance Compliance Statement ("O&M Statement)for the Stormwater BMPs identifying the party responsible for implementing the stormwater BMP Operation and Maintenance Plan ("O&M Plan") and certifying the following: i.) the O&M Plan is complete and will be implemented upon receipt of the Certificate of Compliance, and ii.)the future responsible parties shall be notified in writing of their ongoing legal responsibility to operate and maintain the stormwater management BMPs and implement the Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan. d) Post-construction pollution prevention and source control shall be implemented in accordance with the long-term pollution prevention plan section of the approved Stormwater Report and, if applicable, the Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan required by the National Pollution Discharge Elimination System Multi-Sector General Permit. e) Unless and until another party accepts responsibility, the landowner, or owner of any drainage easement, assumes responsibility for maintaining each BMP. To overcome this presumption, the landowner of the property must submit to the issuing authority a legally binding agreement of record, acceptable to the issuing authority, evidencing that another entity has accepted responsibility for maintaining the BMP, and that the proposed responsible party shall be treated as a permittee for purposes of implementing the requirements of Conditions 18(f) through 18(k)with respect to that BMP. Any failure of the proposed responsible party to implement the requirements of Conditions 18(f) through 18(k)with respect to that BMP shall be a violation of the Order of Conditions or Certificate of Compliance. In the case of Stormwater BMPs that are serving more than one lot, the legally binding agreement shall also identify the lots that will be serviced by the stormwater BMPs. A plan and easement deed that grants the responsible party access to perform the required operation and maintenance must be submitted along with the legally binding agreement. f) The responsible party shall operate and maintain all stormwater BMPs in accordance with the design plans, the O&M Plan, and the requirements of the Massachusetts Stormwater Handbook. wpaform5.doc• rev,05/19/2010 Page 8 of 12 Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection Provided by MassDEP: Bureau of Resource Protection - Wetlands 64-552 WPA Form 5 - Order of Conditions MassDEP File# Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act M.G.L. c. 131, §40 eDEP Transaction# Salem City/Town C. General Conditions Under Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act (cont.) g) The responsible party shall: 1. Maintain an operation and maintenance log for the last three(3) consecutive calendar years of inspections, repairs, maintenance and/or replacement of the stormwater management system or any part thereof, and disposal (for disposal the log shall indicate the type of material and the disposal location); 2. Make the maintenance log available to MassDEP and the Conservation Commission ("Commission") upon request; and 3. Allow members and agents of the MassDEP and the Commission to enter and inspect the site to evaluate and ensure that the responsible party is in compliance with the requirements for each BMP established in the O&M Plan approved by the issuing authority. h) All sediment or other contaminants removed from stormwater BMPs shall be disposed of ih accordance with all applicable federal, state, and local laws and regulations. I) Illicit discharges to the stormwater management system as defined in 310 CMR 10.04 are prohibited. j) The stormwater management system approved in the Order of Conditions shall not be changed without the prior written approval of the issuing authority. k) Areas designated as qualifying pervious areas for the purpose of the Low Impact Site Design Credit(as defined in the MassDEP Stormwater Handbook, Volume 3, Chapter 1, Low Impact Development Site Design Credits) shall not be altered without the prior written approval of the issuing authority. 1) Access for maintenance, repair, and/or replacement of BMPs shall not be withheld. Any fencing constructed around stormwater BMPs shall include access gates and shall be at least six inches above grade to allow for wildlife passage. Special Conditions (if you need more space for additional conditions, please attach a text document): See attached wpaloao5.doo• rev.05/19/2010 Page 9 o112 Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection Provided by MassDEP: Bureau of Resource Protection - Wetlands 64-552 WPA Form 5 - Order of Conditions MassOEPPae# 1 Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act M.G.L. c. 131, §40 eDEPTransaction k Salem City/Town D. Findings Under Municipal Wetlands Bylaw or Ordinance 1. Is a municipal wetlands bylaw or ordinance applicable? ® Yes ❑ No 2. The Salem hereby finds (check one that applies): Conservation Commission a. ❑ that the proposed work cannot be conditioned to meet the standards set forth in a municipal ordinance or bylaw, specifically: 1, Municipal Ordinance or Bylaw 2.Citation Therefore, work on this project may not go forward unless and until a revised Notice of Intent is submitted which provides measures which are adequate to meet these standards, and a final Order of Conditions is issued. b. ® that the following additional conditions are necessary to comply with a municipal ordinance or bylaw: Wetlands Protection & Conservation c. 50 1.Municipal Ordinance or Bylaw 2.Citation 3. The Commission orders that all work shall be performed in accordance with the following conditions and with the Notice of Intent referenced above. To the extent that the following conditions modify or differ from the plans, specifications, or other proposals submitted with the Notice of Intent, the conditions shall control. The special conditions relating to municipal ordinance or bylaw are as follows (if you need more space for additional conditions, attach a text document): The attached conditions are issued under the Wetlands Protection Act and are sufficient for compliance with the local ordinance wpaform5.doc• rev.05119M010 Page 10 of 12 Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection Provided by MassDEP: Bureau of Resource Protection - Wetlands L4- (,Q-ZL WPA Form 5 - Order of Conditions MassDEP File# Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act M.G.L. c. 131, §40 eDEP T ansaction# city/Town E. Signatures Important:When This Order is valid for three years, unless otherwise specified as a special 7 filling out forms condition pursuant to General Conditions#4,from the date of issuance. 7.D to of Is uanc on the computer, use only the tab Please indicate the number of members who will sign this form. key to move your This Order must be signed by a majority of the Conservation Commission. 2. Number of Signers cursor-do not use the return The Order must be mailed by certified mail (return receipt requested)or hand delivered to key' the applicant. A copy must be mailed, hand delivered or filed electronically at the same time with the appropriate MassDEP Regional Office. S' u ` C b certified mail, return receipt Y ❑ by hand delivery on P reguueeste ,l onr/3 Date Date F. Appeals The applicant, the owner, any person aggrieved by this Order, any owner of land abutting the land subject to this Order, or any ten residents of the city or town in which such land is located, are hereby notified of their right to request the appropriate MassDEP Regional Office to issue a Superseding Order of Conditions. The request must be made by certified mail or hand delivery to the Department, with the appropriate filing fee and a completed Request of Departmental Action Fee Transmittal Form, as provided in 310 CMR 10.03(7) within ten business days from the date of issuance of this Order. A copy of the request shall at the same time be sent by certified mail or hand delivery to the Conservation Commission and to the applicant, if he/she is not the appellant. Any appellants seeking to appeal the Department's Superseding Order associated with this appeal will be required to demonstrate prior participation in the review of this project. Previous participation in the permit proceeding means the submission of written information to the Conservation Commission prior to the close of the public hearing, requesting a Superseding Order, or providing written information to the Department prior to issuance of a Superseding Order. The request shall state clearly and concisely the objections to the Order which is being appealed and how the Order does not contribute to the protection of the interests identified in the Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act(M.G.L. c. 131, §40), and is inconsistent with the wetlands regulations (310 CMR 10.00). To the extent that the Order is based on a municipal ordinance or bylaw, and not on the Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act or regulations, the Department has no appellate jurisdiction. wpa5sigs.do - rev.==010 Page II of Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection Provided by MassDEP: Bureau of Resource Protection - Wetlands 64-552 WPA Form 5 - Order of Conditions MassDEP Fle R Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act M.G.L. c. 131, §40 eDEP—Transaction k Salem City/Town G. Recording Information Prior to commencement of work, this Order of Conditions must be recorded in the Registry of Deeds or the Land Court for the district in which the land is located, within the chain of title of the affected property. In the case of recorded land, the Final Order shall also be noted in the Registry's Grantor Index under the name of the owner of the land subject to the Order. In the case of registered land, this Order shall also be noted on the Land Court Certificate of Title of the owner of the land subject to the Order of Conditions. The recording information on this page shall be submitted to the Conservation Commission listed below. Salem Conservation Commission Detach on dotted line, have stamped by the Registry of Deeds and submit to the Conservation Commission. ----------- -------------------------- ---------- -------------------------------------- To: Salem Conservation Commission Please be advised that the Order of Conditions for the Project at: Project Location MassDEP File Number Has been recorded at the Registry of Deeds of: ' County Book r Page " r" for: Property Owner and has been noted in the chain of title of the affected property in: Book. Page z In accordance with the Order of Conditions issued on: Date If recorded land, the instrument number identifying this transaction is: Instrument Number If registered land, the document number identifying this transaction is: Document Number Signature of Applicant wpabrm5.doc• rev,0 511 9/2 01 0 i Page 12 of 12 liv Y1%. Attachment to Order of Conditions yF' DEP#64-552,. Pagel of 7 SALEM CONSERVATION COMMISSION Attachment to Order of Conditions DEP FILE /164-552 Salem Harbor Power Station Redevelopment 24 Fort Avenue City of Salem, Massachusetts ADDITIONAL FINDINGS Based on the Estimated Habitats of Rare Wildlife and Certified Vernal Pools Map (2008 -MassGIS) from Natural Heritage &Endangered Species Program (NHESP) of the Massachusetts Division of Fisheries and Wildlife, it has been determined that this project does not occur near any habitat of state- listed rare wildlife species nor contains any vernal pools. This order permits the redevelopment of the Salem Harbor Station at 24 Fort Ave., including demolition of the existing power station and associated structures, environmental remediation, and construction of a new power plant and appurtenances. The applicant proposes to demolish the "Turbine Room" building. However, select portions of the building, including the steel frame, may be left for future redevelopment purposes. This Order allows for the demolition of the entire building or portions of the building as determined by the Applicant. The as-built plan to be submitted in conjunction with the Request for Certificate of Compliance shall show the extent of building remaining, if any. The applicant proposes to relocate the City's 48"drain line. Prior to the relocation of the drain line and construction of any supporting infrastructure, approval of the final location must be obtained from the Agent. GENERAL CONDITIONS 1. This Order of Conditions must be recorded in its entirety (including all 7 pages of Special Conditions) at the Essex County Registry of Deeds or the Land Court for the district in which the land is located, after the expiration of the 10-day appeal period and within 30 days of the issuance. A copy of the recording information must be submitted to the Salem Conservation Commission before any work approved in this Order commences. 2. Approval of this application does not constitute compliance with any law or regulation other than M.G.L Chapter 131, Section 40, Wetlands Regulations 310 CMR 10.00 and the City of Salem Wetlands Protection Ordinance, Salem Code Chapter 50. 3. All work shall be performed in accordance with this Order of Conditions and approved site plan(s). No alteration of wetland resource areas or associated buffer zones, other than that a Attachment to Order of Conditions ,r DEP#64-552 .' Page 2 of 7 approved in this Order, shall occur on this property without prior approval from the Commission. 4. Prior to any work commencing on site, a DEP Sign showing DEP File#64-552 must be installed at the entrance to the site and seen from the public way, but not placed on a living tree. 5. No work approved in this Order may commence until the ten (10) day appeal period has lapsed from the date of the issuance of this Order. 6. With respect to this Order, the Commission designates the Conservation Agent as its agent with powers to act on its behalf in administering and enforcing this Order. 7. The Commission or its Agent, officers, or employees shall have the right to enter and inspect the property at anytime for compliance with the conditions of this Order, the Wetlands Protection Act MGL Chapter 131, Section 40, the Wetlands Regulations 310 CMR 10.00, and shall have the right to require any data or documentation that it deems necessary for that evaluation. 8. The term"Applicant" as used in this Order of Conditions shall refer to the owner, any successor in interest or successor in control of the property referenced in the Notice of intent, supporting documents and this Order of Conditions. The Commission shall be notified in writing within 30 days of all transfers of title of any portion of the property that takes place prior to issuance of the Certificate of Compliance. 9. It is the responsibility of the applicant to procure all other applicable federal, state and local permits and approvals associated with this project. These permits may include but are not necessarily limited to the following: a. Section 404 of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (P.L. 92-500, 86 stat. 816), U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. b. Water Quality Certification in accordance with the Federal Water Pollution Control under authority of sec. 27(5) of Chapter 21 of the Massachusetts General Laws as codified in 314 CMR 9.00. c. Sewer Extension Permit from the DEP Division of Water Pollution Control under G. L. Ch. 21A ss7 and 314 CMR 7.00. Any Board of Health permit for septic system design for any portion of the septic system within 100 feet of wetlands shall be submitted to the Commission prior to construction initiation. d. Design Requirements for Construction in Floodplains under the State Building Code (780 CMR 744.). 10. If there are conflicting conditions within this Order, the stricter condition(s) shall rule. 11. All work shall be performed so as to ensure that there will be no sedimentation into wetlands and surface waters during construction or after completion of the project. 12. The Commission or its Agent shall have the discretion to modify the erosion/siltation control methods and boundary during construction if necessary. 13. The Commission reserves the right to impose additional conditions on portions of this project or this site to mitigate any actual or potential impacts resulting from the work herein permitted. 14. The work shall conform to the following attached plans and special conditions: Attachment to Order of Conditions DEP N64552. Page 3 of 7 15. Final Approved Plans Salem Harbor Station Redevelopment Project (Title) July 24, 2013 (Dated) Various (Signed and Stamped by) City of Salem Conservation Commission (On file with) Stormwater Management Report Salem Harbor Station Redevelopment Project (Title) April 4, 2013 (Dated) Brian R.Marchetti (Signed and Stamped by) City of Salem Conservation Comnussion (On file with) 16. Any proposed changes in the approved plan(s) or any deviation in construction from the approved plan(s) shall require the applicant to file a Notice of Project Change with the Commission. The Notice shall be accompanied by a written inquiry prior to their implementation in the field, as to whether the change(s) is substantial enough to require filing a new Notice of Intent or a request to correct or amend this Order of Conditions. A copy of such request shall at the same time be sent to the Department of Environmental Protection. 17. In conjunction with the sale of this property or any portion thereof before a Certificate of Compliance has been issued, the applicant or current landowner shall submit to the Commission a statement signed by the buyer that he/she is aware of an outstanding Order of Conditions on the property and has received a copy of the Order of Conditions. 18. Condition Numbers 46 and 47 as indicated shall continue in force beyond the Certificate of Compliance, in perpetuity, and shall be referenced to in all future deeds to this property. PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION 19. Prior to the commencement of any activity on this site other than activities listed above, there must be a Pre-Construction Meeting on site between the project supervisor, the contractor responsible for the work, and the Conservation Agent and/or a member of the Conservation Commission to ensure that the requirements of the Order of Conditions are understood. The stalked sediment control line shall be adjusted, if necessary, during the pre-construction Attachment to Order of Conditions DEP#64552 t- Page 4 of 7 meeting. Please contact the Conservation Agent at (978) 619-5685 at least forty-eight (48) hours prior to construction to arrange for the Pre-Construction Meeting. 20. Prior to the pre-construction meeting and commencement of any activity on this site, sediment controls shall be installed as shown on the approval plan(s) and detail drawings or the Project's Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP). The Commission and/or its Agent shall inspect and approve such installation at the pre-construction meeting. 21. No clearing of vegetation, including trees, or disturbance of soil shall occur prior to the pre- construction meeting. Minimal disturbance of shrubs and herbaceous plants shall be allowed prior to the pre-construction meeting if absolutely necessary in order to place sediment control measures where required. 22. There shall be an adequate reserve supply of perimeter sediment control devicesstored under cover on the site to be used for emergency sediment control purposes. EROSION PREVENTION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL 23. Appropriate sediment control devices shall be in place prior to the beginning of any phase of construction, and shall be maintained during construction in any wetland resource area and/or buffer zones. The erosion prevention and sediment control measures shown on the approval plan(s) or SWPPP and provisions in the Order will be the minimum standards for this project; the Commission or its Agent may require additional measures. 24. All debris, fill and excavated material shall be stockpiled a location far enough away from the wetland resource areas to prevent sediment from entering wetland resource areas. Material stockpiles shall be protected from contact with stormwater using a temporary perimeter sediment barrier such as fiber roll, compost filter tube or silt fence. Stockpiles shall be covered or appropriate temporary erosion control stabilization method applied to minimize sediment discharge. 25. Erosion and sedimentation control devices shall be inspected after each storm event and repaired or replaced as necessary. Any accumulated sediment adjacent to the barriers shall be removed when it reaches one-half of the above ground height of the barrier). 26. Disturbed areas shall remain in a stable condition at the close of each construction day. 27. Any de-watering of trenches or other excavation required during construction shall be conducted so as to prevent siltation of wetland resource areas. All discharge from de-watering activities shall be treated by an appropriate method that may sediment traps, filtration systems (bag or sand filter) dewatering tanks or other means approved by the Commission or its Administrator, prior to discharge. 28. Within fourteen (14) days of completion of construction on any given portion of the project, all disturbed areas in the completed portion of the site shall be temporarily or permanently stabilized with rapidly growing vegetative cover, using sufficient top soil to assure long-term stabilization of disturbed areas. 29. If soils are to be disturbed for longer than fourteen (14) days, a temporary cover of rye or other grass should be established to prevent erosion and sedimentation. If the season is not +tom Attachment to Order of Conditions DEP N64-552. tom' Page 5 of 7 appropriate for plant growth, exposed surface shall be stabilized by other appropriate erosion control measures, firmly anchored, to prevent soils from being washed by rain or flooding. DURING CONSTRUCTION 30. A copy of this Order of Conditions and the plan(s) approved in this Order shall be available on site at all times when work is in progress. 31. No alteration or activity shall occur beyond the limit of work as defined by the sediment barriers shown on the approved plan(s). 32. All waste products, including construction materials, etc. shall be deposited in waste containers of sufficient size to contain waste. 33. Building products shall be stored either under cover to prevent products from coming into contact with rainwater or similar effective means to prevent the discharge of pollutants. Diesel fuel, oil and hydraulic fluids, and other petroleum products shall be stored in water-tight containers and provide cover (plastic sheeting or temporary roof) to prevent products from coming into contact with rainwater or provide secondary containment. 34. Hazardous wastes (paints, solvents, curing compounds, acids) shall be separated from construction waste and stored in sealed containers suitable to prevent leakage and corrosion and labeled in accordance with applicable federal and state requirements. Outside storage of containers shall contain secondary containment or similar effective means to prevent discharge of pollutants. 35. Concrete trucks shall not be washed out in any wetland resource or buffer zone area, nor into any drainage system. Concrete washwater shall be directed to a leak-proof container or pit. Any deposit of cement, concrete or masonry products into a buffer zone or wetland resource area shall be immediately removed. 36. All exposed sub-soils shall be covered by a minimum of three (3) inches of quality screened loam topsoil prior to seeding and final stabilization. 37. Immediately following drainage structure installation all inlets shall be protected by inlet protection to remove sediment from the discharge before it enters the drainage system. Inlet protection measures may include woven filter fabric, concrete blocks with clean washed stone. Inlet protection measures may be removed in the event that the measure floods. 38. There shall be no pumping of water from wetland resource areas. 39. All equipment shall be inspected regularly for leaks. Any leaking hydraulic lines, cylinders or any other components shall be fixed immediately. 40. During construction, all drainage structures shall be inspected regularly and cleaned as necessary. 41. The applicant is hereby notified that failure to comply with all requirements herein may result in the issuance of enforcement actions by the Conservation Commission including, but not limited to, civil administrative penalties under M.G.L Chapter 21A, section 16. AFTER CONSTRUCTION " . n Attachment to Order of Conditions z 1 DEP#64-552 x ,_ Page 6 of 7 42. Upon completion of construction and final soil stabilization, the applicant shall submit the following to the Conservation Commission to request a Certificate of Compliance (COC): a. A Completed Request for a Certificate of Compliance form (WPA Form 8A or other form if required by the Conservation Commission at the time of request). b. A letter from a Registered Professional Engineer certifying compliance of the property with this Order of Conditions. c. An "As-Built" plan signed and stamped by a Registered Professional Engineer or Land Surveyor showing post-construction conditions within all areas under the jurisdiction of the Massachusetts Wetlands"Protection Act. This plan shall include at a minimum: d. All wetland resource area boundaries with associated buffer zones and regulatory setback areas taken from the plan(s) approved in this Order of Conditions; e. Locations and elevations of all stormwater management conveyances, structures and best management designs, including foundation drains, constructed under this Order within any wetland resource area or buffer zone; f. Distances from any structures constructed under this Order,to wetland resource areas- "structures"include, but are not limited to, all buildings, septic system components, wells; utility lines, fences;retaining walls, and roads/driveways; g. A line delineating the limit of work-"work" includes any filling, excavating and/or disturbance of soils or vegetation approved under this Order; 43. When issued, the Certificate of Compliance must be recorded at the Essex County Registry of Deeds and a copy of the recording submitted to the Salem Conservation Commission. 44. If the completed work differs from that in the original plans and conditions; the report must specify how the work differs; at which time the applicant shall first request a modification to the. . r. Order. Only upon review and.approval by the Commission,may the applicant request in writing a Certificate of Compliance as described above. 45. Erosion control devices shall remain in place and properly functioning until all exposed soils have been stabilized with final vegetative cover and the Conservation Commission and/or its Agent has authorized their removal ADDITIONAL CONDITIONS 46. Monitoring Reports-The applicant or applicant's representative shall provide progress reports to.the Agent during demolition and construction activities.- Such reports shall be submitted"" electronically'and contain the following information: summary of major activities performed to date;photographs of areas where major activities have been performed; a description of any impacts to resource areas not anticipated in the Notice of Intent and supplemental application materials and corrective actions taken; and a summary of activities expected to be performed prior to-the next reporting period. Two reports shall be submitted during demolition and four reports shall be submitted during construction. Additional reports and or supplemental items in addition to those listed herein may be required at the discretion of the Agent and/or Commission as construction progresses. Attachment to Order of Conditions DEP#64-552, Page 7 of 7 47. Turbine Building Demolition-The applicant proposes to demolish the "Turbine Room" building. However, select portions of the building, including the steel frame, may be left for future redevelopment purposes. This Order allows for the demolition of the entire building or Portions of the building as determined by the Applicant. The as-built plan to be submitted in conjunction with the Request for Certificate of Compliance shall show the extent of building remaining, if any. 48. Point of Contact -Prior to the commencement of demolition activities, the Applicant shall provide the Conservation Agent with the name and contact information of the person responsible for day to day activities at the site. 49. Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan-The Applicant shall provide a copy of the Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) to the Conservation Agent for review and approval at least thirty (30) days prior to earth disturbance activities at the site. 50. Material Stockpiles-Fill material may not be stockpiled within any resource area or 100 foot buffer zone to coastal bank with the following exceptions: a. Because the existing coal pile area is surrounded by a concrete swale and contains a dust suppression system, this location may be used for the storage of uncovered fill material. The perimeter swale and dust suppression system shall be used during the temporary storage of material to prevent sediment transport from the area and minimize fugitive dust. b. The use of additional areas for material storage must be reviewed and authorized by the Agent. In addition, the use of temporary sediment and erosion control measures must be reviewed and approved for the additional locations. 51. 48-inch City Drain Line-Prior to the relocation of the City's 48 inch drain line and construction of any supporting infrastructure, approval of the final location must be obtained from the Agent. PERPETUAL CONDITIONS 52. After completion of the project, the owner or owner's designee shall submit a letter annually to the Commission verifying that stormwater structures have been inspected and maintained per thea roved Stormwater Operation PPand Maintenance plan included in the project's stormwater report. 53. Per Section 3.0 of Appendix G of the project's stormwater report, the owner, their successors, and assigns authorize the Agent to enter the premises to inspect the stormwater management system. " Construction Management Plan Footprint Power Salem Harbor Redevelopment Project 4 24 Fort Ave i Submitted to the City of Salem November 22", 2013 'Revised January 27t", 2014 1Page x Table of Contents ConstructionManagement Plan...................................................................................................................5 Introduction ..............................................................................................................................................5 ContactInformation..................................................................................................................................5 'Permits and Approvals' Requirements .....................................................................................................5 t Neighborhood.....:.....................................................................................................................................5 Communication:........................................................................................................................................6 Noise.........................................................................................................................................................6 Remediation/Fill.... ...................................................................................................................................7 WasteDisposal..........................................................................................................................................7 Traffic.............:..........................................................................................................................................7 StormwaterProtection.............................................................................................................................8 TreeProtection.........................................................................................................................................8 AirQuality...................................................:.............'............................................................................... Appendix 1 City Plans Required Prior to Demolition Permit............................................................... ........9 CommunicationsPlan ............................................................................................................................. 11 Construction Traffic Management Plan..................................................................................................15 kNoise Mitigation Plan..............................................................................................................................25 Waste Management and Recycling Plan.................................................................................................29 x .+ Soils Management Plan...........................................................................................................................35 Remediation (see full Plan under separate cover)..............................................................................35 General Stockpiling.................. ..............................................................: ....37 ...................................... Appendix 2 City Plans Previously Submitted and Approved.......................................................................39 SWPPP/Drainage Plan.............................................................................................................................39 Stormwater0&M Plan............................................................................................................................39 Appendix 3 City Plans Required Prior to Building Permit...........................................................................41 Dust Control Plan/Street Sweeping.......................................................................................................43 FireFighting ............................................................................................................................................45 LandscapePlan........................................................................................................................................47 + 'Lighting Plan...........................................................................................................................................49 InspectionPlan........................................................................................................................................51 Appendix 4 Landscape Drawings ..................................................:.............................................................53 3Page Construction Management Plan Introduction This Construction Management Plan (CMP) has been prepared by Footprint Power to document the requirements of the various City and State permits issued to the Salem Harbor Station Redevelopment Project(SHS). This plan will be submitted to the Salem City Planner and approved by various City departments prior to the issuance of any new demolition permits. Footprint commits that all activity at the Salem Harbor Redevelopment site will be performed in accordance with any and all rules, regulations and ordinances of the City of Salem,the State of Massachusetts and applicable Federal laws. Contact Information Enclosed is a Communication Plan that contains all of the contact information for the SHS project. Also, procedures for various commitments Footprint is responsible for are included. Permits and Approvals' Requirements ---Footprint-recognizes that there are many approvals and permits associated-with this project that have been granted. This CMP is intended to compile all of those requirements and document our ` understanding of them and commitment to adhere to them. All construction shall be performed in I accordance with any and all rules, regulations and ordinances of the City of Salem. Any waiver of conditions contained within shall require the approval of the applicable City department. Any insignificant changes to the site plan for the SHS facility shall be reviewed by the City Planner and if deemed necessary by the City Planner,shall be brought to the Planning Board.All work shall comply with the requirements of the Salem Building Inspector. Footprint will,with its contractor(s), attend a pre-construction meeting with appropriate city departments. Also, prior to the commencement of any activity on this site other than stormwater control installation, a pre-construction meeting will be held on-site with the Conservation Commission (Con Com) agent. No clearing of vegetation, including trees,or disturbance of soil shall occur prior to the Con Com pre-construction meeting. Minimal disturbance of shrubs and herbaceous plants shall be allowed prior to the pre-construction meeting if absolutely necessary in order to place sediment control measures where required. The staked sediment control line shall be adjusted, if necessary,during the pre-construction meeting. The Conservation Agent will be contacted at least forty-eight(48) hours prior to construction to arrange for the Pre-Construction Meeting. No alteration of wetland resource areas or associated buffer zones,other than that approved by the Conservation Commission in the Order dated 7/31/2013,shall occur on this property without prior approval from the Commission. Neighborhood Footprint is committed to minimizing the impact of the demolition and construction activities on the entire Salem community, especially those that are closest to the site, the residents on Derby Street, 5 Page Webb Street and Fort Ave and the entire neighborhood. All reasonable action will be taken to minimize the negative effects of construction on abutters. The enclosed Communication Plan details our effort to keep everyone informed.Advance notice shall be provided to all abutters and abutters to abutters within 300 feet in writing at least 72 hours prior to commencement of demolition and construction of the project. In order to not contribute to congestion on the roads all construction vehicles left overnight at the site will be located completely on the Footprint site.A staging zone for trucks must be set up away from neighbors so that vehicles will not queue on city streets. Footprint will employ a licensed pesticide applicator to exterminate the area prior to construction, demolition, and/or blasting and will send a copy of the exterminator's invoice to the City Health Agent. The site will be maintained free from rodents throughout construction. Lights used at the site will be controlled so that no fugitive light will cast a glare onto adjacent parcels or adjacent rights of way. Winter snow in excess of snow storage areas on the site will be removed off site and-not-placed to -- :-- congest city streets.All sidewalks, roadways, utilities, landscaping,etc.damaged during construction shall be replaced or repaired to their pre-construction condition, or better. Communication As mentioned, Footprint has created a Communication Plan to facilitate outreach with the City,the neighbors, and regulators. This outreach plan sets forth procedures for providing prior notification to affected residents of: 1. The scheduled start, duration, and hours of construction; 2. any construction the Company intends to conduct that must take place outside of the hours detailed above; and 3. complaint and response procedures including a. contact information, b. the availability of web-based project information, c. a dedicated project hotline for complaints, and d. Protocols for notifying schools of upcoming construction. Furthermore, any noise complaints and the Company response thereto, arising from construction and/or worker traffic that occurs outside of the hours of Monday through Friday from 7:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m., shall be reported to the Energy Facilities Siting Board within one week of the Company's receipt of the complaint. Noise Footprint has developed a Noise Abatement Plan and it is enclosed. This plan was prepared to document the Project's procedures for reducing noise impacts on the neighbors. 61 Page Footprint recognizes the significant noise reductions that could be realized by the placement of a temporary sound wall at the site boundary along Derby Street during construction. Footprint will install, prior to construction and demolition, and no later than June 2014, a twelve-foot high temporary sound wall at the western boundary of the site along Derby Street Drilling and blasting shall be limited to Monday-Friday between 8:00 AM until 15:00 PM. There shall be no drilling, blasting or rock hammering on Saturdays,Sundays, or holidays. Blasting shall be undertaken in accordance with all local and state regulations. Remediation/Fill The entire site was granted a release tracking number(RTN)3-31327 under the Massachusetts Contingency Plan. No structure shall be constructed until the Licensed Site Professional responsible for the site certifies that soil and ground water on the entire site meets the DEP standards for the proposed use. Footprint will disclose in writing to the Health Agent the origin of any fill material needed for the project:Any fill used in connection with this project shall be clean fill. Any fill shall contain no trash, ,..-refuse, rubbish, or debris,.including but not limited to lumber,bricks, plaster,wire, lath, paper, cardboard, pipe,tires, ashes, refrigerators, motor vehicles, or parts of any of the foregoing. «_ Footprint will file for a Beneficial Use Determination (BUD)with the Massachusetts DEP to reuse as much good crushed construction material as possible onsite for fill, including bricks. ^ Waste Disposal A Waste Management Plan is included in this submission. It includes a plan for containment and removal of debris,vegetative waste,and unacceptable excavation material generated during demolition and/or construction. Refuse removal, recycling,ground maintenance and snow removal is the responsibility of Footprint and its successors or assigns. There will be no incineration of waste on site. Traffic A Traffic Plan that satisfies the City of Salem and the EFSB requirements is enclosed in this CMP. In it Footprint commits to meet weekly, or as deemed necessary by city officials, with the representatives of the City, as well as representatives of other major construction projects expected to be ongoing in Salem during construction of the Project including: National Grid (cable replacement project),Spectra Energy (gas pipeline lateral),the Massachusetts Department of Transportation (Canal Street resurfacing), and the META(Station and Garage Improvement project). Such meetings will ensure communication and F - coordination of construction schedules among the four projects in order to maintain safe and efficient traffic flow in Salem.At these meetings, representatives from the City and each project's construction manager shall provide a one week"look-ahead" as to what activities are expected to be undertaken. Attendees from the City of Salem should include, at a minimum, officials from the Public Works, Engineering and Police Departments.These meetings will be held in consultation with and coordinate M 7Page these meetings with the City's Planning Department and the Building Salem Coordinator. Electronic signage will be provided by as appropriate and coordinated with the Building Salem Coordinator. Major deliveries will be made via barge or off peak hours if by vehicle. Stormwater Protection Footprint has supplied the City with a Stormwater Pollution Protection Plan (SWPPP) and it has been approved. Sediment controls will be installed as shown on the approval plan and detail drawings of the Project's SWPPP prior to the pre-construction meeting and commencement of any activity on this site The Commission and/or its Agent shall inspect and approve such installation at the pre-construction meeting. Footprint commits that construction laydown will not occur within a 100-foot buffer of the coastal bank, unless approved by the Con Com. Tree Protection No construction activity will take place under the canopy of trees along Derby Street. A barrier will be installed around trees along Derby Street. The trees along Derby Street will be protected by an orange poly fence or equivalent.. Air Quality The project has demonstrated that it provides for long term improvement in air quality. In that spirit the demolition and construction phase will also minimize impacts to air pollution. DEP Clean Air Construction Initiative will be followed. Idling will be minimized and will follow MADEP rules. Staging and waiting areas will be designated for trucks so as to not interfere with neighbors. ULSD will be required in non-road vehicles. Non road engines will meet standards in 40 CFR 89.112 or 40 CFR 1039 as applicable All diesel powered non-road construction equipment and vehicles greater than 50 brake horsepower will have engines that meet EPA particulate matter emission standards or emission control technology certified by the manufacturerto meet or exceed emissions reductions verified by EPA. Emission control devices such as diesel oxidation catalysts or diesel particulate filters will be installed on the exhaust system side of the diesel combustion engine equipment. All diesel-powered non-road construction equipment with engine horsepower ratings of 50 and above to be used for 30 or more days over the course of project construction will have USEPA-verified (or equivalent)emission control devices,such as oxidation catalysts or other comparable technologies (to the extent that they are commercially available) installed on the exhaust system side of the diesel combustion engine. 8Page Appendix 1 City Plans Required Prior to Demolition Permit 9 1 P a g e 6 ° Communications Plan Footprint has developed this Communications Plan for submittal to the City Planner for review and approval. This plan is also to be presented to the Board of Health. The intent is forth is plan to document all communication requirements from local and State approvals. This outreach plan sets forth procedures for providing prior notification to affected residents of: t { 1. The scheduled start, duration, and hours of construction; 2. any construction the Company intends to conduct that must take place outside of the hours b detailed above; and 3. complaint and response procedures including a. contact information, b. the availability of web-based project information, c. a dedicated project hotline for complaints, and d. Protocols for notifying schools of upcoming construction. Furthermore, any noise complaints and the Company response thereto,arising from construction and/or worker traffic that occurs outside of the hours of Monday through Friday from 7:00 a.m.to 5:00 p.m., shall be reported to the Energy Facilities Siting Board within one week of the Company's receipt of the complaint. Contacts: ` Here find the name, address, and telephone number of the project(site) manager who will be on site and directly responsible for the construction of the project;the person responsible for day to day activities at the site;the point person at Footprint during construction, regular street sweeping, and dust control measures:- George Wilson 24 Fort Ave Salem, MA ' (978)740-8287 gwilson@footprintpower.com. Here find the name and contact information for the persons responsible for answering complaints: Malia Griffin 24 Fort Ave Salem, MA (978)744-0390 mgriffin@footprintsalemharbor.com Marcia MacClary 24 Fort Ave Salem, MA (617) 697-3820 mmacclarv@footprintpower.com 11Page Any noise complaints and Footprint's response thereto,arising from construction and/or worker traffic that occurs outside of the hours of Monday through Friday from 7:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.,shall be reported to the Siting Board within one week of the Company's receipt of the complaint. Generally the complaint line is staffed from 6:00 am to 3:30 pm. Messages can be left 24 hours a day and a response is guaranteed. All complaints will be documented and documentation kept for the duration of construction. Complaints will be reviewed at project meetings. Communication Plan Goals: The demolition of the Footprint Power Salem Harbor Power Plant and the construction of a new power facility is a major development for the City of Salem. As such,there will be impacts upon the City on many levels. Although there are a myriad of issues that need to be communicated when planning and executing such a major project,five topics are especially important. Plans and expectations Everyone working on the project must be in agreement in terms of expected quality and timelines and these overall plans and issues will be communicated to the general public. Project controls Project team members have developed control mechanisms, and plans to mitigate impacts. These project controls and mitigations will be open to close review by the appropriate oversight agencies and made available to the City leadership and residents. Project status and timelines As the project progresses, project management will make updated plans,timelines and schedules public, as well as any issues arising as work moves forward. Notification of any necessary demolition/construction changes Project management will inform City leadership and stakeholders of the reasons for such changes, as well as effect on overall timeline. 72 hour notice of second and third shift work will be coordinated with the City in advance in order to notify abutters and abutters to abutters within 300 feet. Completion of project steps or phases When specific project steps have been accomplished, Project management will share these steps and their importance with the public, as well as the overall impact on timelines and project schedules. Notification will be made of the commencement of construction activities. Communication Pathways and Tools Notification of the schedule and specific issues will be directed at City Leadership, City Department Heads, Civic Organizations, Neighborhood Organizations,Special Interest Groups, and Environmental Interest Groups, as well as residents in Ward 1. Leadership in Neighboring Cities and Towns will also be included. (Lists can be forwarded if requested). 121 Page It is our goal to keep information current, and to allow any interested party to have access to that r information in a simple, informal way. To that end, our plan is first to develop a Footprint Salem Harbor Power Plant website, devoted solely to the closing of the existing plant, demolition and cleanup of the existing site, and construction of the new gas-fired power plant, scheduled for start-up in 2016. The website would be updated weekly or bi-weekly, depending on the project schedule and timeline of activities. The website would also contain background information of specific activities, photographs, overall progress made in keeping with timeline, major upcoming visual changes to site, and a Question and Answer section for stakeholders to ask for additional information and to receive answers. The website will also be an information repository, where interested parties can access permits specifications and conditions and project plans, can track project progress, and measure project timelines. Footprint Power also intends to produce quarterly Newsletters,giving more general background on the company goals, key project managers, and progress made in preparing the site for the start of the new facility. These newsletters (aptly named Footnotes)will be distributed to City Leadership, and residents of Ward 1, plus any other interested stakeholders who can be placed on the email or paper mailing list. In addition, if major changes in plans occur, or if a timely update is necessary to keep stakeholders current, informational flyers would be mailed to the newsletter recipient with specific project information and updates. Footprint plans to erect a LED sign system giving brief weekly information of"what's going on?" at the site. These would be particularly helpful for informing local neighborhoods of upcoming noise,traffic concerns, large equipment deliveries, barge deliveries, or specific activities which might call for increased police oversight, or harbor pilot involvement. Footprint would also schedule neighborhood association meetings, civic%business group presentations, and public information forums where interested parties could ask specific questions,share their concerns, and receive current information. These meetings could be held on a regular schedule, or could be held at the request of either the Footprint Management team or anyone of the stakeholders or stakeholder groups. We also would welcome stakeholder calls,or emails, requesting more information, or clarification, as well as responses to complaints in a timely-manner.The specific call-in number will be publicized for those wishing to ask questions, request additional information or clarification,orto register complaints. ` These responses to comments or inquiries will also be posted when possible on the station website. Stakeholders Contact Information Bentley School Renata McFarland, 978-265-4035 National Grid George DeLoureiro, 774-232-4422 (cell) Spectra Energy Algonquin Gene Muhlherr, PE 617-560-1335 (office) MA DOT Robert Kimungu, Irobert.kimungu@state.ma.us] MBTA George Doherty,617-222-3081 (office) City of Salem www.buildingsalem.com 13Page i Salem City Department Phone Number(978) Fax Number(978) Cemetery/Shade Tree/Open Space 745-0195 741-7041 City Clerk 619-5611 740-9209 City Electrician 745-6300 745-4638 City Engineer 619-5673 745-0349 Department of Public Works 744-3302 Emergency Management 744-3936 745-4646 Fire Department 744-6990 745-4646 Harbormaster 741-0098 741-5641 Health 741-1800 745-0343 Inspectional Services 619-5641 740-9846 Licensing 978-745-9595 x5631 978-744-1279 Mayor's Office 619-5600 744-9327 Planning and Community Development 619-5685 740-0404 Police Department 744-0171 744-7825 Recycling&Trash 619-5673 745-0349 Water&Sewer 619-5674 745-0349 Conclusion It is the intent of the Footprint Management team that the project continue to move forward in as transparent a way as the permitting process. We would welcome input,suggestions, and questions;and plan on working closely with Teams representing other major construction projects within Salem as they move forward with their plans. It may well be that working together with City planners will enable all projects to move forward expeditiously with as little disruption as possible to residents. Our intent is to initiate these practices as soon as possible,so that as we begin demolition, all interested parties will know our schedule ahead of time and can hopefully take some satisfaction and ease regarding the current process and future of the site. Please see www,footprintl)ower.com for further information. 141Page Construction Traffic Management Plan 1.0 Coordination and Communication Footprint has created this traffic management plan to document requirements of various City and State approvals. Workers on all shifts must follow the agreed upon conditions presented here. 1.1 . Other Construction Projects Several construction projects are currently proposed along Webb Street and Canal Street which could 4 affect access/egress to/from the Project. Therefore, a Construction Coordination Group will be formed which will meet as needed. This group will be comprised of the following representatives: Salem Department of Planning and Community National Grid Development George DeLoureiro, PMP Lynne Duncan Construction Manager Director Energy Initiatives Group, LLC 978-619-5685 774-232-4422(cell) Iduncan@salem.com georged@eig-Ilc.com Spectra Energy/Algonquin City of Salem Gene Muhlherr, PE Beth Debski Project Execution Coordinator Spectra Energy Building Salem 617-560-1335 (office) 978-619-5606 781-382-8596 (Mobile) bdebski@salem.com ghmuhlherr@spectraenergV.com Salem Department of Public Works Salem Engineering Department John Tomasz David Knowlton Director City Engineer 1-978-744-3302 1-978-619-5673 itomasz@salem.com dknowlton@salem.com Salem Police Department Salem Dept of Planning and Development Paul Tucker Lynne Duncan Police Chief Director 1-978-744-0171 978-619-5685 ptucker@salem.com- Iduncan@salem.com Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority Bentley Elementary School George Doherty Renata McFarland 617-222-3081(office) Principal 617-212-3608 (cell) 978-265-4035 gdohertv@mbta.com Renatamcfarland@salemkl2.org Massachusetts Department of Transportation Footprint Robert Kimungu George Wilson robert.kimungu@state.ma.us 24 Fort Ave Salem, MA (978) 740-8287 gwilson@footprintpower.com 15Page A project timeline will be developed indicating key milestones for each project and identifying any conflicting use of/impact to area roadways. Footprint commits to meet weekly, or as deemed necessary by city officials,with the representatives of the City,as well as representatives of other major construction projects expected to be ongoing in Salem during construction of the Project including: National Grid (cable replacement project),Spectra Energy (gas pipeline lateral),the Massachusetts Department of Transportation (Canal Street resurfacing),and the MBTA(Station and Garage Improvement project).Such meetings will ensure communication and coordination of construction schedules among the four projects in order to maintain safe and efficient traffic flow in Salem.At these meetings, representatives from the City and each project's construction manager shall provide a one week"look-ahead" as to what activities are expected to be undertaken. Attendees from the City of Salem should include, at a minimum, officials from the Public Works, Engineering and Police Departments.These meetings will be held in consultation with and coordinate these meetings with the City's Planning Department and the Building Salem Coordinator. Electronic signage will be provided by as appropriate and coordinated with the Building Salem Coordinator. 1.2 Bentley Elementary School The Bentley Elementary School is located at the corner of Szetela Lane and Memorial Drive with its associated playing fields abutting Fort Avenue. The school is typically in session between 7:30 a.m. and 2:30 p.m. Students arrive and depart by bus, car and on foot between 7:05 a.m. and 7:30 p.m. and between 2:30 p.m. and 2:50 p.m.To facilitate communication between Footprint Power and school administrators the following will be implemented: - Footprint Power will provide the cell phone number of the resident engineer or Project Manager to the Salem Public School Administration and the Bentley School Principal prior to beginning any construction related activities including demolition. - Footprint Power will contact the Bentley School Principal the first of every month for the full duration of the Project to provide information on major construction milestones and to ascertain any concerns the school may have regarding Project construction. 1.3 Energy Facilities Siting Board(EFSB) In their approval of the Salem Harbor Station Redevelopment Project, the Energy Facilities Siting Board (EFSB) required Footprint Power to implement a comprehensive traffic management plan to address potential traffic impacts during the construction phase of the project. All of the elements specified by the EFSB (see paragraph R in section VI of the EFSB Decision) have been incorporated into this Construction Traffic Management Plan. Following is a listing of the EFSB requirements and where in this Plan that element can be found (if appropriate): 16Page 1. Contact the City, representatives of the Bentley School, National Grid, and Algonquin and solicit their cooperation and participation in preparing an initial plan putting into effect a roadway and traffic mitigation system for Salem. (see sections 1.1 and 1.2) 2. Prepare such a plan with as many parties are agreeable to participate. (this Construction Traffic Management Plan) 3. Submit the plan to the Siting Board and all parties by January 1, 2014. 4., Implement the plan. The roadway and traffic mitigation system shall include the following elements: a. A single repository of information relevant to construction scheduling, road openings, and traffic flow elements. (see section 1.1) b. A plan to operate a traffic-monitoring device at the intersection of Bridge Street and Webb Street, and at any other appropriate road intersection(s), on dates when roadwork for any project or an increase in the size of the Footprint workforce might create adverse traffic flow impacts. (see section 4.2) c. A menu of potential mitigation options,and a decision tree or other suitable approach determining their implementation. (see sections 5.1-5.5) d. A platform for Footprint, National Grid,Algonquin, and the Salem DPW to coordinate construction activities. (see section 1.1) e. A protocol for allocation of mitigation costs (see sections 5.1—5.5) Additionally,the Siting Board directed Footprint to provide it with quarterly reports on its traffic monitoring, coordination with other entities, and traffic mitigation activities, which Footprint Power will provide starting in January 2014. 2.0 Construction Worker Parking «, On-site gravel parking lots will be provided for employee parking. These lots will accommodate between 600 and 625 parking spaces for an estimated 587 peak period construction workers. Workers are expected to be on-site between 7:00 a.m. and 3:30 p.m. On-street parking by construction workers will not be permitted. Footprint Power staff will monitor Fort Avenue, Derby Street, Webb Street, English Street, Allen Street and Becket Avenue for construction worker vehicles. If such vehicles are found,the owner will be notified and required to move said vehicle. In order to not contribute to congestion on the roads all construction vehicles left overnight at the site will be located completely on the Footprint site.A staging zone for trucks must be set up away from neighbors so that vehicles will not queue on city streets. 3.0 Material Delivery and Routes Barge vessels will be used to transport major plant components including structural steel, siding, roofing, pre-cast concrete, and containerized smaller components; construction equipment such as cranes and bulldozers;demolition debris; and fill material. Major deliveries will be made via barge or off peak hours if by vehicle. t 17Page ° In the rare instance when an oversized truck is required to transport a large component to the Project site, detailed information regarding routing and scheduling will be reviewed with the City of Salem representatives on the Construction Coordination Group prior to the delivery. Designated truck routes for the delivery of concrete will be identified and approved prior to the issuance of a building permit. Depending on which concrete plant is used,the truck routes may arrive by several possible routes. However,the final route will coincide with the routes described below for non-concrete deliveries. Concrete truck deliveries will occur during off-peak hours to the extent possible. Truck routes for non-concrete deliveries are depicted on the attached map which will be submitted to the city prior to the issuance of a building permit.These routes are likely to include: 1. Route 128(from north)-Route 1A(Bridge Street)to Webb Street 2. 1-95 (from north)-Route 1 to Route 114 to Bridge Street to Webb Street 3. Route 128(from south)-Route 114 to Bridge Street to Webb Street 4. Route 107 (from southwest) - Route 107 (Highland Avenue, Boston Street and Bridge 5. Street)to Bridge Street to Webb Street 6. -Route 1A (from points south) - Route 1A to Jefferson Avehue'to`Summer Street to Bridge Street to Webb Street Footprint Power will work with the City of Salem to finalize designated truck routes and will require that these routes be used by all contractors, subcontractors and delivery vehicles for deliveries that cannot be transported by barge to the site. All deliveries of aqueous ammonia will be coordinated with the Fire Department in regard to route,time of day, and safety measures. Trucks will not be allowed to park or stage off-site and will not be allowed to idle for more than five minutes on-site per the Massachusetts Anti-Idling Law (MSG, Chapter 111, Sections 142A-142M). 4.0 TrajficMonitoring 4.1 Traffic Monitoring by Professional Traffic Operations Engineer Traffic operations shall be monitored by a Professional Traffic Operations Engineer(PTOE), or under the direction of a PTOE, at the following intersections: - Webb Street/Essex Street - Webb Street/SzetelaLane - Bridge Street/Webb Street - Bridge Street/Sgt.James Ayube Memorial Drive (north) - Bridge Street/Sgt.James Ayube Memorial Drive (south) 18Page Traffic monitoring shall be performed in the months when a significant change in the number of workers is expected. City officials shall be invited to join Footprint Power's engineers in the field during the observation periods. These months include (months are estimated, actual worker count will determine the need for monitoring): Month 1: Establish baseline condition Month 13:Worker level at or exceeds 100 Month 17:Worker level at or exceeds 200 Month 21:Worker level at or exceeds 300 to 400 Month 24: Worker level at or exceeds 500 Month 28:Worker level at peak Month 33: Worker level at or exceeds 200 Deviations from this schedule shall be made in consultation with the City of Salem in the event the dates projected for construction worker impacts change. Upon reaching each of these worker populations levels,traffic observations will be performed within two weeks and for a minimum of two days.The monitoring will be conducted each day during peak workertravel periods including: - 6:00 a.m. to 7:30 a.m. - 2:30 p.m. to 4:00 p.m. Vehicle queue lengths will be observed and noted every five minutes during these periods. Footprint Power will document the results of each observation period in a brief technical report and provide copies of the report to the City of Salem. If the observations indicate that mitigation measures are warranted,the reports will make recommendations as to what measures should be implemented. The City of Salem Police Department will be contacted on a weekly basis (Construction Coordination meetings)to determine if there have been any traffic related complaints. 4.2 Real-Time Traffic Observations A traffic-monitoring device will be installed at Bridge Street/Webb Street intersection for the duration of the Project construction. The device will likely be a video camera with an active website address for observation of the intersection at anytime. 5.0 Traffic Mitigation 5.1 Webb Street/Derby Street/Site Construction Gate Police Officer control will be provided between 6:30 a.m. and 4:30 p.m. on days when on-site construction workers number greater than 250 workers.This is expected to occur approximately between months 17 and 21.The costs of this police detail will be the responsibility of Footprint Power. 191 Page Based on input from City Officials, or as requested by Footprint Power to facilitate traffic flow, Police Officer control may also be provided at the intersection on days with fewer than 250 workers. 5.2 Bridge Street/Webb Street If the monitoring program indicates that any of the following occurs, mitigation measures will be implemented: - Construction related traffic results in vehicle queues which extend to Collins Street (700 feet), Winter Street(600 feet) or Conant Street (700 feet) for more than 25 percent of the peak hour observations. - The PTOE indicates that the intersection is operating poorly. - The city is receiving more than five complaints a week regarding construction related traffic at the intersection. The following mitigation measures will be implemented sequentially until the PTOE and City of Salem concur that the intersection is functioning adequately: ➢ Step 1 Implement traffic signal timing adjustments. ➢ Step 2 Provide police officer control during peak construction related periods (6:00 a.m. to 7:30 a.m. and/or 2:30 p.m.to 4:00 p.m.). ➢ Step 3 Work with the North Shore Transportation Management Association to provide incentives to construction workers to encourage carpooling and ridesharing. ➢ Step Require that some of the construction workers park off-site and be shuttled to/from the Site.The number of workers will be constantly adjusted as needed to reduce traffic volumes and improve operations at the intersection. The costs of the above measures will be the responsibility of Footprint Power. 5.3 Webb Street/Szetela Lane If the monitoring program indicates that any of the following occurs, mitigation measures will be implemented: - Construction related traffic results in vehicle queues on Webb Street which extend to Fort Avenue (240 feet) or Boardman Street (250 feet) for more than 25 percent of the peak hour observations. - The PTOE indicates poor operations at the intersection. - The city is receiving more than five complaints a week regarding construction related traffic at the intersection. 201 Page t R •l The following mitigation measures will be implemented sequentially until the PTOE and City of Salem concur that the intersection is functioning adequately: ' ➢ Step 1 Implement traffic signal timing adjustments. ➢ Step 2 Provide police officer control during peak construction related periods (6:00 a.m.to .7:30 a.m. and/or 2:30 p.m.to 4:00 p.m.). ➢ Step 3 Work with the North Shore Transportation Management Association to provide incentives to construction workers to encourage carpooling and ridesharing. ➢ Step 4 Require that some of the construction workers park off-site and be shuttled to/from the Site.The number of workers will be constantly adjusted as needed to reduce traffic volumes'and improve operations at the intersection. The costs of the above measures will be the responsibility of Footprint Power. 5.4 Bridge Street/Sergeant fames Ayube Memorial Drive(south) If the monitoring program indicates that any of the following occurs, mitigation measures will be implemented: Construction related traffic results in vehicle queues on Bridge Street which extend to Williams Street(300 feet)for more than 25 percent of the peak hour observations. — The PTOE indicates poor operations at the intersection. — The city is receiving more than five complaints a week regarding construction related traffic at the intersection. The following mitigation measures will be implemented sequentially until the PTOE and City of Salem concur that the intersection is functioning adequately: ➢ Step 1 , Construction vehicles exiting the Project site and proceeding to points south along Bridge Street will be encouraged to proceed to the northerly Bridge Street/Sergeant James Ayube Memorial Drive intersection to utilize existing Bridge Street left turn lane capacity. ➢ Step 2 Implement traffic signal timing adjustments. ➢ Step 3 Provide police officer control during peak construction related periods (6:00 a.m.to 7:30 a.m. and/or 2:30 p.m.to 4:00 p.m.). ➢ Step 4 Work with the North Shore Transportation Management Association to provide incentives to construction workers to encourage carpooling and ridesharing. 21Page ➢ Step 5 Require that some of the construction workers park off-site and be shuttled to/from the Site.The number of workers will be constantly adjusted as needed to reduce traffic volumes and improve operations at the intersection. The costs of the above measures will be the responsibility of Footprint Power. 5.5 Bridge Street/Sergeant)ames Ayube Memorial Drive(north) If the monitoring program indicates that any of the following occurs, mitigation measures will be implemented: - Construction related traffic results in vehicle queues on Bridge Street which extend to Ames Street (630 feet)for more than 25 percent of the peak hour observations. - The PTOE indicates poor operations at the intersection. - The city is receiving more than five complaints a week regarding construction related traffic at the intersection. The following mitigation measures will be implemented sequentially until the PTOE and City of Salem concur that the intersection is functioning adequately: ➢ Step 1 Implement traffic signal timing adjustments. ➢ Step 2 Provide police officer control during peak construction related periods (6:00 a.m.to 7:30 a.m. and/or 2:30 p.m.to 4:00 p.m.). ➢ Step 3 Work with the North Shore Transportation Management Association to provide incentives to construction workers to encourage carpooling and ridesharing. ➢ Step 4 Require that some of the construction workers park off-site and be shuttled to/from the Site.The number of workers will be constantly adjusted as needed to reduce traffic volumes and improve operations at the intersection. The costs of the above measures will be the responsibility of Footprint Power. 5.6 Transportation Demand Management 5.6.1 MassRIDES Footprint Power and its construction contractor will partner with MassRIDES to encourage construction workers to utilize the travel options (carpools,vanpools,transit, bicycle) supported by MassRIDES and the MassRIDES website (http://www.commute.com): 22Page 5.6.2 North Shore Transportation Management Association(NSTMA) Footprint Power will join the NSTMA (http://www.northshoretma.org) during the period of construction and following construction for a minimum of three years to reduce vehicle traffic on local streets and reduce vehicle emissions in the study area. Payment for membership for the duration of the Project construction and the three-year membership will be made prior to the issuance of a demolition permit. Prior to issuance of the demolition permit, Footprint Power will provide the Salem City Planner with an update of NSTMA programs that it has committed to implement in an effort to reduce construction worker traffic. v. f . k 23Page ,. Noise Mitigation Plan Footprint has created this Noise Mitigation Plan to document its commitment to minimizing the demolition and construction impacts on neighboring residents. This plan incorporates all requirements ` from approvals and permits issued to date, and some additional best practices to accomplish the goals. Footprint will ensure that all contractors and subcontractors will use every effort and means possible to minimize or eliminate noise caused by abatement and demolition operations. Noise control measures shall be provided which are necessary to limit noise measured at the property boundary lines. All provisions in the City of Salem's Code of Ordinance, Chapter 22, Noise Control, shall be strictly ,adhered to. - b Footprint recognizes the significant noise reductions that could be realized by the placement of a temporary sound wall at the site boundary along Derby Street during construction. Footprint will install, prior to construction and demolition, and no later than June 2014,a twelve-foot high temporary sound wall at the western boundary of the site along Derby Street Drilling and blasting shall be limited to Monday-Friday between 5:00 AM unti11/5:00 PM.There shall be no drilling; blasting or rock hammering on Saturdays,Sundays, or holidays. Blasting shall be undertaken ` in accordance with all local and state regulations. Mitigation Methods and Guidelines Contractors will provide working machinery designed to operate with the least possible noise;the air " intakes of compressors shall be equipped with silencers; engine-driven machinery,where permitted, shall be equipped with mufflers;and crushing equipment shall be enclosed in sound-insulating enclosures and baffles shall be provided where required. Reasonable efforts will be made to minimize the impact of noise resulting from construction activities or demolition activities. The following noise mitigation measures are planned: 1. Comply with construction hours limits. 2. Speed limits on and off site will be monitored. 3. Mufflers will be used where available. 4. Noisy equipment will be located away from sensitive receptors when possible. 5. ,Engine housing panels will be kept closed. 6. Background sensing backup beepers if working near the property fence line. Outreach Footprint has developed a Communication Plan for project construction. The plan sets forth procedures for providing prior notification to affected residents of: 1. the scheduled start, duration, and hours of construction; 2. any construction the Company intends to conduct that must take place outside of the hours detailed above; and 25Page 3. complaint and response procedures including contact information, the availability of web-based project information, a dedicated project hotline for complaints, and protocols for notifying schools of upcoming construction. Furthermore, any noise complaints and the Company response thereto, arising from construction and/or worker traffic that occurs outside of the hours of Monday through Friday from 7:00 a.m.to 5:00 p.m.,will be reported to the Siting Board within one week of the Company's receipt of the complaint. Work Hours Footprint will require all contractors to confine noisy construction activities to weekdays only,with the exception of work that necessarily has a longer required continuous duration than normal construction hours allow, such as a concrete pour. Footprint is allowed to engage in any construction activities Monday through Friday, not earlier than 7:00 a.m. and not later than 5:00 p.m. Non-noisy construction outside of these hours is to be requested from and scheduled through the City, and monitored by the City to ensure that such work is not disruptive to the community. Should the Company and the City not agree on such requests,the Company may make a request directly to the Siting Board, and notify the City in writing that is has done so. It shall be the Company's responsibility to demonstrate that it meets: these requirements. During construction the Applicant may request approval to work outside the normal work hours of 7:00 am to 5:00 pm from the Building Inspector provided that a. the noise level will not create noise in the neighborhood at levels in excess of the noise from the operation of the existing Salem Harbor Station; b. Footprint will monitor sensitive noise receptors,as necessary, during second and third shifts; and c. Notice of second and third shift work is coordinated with the City in advance in order to notify abutters and abutters to abutters within 300 feet. It is noted that the City will limit noisy work if previously established acceptable levels are exceeded. Footprint will develop and adopt a clear and strict policy for its workers and contractors to minimize vehicular noise and visual impacts to surrounding neighborhoods in the event of second or third shift construction. The policy should include designated speed limits,staggered times of arrivals and departures, proper maintenance of vehicles,avoiding use of high beams and loud sound systems, and carpooling incentives, as well as additional mitigation measures that may be useful. Further,to encourage minimally disruptive worker arrivals and departures at the site, Footprint will provide a police detail between the second and third shifts when the total number of workers entering and exiting the site exceeds 100 workers at the shift change. Temporary Construction Sound Wall 261 Page In an effort to minimize the effect of noises during construction activities to off-site receptors,the contractor shall erect a temporary sound wall.The wall will be 12 feet high and required on the entire western boundary of the project site including an East-West portion that will extend approximately 200 feet inward on the Southerly Boundary of the site from Derby Street. The materials of construction will be flexible acoustical barrier blankets or plywood (or equivalent), suitable for 30 months of outdoor exposure. The contractor will install and maintain this construction sound wall along or in the vicinity of the existing security fence including special details at any existing or new gates to allow operability.The design noise reduction will be 18—25 dBA(Noise Reduction Coefficient rating ofNRC-0.85 or greater) Footprint and its contractors will maintain the fence during the period from the start of construction through the completion of all demolition activities and demobilization from the Site. Monitoring Action plan Footprint has an action plan in place to monitor noise levels on a regular basis and to address noise comments and complaints during construction and operations. See the Communication Plan for more information. The Communication Plan identifies the appropriate contact person at Footprint Power and the formal method to provide comments and register complaints. -Footprint-has established the following.Monitoring Protocol: • Monitoring of Sound Levels will be performed by a third-party environmental consulting firm hired by Footprint. • A total of eight (8) environmental monitoring "station" locations have been identified along the perimeter of the Site boundaries. These will be maintained throughout the course of the project. • Sound Pressure Level (SPL) and center band frequency analysis is conducted for both background determinations and operating source generation SPL's from the existing Power Plant. Leq and L90 sound level measurements are collected utilizing a Quest 2700 Spectrum Analyzer during each work shift while outdoor activities are occurring at the site. SPL measurements are collected from a minimum of S environmental monitoring stations. • Sound level measurements will be regularly compared to regulatory guidelines so that adjustments to work activities may be made if deemed necessary to reduce noise levels. • Due to some of the monitoring equipment constraints, monitoring for some parameters will only be performed during days where the weather is optimally sunny with normal winds (non- rain days). New Facility Noise Noise levels from Salem Harbor Power Plant(the new plant)generated by operations, including but not limited to refrigeration and heating,will not increase the broadband sound level by more than 10 dB(A) above the ambient levels measured at the property line. Footprint will consult with the City of Salem and MassDEP to develop an operational noise monitoring protocol,which shall consist of an ongoing periodic noise monitoring program and reporting procedure. The protocol will include the collection of additional baseline noise measurements,taken on a schedule chosen in consultation with MassDEP and the City,and the periodic noise monitoring program will begin 27Page within six months of the commencement of the facility's commercial operation.The reporting procedure should provide for dissemination of monitoring results to the City and the community areas that are affected by noise increases from the facility of three dBA or more. Footprint will submit a copy of the noise monitoring protocol to the Siting Board prior to commercial operation. In the process of developing this protocol Footprint will provide an opportunity for others to comment on the proposed protocol. Finally, Footprint will provide a compliance filing that includes a quantifiable explanation of what nighttime construction sound levels the City would regard as "noisy' and,therefore,would be prohibited by the PUD Special Permit in the surrounding neighborhood. 28Page Waste Management and Recycling Flan This Waste Management Plan has been developed by Footprint to describe the goals and practices for " waste management and disposal for the demolition and construction phases of the project. It is Footprint's intent to be proactive and responsible and in full compliance to best serve the needs of the neighboring community, all persons working at the site, and to the environment. Footprint's focus is to utilize state-of-the-art procedures and to perform all activities in a manner which promotes material reuse and recycling while minimizing wastes and waste streams which are detrimental to the environment. Energy Facilities Siting Board Footprint, prior to the commencement of construction, is to provide to the Siting Board a recycling and reuse plan,with targets for demolition and construction waste and its anticipated recycling rate for operational wastes, and to explain how these targets are consistent with the goals of the Massachusetts 2010-2020 Solid Waste Master Plan produced by MassDEP. Further, Footprint is to submit a report on the actual demolition and construction waste reuse and recycling rates before operation of the facility and to submit a report on operational recycling rates for the first year of operation of the facility. The MADEP 2010-2020 Solid Waste Master Plan Executive Summary is reprinted here: "Every year, even though Massachusetts boasts one of the highest recycling rates in the nation, the Commonwealth disposes of enough trash to fill 74 Fenway Parks. The disposal of that much material carries a large cost to the environment and the taxpayer wallet. By recycling and reusing more waste materials, Massachusetts cities and towns can save money and benefit the environment as they throw away less trash. The Patrick Administration is committed to developing the tools needed to increase the diversion of solid waste,allow municipalities to save money, and put the Commonwealth squarely on the path to a Zero Waste future. There are challenges to overcome. Despite new technologies and processes that have improved the ability of residents, businesses and municipalities to handle, sort and recycle materials, recycling rates in Massachusetts have not progressed.As landfills close, municipalities and businesses seek innovative solutions to the problem of higher waste disposal costs, but state government has fewer resources to help. Meanwhile, solid waste management is an important contributor to greenhouse gas(GHG)emissions, which Massachusetts is bound by law to reduce 25 percent by 2020 below 1990 levels and 80 percent by 2050. Through a blend of innovative policies, ranging from technical assistance to legislation to initiatives to support and grow recycling markets, the 2010-2020 Solid Waste Master Plan addresses these challenges and places the Commonwealth on the pathway to higher reuse and recycling rates and reduced disposal. With a continuing commitment on all our parts, we will successfully implement the Plan and make zero waste a reality in Massachusetts." a . (emphasis added) 29Page Footprint has contracted AEI to prepare a Beneficial Use Determination Application (BUD)to allow for the reuse on site of as much acceptable material as possible. AEI has taken an enormous number of samples from the construction materials and had them analyzed for hazardous materials such as PCB, dead, and asbestos. All construction materials were then categorized and when the time for demolition comes,will be separated and dispositioned according to their end use. Not all materials can be recycled, but in the spirit of the Master Plan Footprint is committed to reusing as much material as allowed by the BUD. A copy of the BUD application and permit(when issued)will be submitted to the EFSB. Waste Management The entire site was granted a release tracking number(RTN)3-31327 under the Massachusetts Contingency Plan. No structure shall be constructed until the Licensed Site Professional responsible for the site certifies that soil and ground water on the entire site meets the DEP standards for the proposed use. Footprint will disclose in writing to the Health Agent the origin of any fill material needed for the project.Any fill used in connection with this project shall be clean fill. Any fill shall contain no trash, refuse; rubbish, or debris, including but not limited to lumber, bricks, plaster,wire, lath, paper, cardboard, pipe,tires, ashes, refrigerators, motor vehicles, or parts of any of the foregoing. Footprint will file for a Beneficial Use Determination (BUD)with the Massachusetts DEP to reuse as much good crushed construction material as possible onsite for fill, including bricks. Footprint commits to segregate reusable materials such as metal, asphalt, and scrap wood into stockpiles for salvage or on-site reuse; use containment structures around refueling and vehicle maintenance areas;and implement best practices regarding solid waste management, including recycling all non-hazardous waste to the extent practicable. All waste will be evaluated for hazardous waste characteristics either by sampling and analysis or by Station personnel process knowledge. Only licensed and qualified haulers, handlers and recycle/disposal sites will be used. Footprint will require all contractors performing the remediation and demolition activities to be responsible for completely documenting the disposition of all materials at the site.The intent is to record "green activities" including the volumes of materials reused, recycled, and disposed including all wastes and re-use/minimization of water and other disposable materials throughout the course of the project. This is done in support of the FEIR/MEPA requirement to "establish a goal to recycle 50%of the material eligible for recycling". This documentation shall be provided to Footprint Power during and at the completion of the project. The project plans include the accommodations for managing all recyclable material, including but not limited to: cardboard, rigid plastic,tile, concrete and paper. 301 Page 'All data to support State and Federal reporting will be recorded and maintained. Beneficial Use Determination Ideally, no demolition material leaves the site. However, it has been determined that a large portion of the materials resulting from demolition of Salem Harbor Station are inexorably mixed with hazardous materials like asbestos, PCB and lead. Material resulting from demolition will be managed in accordance with a Beneficial Use Determination (BUD) (approval anticipated by the MA DEP in late 2013/early 2014) for material re-use of asphalt,.brick, and concrete, etc. Contractors shall utilize techniques and . technologies that will maximize the re-use of the demolition materials and minimize off-site transport. These techniques can be found in the BUD. In conjunction with the BUD, Footprint's contractors will perform the on-site crushing down to minus 1 '/:" in size for all asphalt, brick, and concrete materials at the site. Crushed materials shall be temporarily stockpiled until it can be spread or used in accordance with the BUD. All activity will conform to all requirements of the approved Beneficial Use Determination. - -- If,despite the best-efforts of the contractors,there is non-recyclable material, non-recyclable solid.. . ' wastes will be transported to a licensed solid waste landfill,and separate containers. Waste Transportation and Disposal The remediation and demolition Contractor is responsible for contacting the intended waste disposal site to confirm the site's ability to accept materials in the volumes and duration of the intended project. The Contractor will also obtain approval from Footprint for waste transporters for each disposal facility. All waste containers must meet applicable regulatory requirements and accepted by all regulatory agencies. Waste transportation and disposal costs for oils, liquids,sludge,and other regulated waste and hazardous waste will be properly documented and manifested. Where there is a need fortransport of large scale materials or debris, marine-based vessels will be required. All roll-off containers used for disposal of asbestos waste will be double lined with approved plastic liners and labeled according to all regulations. All waste will be properly sized to meet the requirements of the disposal facilities. Waste materials will not be allowed to accumulate on site and must be handled within an appropriate length of time. - - 31Page Hazardous wastes (paints,solvents, curing compounds, acids)shall be separated from construction waste and stored in sealed containers suitable to prevent leakage and corrosion and labeled in accordance with applicable federal and state requirements. Outside storage of containers shall contain secondary containment or similar effective means to prevent discharge of pollutants. ABC Rubble Materials Re-Use Approved cementious materials will be crushed in accordance with the BUD. Crushed cementious demolition debris not containing Regulated Materials shall be placed in a designated crushed material storage area.The materials to be left on site will be reduced to a size sufficient to prevent voids and settling. Regulated Materials Abatement All materials listed as Regulated will be properly removed and disposed of by a licensed hazardous waste hauler or an appropriate hauler for the regulated material being removed. All regulated wastes shall be appropriately labeled and disposed of or recycled in accordance with all state,federal, and local regulations. Waste Manifests, Bills of Lading,Waste Shipment Records shall be appropriately filled out and maintained. Prior to initiating major demolition activities, all regulated waste materials associated with the existing power plant operations will be removed,segregated/consolidated (as necessary), containerized,and staged at designated areas for transportation and disposal at a facility that has been evaluated and approved by Footprint Power. The types of waste materials to be collected include, but are not limited to the following: • Batteries; • Mercury-containing devices; • Mercury; • Lighting systems; • Light ballasts; • Loose lead-based paint; • All Boiler Ash Interior to the Boilers (Priorto abatement/demolition of boilers) • Sediments and Sludge from Settling Basins • Other miscellaneous items including product in system piping throughout the plant. Appropriate PPE and packaging and disposal forthe waste in these areas where other abatement activities must occur will be used. All PCB-Containing Light Ballasts and Fluorescent Light Bulbs located within the buildings are to be removed and properly disposed or recycled in accordance with applicable regulations. Care should be 321 Page taken not to break any fluorescent light bulbs. Any broken bulbs should be cleaned up immediately during abatement operations. Future Power Plant Operations t .. The resultant establishment(s)shall dispose of all waste materials resulting from its operations in an environmentally sound manner as described to the Board of Health. s • 33Page Soils Management Plan Remediation (see full Plan under separate cover) + A Soils Management Plan for remediation has been prepared by Mike Billa of TetraTech, LSP of the site. The plan is a comprehensive document prepared to satisfy the requirements of the Massachusetts Contingency Plan. s + 35Page General Stockpiling At this point there can be no definitive stockpiling area designation plan that will apply for the duration of the demolition and construction project due to the complex nature of the project and the changing activities overtime. However,there are overriding design parameters that must betaken into account for all stockpiling decisions. Those conditions are summarized here. In accordance with City approvals, all debris,fill and excavated material will be stockpiled a location far enough away from the water to prevent sediment from entering Salem Harbor. In accordance with the SWPPP material stockpiles will be protected from contact with stormwater using a temporary perimeter sediment barrier such as fiber roll, compost filter tube or silt fence. Stockpiles will be covered or ' appropriate temporary erosion control stabilization method applied to minimize sediment discharge. Disturbed areas will remain in a stable condition at the close of each construction day. Within fourteen (14) days of completion of construction on any given portion of the project, all disturbed areas in the completed portion of the site will be temporarily or permanently stabilized with rapidly growing vegetative cover, using sufficient top soil to assure long-term stabilization of disturbed areas. e k If soils are to be disturbed for longer than fourteen (14)days, a temporary cover of rye or other grass should be established to prevent erosion and sedimentation. If the season is not appropriate for plant growth, exposed surface will be stabilized by other appropriate erosion control measures,firmly . anchored, to prevent soils from being washed by rain or flooding. Footprint has identified all areas on the site suitable for stockpiling. At the end of this plan is a plan drawing representing the areas suitable for stockpiling. The plan shows the 100 year flood zone shaded in yellow and the 100 foot buffer zone to bank represented by the heavy dashed red line. Fill material will not be stockpiled within any resource area or 100 foot buffer zone to coastal bank with the following exceptions: a. Because the existing coal pile area is surrounded by a concrete swale and contains a dust suppression system,this location may be used for the storage of uncovered fill material. The perimeter swale and dust suppression system will be used during the temporary storage of material to prevent sediment transport from the area and minimize fugitive dust. b. The use of additional areas for material storage must be reviewed and authorized by the Conservation Commission agent. In addition,the use of temporary sediment and erosion control measures must be reviewed and approved for the additional locations. Areas for stockpiling will be designated. Stockpiles will be protected from stormwater and wind.They will be covered or stabilized. Snow storage sites must be designated on plans. 37Page rh Fft ip a 'T 4v 4�F Y' i� ti. Y S � 2 �y yy 1•Sl S - 1��V Y"�rli ,pg K n.y., , �. / 3 � i 2i' •3P� i . b WILD �Nc 'q�x•� f� 1 D i F" 4 i _ � O Appendix 2 City Plans Previously Submitted and Approved SWPPP/Drainage Plan Stormwater O&M Plan These plans were submitted as part of the Stormwater Management Report dated April 0, 2013. They are currently on file in the City Engineer's office and the Planning Department. Additional copies are available upon request. 1 39Page Appendix 3 City Plans Required Prior to Building Permit 41Page E . Dust Control Plan/ Street Sweeping Dust Control Methods-Specified Requirements Footprint is dedicated to the limiting of impacts to the surrounding community due to dust created from - - the activities associated with the project. Due to the fact that the remediation/demolition project is immediately adjacent to a residential area Footprint has developed this Dust Control Plan. During the demolition phase of the project,the following specialized dust control measures for demolition will be used: • Pre-Cleaning of large surfaces and structural members to remove large concentrations of dusting materials prior to demolition. • Water suppression sprays and misting of potential dust creating situations to prevent spreading of airborne particulates. • Enclosure of areas with tarps and screening when necessary to prevent the migration of dust. •, Sandblasting will use containment or be "dustless" • During earth-moving activities the following dust control practices will be used: • Watering Irrigation ` • Soil Stabilization • Wind Breaks All city water used by the project will be metered and protected by a backflow preventer. Stockpiled materials will be capped or covered to limit fugitive dust from the stockpile in a manner acceptable to the Owner. All sidewalks and roads that are affected by the work conducted at the site will be broom-cleaned. Trucks and vehicles leaving the Site will be washed and cleaned to prevent debris from being deposited on streets and sidewalks. No tracking of soils or dust in the street. Use of street sweepers will be required if tracking is observed. A designated "Truck Wash" area will be established where rinse water is collected and filtered through minimum of 5 micron pore size filters prior to discharge. Environmental Monitoring Footprint has an action plan in place to monitor dust levels on a regular basis during demolition and construction. The Communication Plan identifies the appropriate contact person at Footprint Power and the formal method to.provide comments and register complaints. Footprint has established a Dust Monitoring Protocol. Monitoring of dust levels will be performed by a third-party environmental consulting firm hired by Footprint. The third party Consultant,AEI will collect 431 Page PM-2.5 particulate measurements utilizing a TSI Dust Track meter(or similar) at each monitoring station on a daily basis during demolition or during activities that create dust on-site. In accordance with the methodology,AEI will collect and record measurements for temperature, relative humidity, precipitation wind direction and velocity information throughout the work shifts. Particulate measurements will be compared to the EPA National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS)40 CFR Parts 50,51,and 52—National Ambient Air Quality Standards for Particulate Matter(Final Rule). A total of eight(8)environmental monitoring"station" locations have been identified along the perimeter of the Site boundaries. These will be maintained throughout the course of the project. 44Page e Fire Fighting In accordance with the Planning Board approval Footprint has prepared this Fire Fighting Plan in concert with the Fire Department. The specific requirements are: " "All work will comply with the requirements of the Salem Fire Department.The locations of all fire hydrants will be approved by the Fire Department prior to the issuance of any building permit." " "h)The Fire Department must approve the plan regarding access for firefighting." The fire hydrant locations will be submitted prior to commencement of construction activities, estimated to be February 2014. A plan drawing is attached at the end of this document and will be submitted to the Fire Department detailing access routes to the facility during demolition and construction. Contact information can be found in the Communication Plan. P The We Chief has been engaged in discussions with Footprint, and Footprint commits to ongoing communication with his office to ensure safe firefighting response to the entire facility. 45 _Page Landscape Plan Footprint is preparing a Landscape Maintenance Plan for submittal to the City of Salem and to the EFSB. The Plan will be developed with stakeholders and is for the grounds of the finished facility. The Plan will address topics sensitive to our neighbors such as: I 1. Height of the planting material along the southern-facing side of the landscape berm. 2. The view corridor from Derby Street to the jetty. 3. A description of the community process that took place prior to the completion of the final plans; and 4. A description of any changes to the plans from those in the record. Attached to this plan in Appendix 4 are drawings that have been previously submitted to the City documenting the intended landscape arrangement forthe final property. Footprint will engage the community and present the results of the discussions in a final Landscape Management Plan submitted prior to the beginning of construction. Y 4 ! f I a. 47Page • 1: Y Lighting Plan In accordance with the Planning Board and EFSB decisions Footprint will prepare and submit a lighting Plan. "b)A final lighting plan will be submitted to the City Planner for review and approval prior to the issuance of any building permit. c)After installation, lighting will be reviewed and approved by the City Planner, prior to the issuance of any Certificate of Occupancy." "Applicant will coordinate with the City Planner and Planning Board's consultant to design a monumental, decorative lighting scheme to accent the stack and building. Design to be submitted to the Planning Board prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. Installation of decorative lighting is subject to approval of the Planning Board after a public hearing with appropriate notice to abutters and abutters to abutters within 300 feet.The Certificate of Occupancy will not be conditioned upon Planning Board approval of such plan." "Siting Board directs the Company to submit for approval: (1)final landscaping, lighting and design plans; (2)a description of the community process that took place prior to the completion of the final plans; and (3) a description of any changes to the plans from those in the record." f 49Page Inspection Plan Footprint, in accordance with the EFSB requirement, has prepared this Inspection Plan to document how . Footprint will coordinate with the City of Salem to accomplish the large number of inspections associated with this project. From the EFSB: 6 "The Siting Board directs Footprint to file with the Board, by January 1, 2014,a plan that has been approved by the City, describing how the Company will enable the City to accomplish its required inspectional tasks for the project." The Building Office of the City of Salem is comprised of the Building Commissioner, Assistant Building Inspector, and Plumbing and Gas Inspector, as well as two Clerks.The Building Department takes in all Building, Plumbing, and Gas Permit Applications; reviews all plans and application packages, and grants or denies Applications for Permit. Further,the department conducts all required inspections pertaining to the same, and where applicable the grants all Certificates of Inspection and/or Certificates of Occupancy.To schedule an inspection, Footprint will contact a staff member at the following location: , . . - City of Salem Inspectional Services 120 Washington St., 3rd Floor Salem, MA 01970 Phone: (978) 745-9595 x5641 Fax: (978)740-9846 Hours: Monday-Wednesday 8AM -4PM Thursday 8AM-7PM Friday 8AM --Noon Counter Hours (Inspectors present): Monday-Thursday 8AM -9AM and Noon - 1PM Thursday 513M -7PM Friday 8AM -9AM Inspection Hours Monday-Friday 9AM - Noon Monday-Thursday IPM -4PM The City's Electrical Department receives and grants electrical permits, and schedules inspections for commercial, industrial and residential work.All electrical work performed in the City is controlled through the enforcement of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts State Electrical Codes. There is a Wiring Inspector, a City Electrician, and a clerk. Address:44 Lafayette Street r - 51Page A Central Fire Headquarters,Second Floor Salem, MA 01970 Phone: (978) 745-6300 Fax: (978) 745-4638 Alternate Phone: (978) 745-6301 Emergency Phone: (978)744-1235 Hours:.8AM -4PM, Monday- Friday Footprint recognizes that the burden on the above named departments may be significant so the following actions will be taken, when possible: 1. Twenty four hour notice will be provided of the need for inspectional services. If at all possible 48 hour notice will be provided. 2. Multiple inspections will be scheduled for the same visit. 3. An arrangement for the financial costs associated with the inspections will be negotiated as part of the Community Benefits Agreement(CBA). , 4. The CBA negotiations will also address the need for additional temporary City staffing, paid for by Footprint, if the parties determine that is warranted. 5. Footprint will designate a Project Contact, and an alternate,to the City who has the necessary information to facilitate scheduling and performing of inspections. 52Page a � Appendix 4 Landscape Drawings k t 53Page Tom Devine From: Tom Devine Sent: Monday, July 14, 2014 9:29 AM To: 'Robert R DeRosier' Subject: RE: Salem Harbor Redevelopment request for additional stockpiling locations Rob, Thank you for submitting this request. I approve this stockpile area on behalf of the Commission. Best, Tom Tom Devine, Conservation Agent/Staff Planner City of Salem Department of Planning & Community Development 120 Washington St., 3rd Floor I Salem, MA 01970 (V) 978-619-5682 1 (F) 978-740-0404 tdevine(o)salem.com I salem.com From: Robert R DeRosier [mailto:rderosiercd)footprintsalemharbor.com] Sent: Friday, July 11, 2014 3:13 PM To: Tom Devine Subject: Salem Harbor Redevelopment request for additional stockpiling locations Tom, please find attached an electronic copy of a letter that went out today to your attention. Robert DeRosier PE, CSP Sr. Environmental Specialist rderosier@footprintsalemharbor.com C: 978-660-7112 Based at: Footprint Salem Harbor Station 24 Fort Ave Salem, MA 01970 W: 978-740-8402 F: 978-740-8305 This e-mail is intended for the use of the recipient(s) named above. This message may be an attorney-client communication and, as such, privileged and confidential. If you have received this communication in error, please notify me immediately. 01 M Jim 9 1 Footprint Power 24 Fort Avenue, Salem, MAO]970 Tom Devine, Conservation Commission Agent City of Salem 120 Washington Street Salem, MA 01970 RE: DEP File #64-552-Salem Harbor Station Demolition and Construction Project, request for stockpiling in a resource area Dear Tom, In accordance with Special Condition 50 of the Salem Conservation Commission Order of Conditions we are requesting additional areas located within the 100 year flood zone for the temporary storage of demolition materials. Attached in Figure 1 is the Erosion and Sedimentation Control Phase 1 Diagram found in the Stormwater Pollution Protection Plan submitted to the Conservation Commission to support the approval mentioned above. The 100-year flood zone is indicated in light green and material storage is restricted in those areas unless approval is granted from the Con Com. The oil tanks designated with B3, B4, D6 and B5 in this area are scheduled for demolition in July and August and they are located entirely within the resource area. Once cleared the area is needed for storage of demolition material. We request permission to store material in footprint of the four . oil tanks. Attachment 1 contains the best management practices we will employ to ensure the storage of materials does not contribute fugitive dust or sediment to Salem Harbor. The demolition material will be brick, concrete, steel, dirt,gravel and other miscellaneous non-hazardous material. Please let me know if you have any questions regarding this matter. We look forward to your reply, Sincerely, Robert R DeRosier, PE, CSP Environmental Specialist Date Footprint Power Salem Harbor Operations LLC Reducing Carbon Emissions One Step at a TimeTM -1' � � i rn roFl. Sn g Sl 1 :.-�a 1 _� jy�� m Wim . F'R'�1 ,y-lam 3 p A � yc N({Q�yp c£QQ���I �Jrpgrqpm �� ikY CE � � �.li��J:{v � '^n��• 2 10 Ly QryG� C_T �OnGN U06Y Fy4 C�LLLC 94 C E i2 m g y a lA . s NO l * CL y d r p CL c-I m rs w A 94r -C yU1 Attachment 1 All stockpiling locations will be managed in full compliance with the project SWPPP, specifically section 4.0 Erosion, Sediment and Stormwater Control Measures 1. Materials will be segmented to allow for recycle whenever possible. 2. Hazardous waste materials will not be stored in the green shaded area. 3. In all cases use good engineering practices 4. The area will be protected from contact with stormwater (Including run-on) using a temporary perimeter sediment barrier. 5. For storage longer than 14 days we will provide cover or appropriate temporary stabilization to avoid direct contact with precipitation or to minimize sediment discharge; 6. We will not hose down or sweep soil or sediment accumulated on pavement or other impervious surfaces into any stormwater conveyance (unless connected to a sediment basin,sediment trap, or similarly effective control), storm drain inlet,or to Salem Harbor. 7. We will contact the Conservation Commission agent for a site visit 48 hours prior to storage of material. Reducing Carbon Emissions One Step at a Timel ' 1 t Commonwealth of Massachusetts Executive Office of Energy & Environmental Affairs LlDepartment of Environmental _Protection One Winter Street Boston, MA 02108.617-292-5500 RECEIVED gyJrrt� DEVAL L PATRICK 9 !,N p� y p RICHARD K.SULLIVAN JR. Governor I {� E"u�.Ar _ Secretary 110V 05 2013 KENNETH L KIMMELL Commissioner DEPT.OF PLANNING& COMMUNITY DEVELOPMEN November 1, 2013 In the Matter of: Footprint Power Salem Harbor Development LP Salem Harbor Station Redevelopment Project Salem, Massachusetts Table of Contents I. Introduction.................................................................................................3 I1. Project Description..........................................................................:...........3 III. .Site History .................................................................................................5 A. Jurisdictional Lines...............................................................................5 B. Licensing History and Historic Use.....................................................:5 C. Designated Port Area............................................................................6 D. Municipal Harbor Plan...:......................................................................6 IV. Regulatory Compliance Analysis and Related Findings ............................7 A. Project Compliance with Standards of the Waterways Regulations.....7 1. Conformance with Municipal Zoning and Harbor Plans................7 2. Protection of water related public rights and water-dependent uses:.................................................................................................8 3. Construction and dredging standards..............................................9 4. Consistency with Coastal Zone Management Policies...................9 5. Standards for Nonwater-dependent Infrastructure Facilities..........10 B. Need for a Variance .......:.......................................................................11 C. Conclusion............................................................................................12 V. Variance Analysis and Findings .................................................................12 A. Alternatives Analysis............................................................................12 1. Alternative on-site locations outside of Chapter 91 jurisdiction ....13 This information is available in alternate format Call Michelle Waters-Ekanem,Diversity Director,at 617-292-5751.TDD#1-866-539-7622 or 1-617-574-6868 MassDEP Weosite:w .mass.gov/dep Printed on Recycled Paper Waterways File No. WI3-3886-NPage 2 Salem Harbor Station Redevelopment Project Decision on Variance Request and Written Determination 2. Continued use of a wet-cooling system..........................................14 a. Repowering of the existing plant using once-through cooling.14 b. Use of water-cooling technology at new facility.....................:14 3. Water-borne fuel delivery...............................................................15 B. Mitigation Measures Analysis ..............................................................15 1. Minimizing impact by constructing a facility with a smaller footprint on tidelands......................................................................16 2. Site redevelopment/demolition and remediation...........::...............17 3. Construction/repair/maintenance of WDI Infrastructure................18 4. Marketing........................................................:................................18 5. Dedication of non-tidelands areas to DPA–compatible use ...........19 C. Necessity for a Variance/Overriding municipal, regional, state, federal interest Analysis...::.........................:...:.....................................19 1. Legislature identified a public interest in redevelopment of site....19 2. Project will help reestablish WDI use of the DPA .........................20 3. Project will provide electricity determined to be necessary for grid reliability in NEMA.................................................................21 D. Variance Findings.................................................................................22 1. Finding relative to alternatives analysis................................:.........22 2. Finding relative to,mitigation measures analysis............................22 3. Finding relative to necessity/overriding interest analysis...............22 VI. Decision......................................................................................................22 VII. Findings.......................................................................................................23 VIII. Section 61 Findings.....................................................................................23 IX. Conclusion..................:...............................................................................24 Attachments Attachment A—Written Determination and Conditions.....................................26 Attachment B—Standard Waterways License Conditions..................................31 Attachment C—Statement Regarding Appeal Rights..........................................33 1. Who has the right to appeal?.........................................................:..........33 2. How can I request an adjudicatory hearing?............................................33 3. What information must be included in the hearing request? ...................34 AttachmentD—DraftLicense Plans ...................................................................35 Waterways File No. W 13-3886-N Page 3 Salem Harbor Station Redevelopment Project Decision on Variance Request and Written Determination In the Matter of: Footprint Power Salem Harbor Development LP Salem Harbor Station.Redevelopment Project- Salem, Massachusetts RE: Waterways File No. W13-3886-N Decision on Variance Request and Written Determination I. Introduction. Footprint Power Salem Harbor Development LP is a foreign limited partnership, whose principle office is located at 1140 Route 22 East, Ste. 303 in Bridgewater, New Jersey ("the Applicant' or "Footprint'). Footprint submitted to the Department a Chapter 91 License Application, Salem. Harbor Station-Redevelopment Project, dated May 17, 2013 ("Application") proposing to construct a new, 630 Megawatt, natural.gas-fired, quick-start, combined-cycle generating facility ("the Project');in Salem, Massachusetts. The Project would be situated on approximately 19 acres of filled tidelands,within a portion of Salem Harbor which is,a Designated Port Area ("DPA").' As explained below, construction in filled tidelands is jurisdictional2 and subject to licensing requirements administered by the Department of Environmental Protection (the "Department") under Chapter 91 and its implementing regulations.3 To be eligible for a license in filled tidelands in a DPA, an activity must generally be a water-dependent-industrial.use, or an accessoryto such use.4 The Department has classified the Project as a nonwater-dependent- infrastructure facility,5 however, and in its Application, Footprint seeks a variance from the water-dependent-industrial use requirement and from certain related provisions of the licensing regulations all as discussed, below. II. Project Description. The Applicant describes the Project as follows:7 • anew combined-cycle generating.("CCG") facility, including a nominal 630 MW natural gas-fired electric generation facility with"Quick Start" capability that under summer conditions can generate an additional 62 MW, for a total of 692 MW • CCG facility major components include: o two quick-start natural gas combustion turbine generators (CTGs) Application at 1-1. 2310 CMR 9.04(2). - - 3 MGL c.91,ss.14 and 18;310 CMR 9.05(1). 4 Other uses may be allowed to a limited extent;see 310 CMR 9.32(1)(b)(1) 5310 CMR 9.12(l). 6310 CMR 9.21. Application at 2-1. Waterways File No. W1 3-3886-N Page 4 Salem Harbor Station Redevelopment Project Decision on Variance Request and Written Determination o two heat recovery steam generators (HRSGs) including pollution control equipment o two steam turbine generators (STGs) o an administrative building with warehouse/shops space o a service bay o an Operations Building o Air Cooled Condenser Mechanical Buildings o the Main Power Distribution Center Building o a water treatment facility o transformers o an ammonia storage tank o two water tanks o air-cooled condensers o a facility switchyard o other structures and infrastructure These components would be situated wholly or partly within Chapter 91 jurisdiction. The Project is proposed to be primarily located in the Salem Harbor DPA, which is reserved primarily for water-dependent-industrial use.The generating facility, including the associated landscaped berm, is proposed to occupy approximately 20 acres, including 19 acres of filled tidelands, entirely within the DPAB. The Project also includes the demolition and removal of the existing power plant and associated facilities, including fuel tanks, coal pile, lined water treatment basins, and buildings. The proponent plans to remediate the soil where necessary in connection with the redevelopment of the remainder of the site not occupied by the proposed generating facility. Draft license plans showing the proposed Project are appended to this Variance Decision and Written Determination at Attachment D. The Project is intended to "ensure a reliable supply of electricity in the Independent System Operator("ISO")New England grid as it provides needed new capacity in the Northeast Massachusetts ("NEMA")Boston load zone."9 The CCG facility uses efficient, state-of-the art equipment that will have significantly fewer environmental impacts than older power plants. As a result of the way electricity is introduced into the grid,the CCG facility would displace less efficiently-generated electricity by other facilities and thereby reduce annual regional emissions of CO2 by 1.3%,NOx by 10%, SOx by 8%, and mercury by 6%.10 The Application also cites the Massachusetts Clean Energy and Climate Action Plan for 2020 as the source for its contention that the displacement of the existing Salem Harbor and Somerset Station power plants by gas-fired plants.will result in a 1.2 metric net reduction of CO2 in 2020.11 The Project's quick-start capability allows for generation of electricity with very short start times and short minimum run times. This feature facilitates the integration of renewable energy sources into the s Application at Figure 2-1. 9 Application at 2-1. See also discussion,below. 10 Application at 2-6. 11 Id. Waterways File No. W1 3-3886-N Page 5 Salem Harbor Station Redevelopment Project Decision on Variance Request and Written Determination grid because it can compensate for a drop in generation (due for example to weather-related low wind speed) within a short time period. The alternative to achieve this same benefit.would be for a generating facility to run above demand in order to maintain reliability for times when the . renewable generation declines temporarily. III. Site History. The Project site covers an area of approximately 65 acres, including approximately 62.45 acres of land and 2.4 acres of watersheet(primarily associated with the discharge channel)on Salem Harbor. The Project site is occupied entirely by the existing Salem Harbor Station generating facility and associated buildings,oil tanks; coal storage areas, detention basins, marine terminal, parking areas and associated structures, as well as the National Grid switchyard. See Figure 2-1 of the Application. A...Jurisdictional Lines. Mapping of Salem Harbor performed by the United States Coast Survey in the mid-1800's serves as the basis for determining the extent of Chapter 91 jurisdiction at the site 12. These maps show that most of the site was historically tidal flats, with a peninsula of upland extending into the location of the existing power plant. A soundings map from this period establishes the historic low water mark along the seaward edge of the Project site. According to an overlay of the historic high and low water marks onto a current map of the site, the majority of the existing generating station is not within Chapter 91 jurisdiction, although the marine terminal and oil and coal storage areas are located almost entirely on filled tidelands (predominately filled private tidelands). Based on these jurisdictional lines, nearly 46 acres of the Project:site are within Chapter 91 jurisdiction, including approximately 2.4 acres of flowed tidelands and approximately.43.3 acres of filled tidelands. B. License Hg istory and Historic Use. The Chapter 91 license application provides a thorough review of the history of filling of the site and the applicable legislative authorizations and licenses.At least three authorizations for construction of wharves were granted prior to the establishment of the Chapter 91 licensing process in 1866. Since then, 29 licenses were issued for fill and structures at the site. A recent report concerning redevelopment of the site provides a brief site history.13 The site has had a long maritime history beginning with construction of wharves in 1800. Railways were extended to the site in the 1850s to transport goods inland from the docks. Coal became a significant product shipped to the site in the late 1800's/early 1900's until coal imports shifted to different cities, after which the site became dormant. Additional filling of mudflats occurred "The following maps were used:U.S.Coast Survey Topographical Survey No.303,completed in 1849-1850 and U.S. Coast Survey Hydrographic Survey No.284,completed in 1850-1851. In addition,a reconstructed shoreline,from a map prepared by Sidney Perley in 1933,was used to estimate Phillips Wharf,which existed prior to the Coast Survey mapping. 13 Salem Harbor Revitalization Task Force. "Pathway to Renewal'A Review of Site Remediation and Redevelopment Options for Salem Harbor Power Station,"June 15,2013("Task Force Report"). This report was issued pursuant to Section 42 of An Act relative to competitively priced electricity in the Commonwealth,signed into law by Governor Deval Patrick on August 3,2012. Waterways File No. W 13-3886-N Page 6 Salem Harbor Station Redevelopment Project Decision on Variance Request and Written Determination prior to the eventual construction of the first coal-fired generation unit on the site, in 1948. Operation of the generating facility began in 1951, with two additional units becoming operational in 1952 and 1958,respectively. In 1969, the generating units were converted from coal to oil. In 1978, a fourth generating unit was added. During the oil embargo of the early 1970's, the first three units were converted back to coal. With all four of its generating units operating, the facility generated 745 MW of electricity; however, two of the units were decommissioned in December 2011, leaving the current generating capacity with the two remaining units at approximately 580 MW.14 In October 2010, the previous owner of the,facility, Dominion Energy Salem Harbor, LLC ("Dominion"), notified ISO New England ("ISO-NE") that it would retire the remaining units in June 2014. Dominion had also entered into a consent order with Conservation Law Foundation("CLF") to shut down the facility according to this schedule.15 The site also includes an existing National Grid switchyard and electric transmission lines that are owned and operated independent of the generating facility but that serve to:transmit electricity generated by the plant. C. Designated Port Area. All but approximately 2.4 acres of the site are located within the Salem Harbor DPA. DPAs were designated by the Massachusetts Office of Coastal Zone Management ("CZM") in 1978 to "ensure that coastal development by water-dependent industry could be accommodated on a sustainable basis."16 There are currently eleven DPAs in the State, and they share attributes common to industrial port areas, including the necessary waterfront and backland infrastructure, as well as sufficient land area to accommodate industrial activity.17 In 1979, DEP developed regulations consistent with the CZM policy goals. When originally established, only the flowed tidelands portions of DPAs were subject to Chapter 91 licensing requirements; however the regulatory requirements for DPAs were extended onto filled tidelands when jurisdiction was extended onto filled tidelands in the wake of the Boston Waterfront decision.18 D. Municipal Harbor Plan. The Project site is also subject to a Municipal Harbor Plan/DPA Master Plan ("MHP/DPA Master Plan") approved by the Secretary of the Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs in 2008, for a 10 year period. The MHP/DPA Master Plan provides the Department with guidance and alternative requirements for use in licensing projects within a planning area.19 14 Task Force Report at 14-16. Is Comment letter submitted on July 8,2013 by Shanna Cleveland,Senior Attorney,CLF on behalf of CLF,Healthlink, and Clean Water Action. 16 Introduction to the 1994 Designation of Port Areas regulations at 301 CMR 25.00. "CZM,web site at ham://www.mass.gov/eea/agencies/czm/program-areas/port-and-harbor-planning/designated- ort-areas ). Is Boston Waterfront Dev. Corp. v. Commonwealth,378 Mass.629(1979) . 19 A municipal harbor plan may be voluntarily prepared by a community to further its waterfront planning goals. The municipal harbor planning process,including a DPA master plan component when appropriate,is managed by CZM on behalf of the EEA Secretary,who must formally approve each plan. Once approved,the Department must issue permits and licenses that are consistent with the MHP. 310 CMR 9.34(2) Waterways File No. W 13-3886-N Page 7 Salem Harbor Station Redevelopment Project Decision on Variance Request and Written Determination IV. Regulatory.Compliance Analysis and Related Findings. A. Project Compliance with Standards of the Waterways Regulations. This section reviews the applicable regulatory standards at 310 CMR 9.00, and whether the proposed Project would comply or would require a variance from those standards. This review concludes that a variance is necessary due to the prohibition on new fill and structures for a nonwater-dependent use in a DPA pursuant to 310 CMR 9.32(1)(b), discussed below. However, the proposed Project otherwise complies with all relevant performance standards of the Waterways Regulations. These include the standards to protect water related public rights and water dependent uses (310 CMR 9.35 to 9.36), design and construction-related standards (3 10 CMR 9.37 and 9.40), and the standards for nonwater-dependent use projects consisting of infrastructure facilities on tidelands (310 CMR-9.55). 1. Conformance with Municipal Zoning and Harbor Plans. The Application 20 reviews the consistency of the Project with the Salem MHP/DPA Master Plan. As noted in the Application, the MHP/DPA Master Plan envisions the ongoing energy production use of the existing power plant, and-supports the goal of reducing the environmental impacts of the existing plant, including reduced wastewater discharges to the harbor, improvements in combustion technology, and consideration of alternative fuels, including natural gas,to reduce air emissions. The Application also notes that CZM, in its letter regarding the Final Environmental Impact Report ("FEIR"), states that"the proposed project meets the intent and the substantive provisions of the Plan and the Secretary's approval and does not require an amendment to the Plan." Similarly, the City of Salem noted in its comments on the FEIR that the Project is consistent with the MHP/DPA Master Plan. While concluding that the Project is consistent with the MHP/DPA Master Plan; the Application also states, "To the extent that there is any lack of clarity regarding the Facility's consistency with the.Harbor Plan, the Applicant requests a variance from the provisions'of 310 CMR 9.34(2)." The Waterways Regulations at 310 CMR 9.34(2)(a)require that the Department.determine that a project in an area subject to a municipal harbor plan conforms to the plan to the degree applicable under the plan approval standards implemented by CZM under 301 CMR 23.00. Furthermore; In making this determination the Department shall take into account all relevant information in the public record, and shall act in accordance with the following provisions: 1. the Department shall consult with the planning board or other municipal body with lead responsibility for plan implementation, as appropriate and in accordance with the provisions of 310 CMR 9.11(1). In the event a written recommendation as to plan conformance is submitted by such board or other body, the Department shall presume that the requirement is met or not met in accordance with said 20 Application at 4-7 to 4-8. Waterways File No. WI 3-3886-N Page 8 Salem Harbor Station Redevelopment Project Decision on Variance Request and Written Determination recommendation, except upon a clear showing to the contrary and except as otherwise provided in 310 CMR 9.34(2)(a)2.; 2. the Department shall not find the requirement has been met if the project requires a variance or similar form of exemption from the substantive provisions of the municipal harbor plan, unless the Department determines the deviation to be de minimus or unrelated to the purposes of M.G.L. c-91 or [3]10 CMR 9.00...21 [Correction to erroneous citation in the original.] Pursuant to 310 CMR 9.34(2)(a), the Department consulted 22 with the Salem Department of Planning and Community Development (DPCD), the agency identified in the MHP as being responsible for its implementation . DPCD responded: It is the City's position that Footprint Power's proposed natural gas facility does meet the intent and substantive provision of the Salem Municipal Harbor Plan and the Secretary's Decision. In the Secretary's Decision, dated June 24, 2008, it states that"any proposed new use(s) for the site beyond energy production, marine industry, and temporary uses as defined in 310 CMR 9.02 will require a renewal or amendment to this Harbor Plan." Clearly, Footprint Power's proposal is an energy production use and therefore is consistent with our Harbor Plan.23 Based on the DPCD's written recommendation and CZM's concurrence with DPCD's written recommendation,the Department presumes that the Project is consistent with the MHP/DPA Master Plan,under 310 CMR 9.34 (2)(a)(1). Accordingly, the Department has determined that the Project conforms with the MHP/DPA Master Plan. and need not consider Applicant's conditional request for a variance from 310'CMR 9.34(2). 2. Protection of water related public rights and water-dependent uses. Since the Project does not involve new fill or structures in flowed tidelands, 310 CMR 9.35 is not applicable, except for 310 CMR 9.35(5), which specifies requirements related to public access facilities. The Project will provide appropriate public access from Derby Street along the landscaped berm surrounding the generating facility. Pursuant to 310 CMR 9.35(5), the proposed license conditions attached hereto will specify hours of public access, appropriate signage, and any restrictions on public access that may be allowed. 310 CMR 9.36 protects water-dependent uses at or near the Project site. Due to the proposed location of the generating facility on filled tidelands, and its location generally in the center of the property, it will not interfere with private access to littoral or riparian property and will not disrupt any water-dependent use at an off-site location in the vicinity of the Project site, in accordance with 310 CMR 9.36(1) and (2), respectively. 310.CMR 9.36(4) does not apply to the 21310 CMR 9.34(2) 22 Letter from Alex Strysky, DEP to Lynn Goonin Duncan and Frank Taormina,Salem Department of Planning and Community Development,dated May 21,2013. 23 Letter from Lynn G. Duncan,Salem Department of Planning and Community Development to Alex Strysky,DEP, dated May 22,2013. Waterways File No. W 13-3886-N Page 9 Salem Harbor Station Redevelopment Project Decision on Variance Request and Written Determination Project,.since the existing water-dependent use will be discontinued by the user, per 310 CMR 9.36(4)(b)• 310 CMR 9.36(5)(a) does not apply to the Project, since the Department did not receive a notice of-interest from a competing party pursuant to 310 CMR 9.36(5)(a). The Project, as conditioned herein, will also include reasonable arrangements to prevent commitments of space that would discourage water-dependent industrial activity on the site or elsewhere in the DPA. Pursuant to 310 CMR 9.36(5)(b)(1), the license will include a condition requiring removal of the structures associated with the proposed generating facility that cannot be converted to water-dependent industrial use.. The Project also does not include nonwater-dependent uses within the water- dependent use zone ("WDUZ"), which for this Project extends 100 feet landward from the present mean high water mark within the discharge channel.. The generating facility itself is:sited well outside the WDUZ. Only a portion of the seaward half of the berm, measuring approximately 12,900 s.£, is located within the WDUZ. The purpose of this berm is to serve as shore protection and to mitigate sea-level rise and, therefore, is water-dependent pursuant to 310 CMR 9.12(2)(a). The remaining provisions of 310 CMR 9.36 are concerned with marine industrial parks and supporting DPA uses, and are therefore not applicable to the Project. 3. Construction and dredging standards. Prior to license issuance, the proponent will be required to submit license plans signed and stamped by a Registered Professional engineer, along with other necessary certification, to document that the structures are structurally sound and comply with Massachusetts Building Code requirements for structures in a floodplain. The first floor of all buildings has been designed to be six feet above the existing 100 year flood zone to withstand a 100-year-storm event and to incorporate sea level rise 24. Therefore, the Project complies with 310 CMR9.37(1) and (2). In addition, the berm is located approximately 80 feet from the high water mark in the discharge channel and does not abut similar structures. The license includes a condition requiring modification or removal of the berm if the Department determines the berm has an adverse effect on the Project site or adjacent sites, per 310 CMR 9.37(3)(e). For these reasons, the Project complies with the requirements of 310 CMR 9.37(3). 4..Consistency with Coastal Zone Manaeement Policies. While requesting a variance from 310 CMR 9.54 in the event one is necessary, the Application 25 states that the Project complies generally with CZM policies, since it conforms with the Municipal Harbor Plan, and includes analysis of the Project's conformance with each of the relevant CZMProgram Policies. The Waterways Regulations at 3'10 CMR 9.54 require that all nonwater-dependent use projects in the coastal zone be consistent with CZM Program Policies. 310 CMR 9.54(2) provides, however, that"If the project is within an area covered by a municipal harbor plan, the Department shall presume this standard is met, in accordance with the provisions of 310 CMR 9.34(2)(b)3." The relevant provision, in turn, states: (b) If the project conforms to the municipal harbor plan the Department shall: 24 For further detail,see the DER Certificate at 9,Section 3.4 of the FEIR,and the FOR Certificate at 12. 25 Application at 4-9 to 4-18. _ Waterways File No. W 13-3886-N Page 10 Salem Harbor Station Redevelopment Project Decision on Variance Request and Written Determination 3. determine that the requirement of 310 CMR 9.54, governing consistency with CZM policies, has been met, if applicable, except upon a written showing by CZM for a project identified in 310 CMR 9.13(2)(a) for CZM participation that the project conflicts with CZM policy in effect when the license application was completed, in a manner that was not reasonably foreseeable at the'time of plan approval. Based on the Department's finding that the Project is consistent with the approved MHP/DPA Master Plan, the Department finds that the Project is consistent with CZM Program Policies pursuant to 310 CMR 9.54(2). The Department notes that CZM's letter on the FEIR, cited above,also expressed its view that the Project is consistent with the MHP/DPA Master Plan, and CZM has provided no written showing or otherwise expressed to the Department any opinion to the contrary. Accordingly;the Department need not consider Applicant's conditional request for a variance from 310 CMR 9.54. 5. Standards for Nonwater-dependent Infrastructure Facilities. The performance standards at 310 CMR 9.55 are intended to apply to infrastructure projects that provide electric and other infrastructure services directly to the public. The regulations recognize the industrial nature of such projects and therefore require public access,wherever appropriate, in a manner that is consistent with the operation of the infrastructure facility. The performance standards require each project to include mitigation measures to ensure that all feasible measures arc taken to avoid, minimize and mitigate the project's detrimental effects on water-related interests of the public, listed at 310 CMR 9.55(1)(a-f): a. the protection of maritime commerce, industry, recreation and associated public access; b.-the protection, restoration; and enhancement of living marine resources; c. the attainment of water quality goals; d. the reduction of flood and erosion-related hazards on lands subject to the 100-year storm event or to sea-level rise, especially those in damage-prone or natural buffer areas; e. the protection and enhancement of public views and visual quality in the natural and built environment of the shoreline; and f. the preservation of historic sites and districts, archeological sites, and other significant cultural resources near waterways. As described in the variance analysis below, the Project includes measures to attract water- dependent industrial uses to the available portions of the Project site and will provide, for the first time, an appropriate level of public access to the site in light of the industrial uses planned at the site. A public pathway, starting at a planned public information kiosk at the site entrance, will be constructed on the berm and will provide views from an elevated perspective. The Department notes that currently, there is,no public access allowed at the site, and that the planned pathway,could be extended to other parts of the site if designed in a manner compatible with the future uses in the DPA. Waterways File No. W13-3886-N Page 11 Salem Harbor Station Redevelopment Project Decision on Variance Request and Written Determination The proposed Project will have no direct impact to living marine resources since it does not propose to continue the intake/discharge of cooling water that is required of the existing power plant. The Project has been designed to minimize its stormwater and water quality impacts. As the Project site is a coastal site located in Land Subject to Coastal Storm Flowage, it,is not required to provide compensatory flood storage, but it will be required to comply with the Order of Conditions issued by the Salem Conservation Commission. The first floor of the proposed buildings has been elevated to six feet above the 100-year flood level and will also be protected from hazards related to sea level rise. The Application reviewed possible flooding scenarios related to ocean storms surge and flooding caused by wind- and wave- action and found that the Project would not have.a negative effect on adjacent properties. According to the proponent, the layout of the structures, landscaping, and the size and location of the berm, were designed to provide visual screening for the benefit of the residential neighborhood. The Application provided a set of visualizations of the proposed generating facility from various vantage points to illustrate the visual effect of the proposed facility and the screening measures compared to existing conditions. No historical or cultural resources are located at the Project site. The Department has not received any correspondence from the Massachusetts Historical Commission regarding this site. Based on the above analysis, the Department determines that he Project complies with the standards for nonwater-dependent infrastructure facilities at 310 CMR 9.55. B. Need for a Variance. In its Application,26 Footprint requests a variance from the provisions of 310 CMR.9.32, which prohibit certain non-water-dependent uses in a DPA. Any project to be licensed under the Waterways regulations must: a) be among the listed permittable uses of fill and structures found at 310 CMR 9.32; and b) meet all applicable performance standards in the Waterways regulations. Since the Project is proposed on filled tidelands in a DPA, it must be among the allowable uses listed at 3.10 CMR 9.32(1)(b). The only nonwater-dependent uses that may be licensed in a DPA are those listed at 310 CMR 9.32(1)(b)(4): a use to be licensed as part of a marine industrial park, a Supporting DPA Use, or a temporary use. The Project, however, would not meet any of these regulatory definitions.27 The Project is best considered a nonwater-dependent infrastructure facility. While special provisions are made for the siting and mitigation requirements of these facilities in the Waterways Regulations at 310 CMR 9.5 5, they are not among the permitted uses in a DPA. Therefore, the Department has determined that the Project requires a variance. C. Conclusion. While the Project requires a variance because it is categorically prohibited by 310 CMR 9.32,the Department has determined that the Project meets all other applicable standards, including those for nonwater-dependent use projects consisting of infrastructure facilities on tidelands, at 310 CMR 9.55. 26 Application at 5-5. 27 These terms are defined at 310 CMR 9.02. Waterways File No. W13-3886-N Page 12 Salem Harbor Station Redevelopment Project Decision on Variance Request and Written Determination V. Variance Analysis. Pursuantto 310 CMR 9.21(t),-the Commissioner may grant a variance for a project only"upon finding following a public hearing 28 that: a) there are no reasonable conditions or alternatives that would allow the project to . proceed in compliance with 310 CMR 9.00; b) the project includes mitigation measures to minimize interference with the public interests in waterways and that incorporates measures designed to compensate the public for any remaining detriment to such interests; and c) the variance is.necessary: 1. to accommodate an overriding municipal, regional, state or federal interest; or 2. to avoid•such restriction on the use of private property as to constitute unconstitutional taking without compensation; or 3. to avoid substantial hardship forthe continuation of a use or structure existing as of October 4, 1990, and for which no substantial change in use or substantial structural alteration has occurred since that date. In the following paragraphs,the,Department considers each of the above factors relevant to Footprint's request for a variance from 310 CMR 9.32.29 A. Alternatives Analysis. Because the need for a variance was considered in the FEIR, the Department must presume that the FEIR's description of alternatives satisfactorily describes alternative designs, locations; or construction methods which would achieve the purpose of the Project without the need for a variance, in accordance with 310 CMR 9.21(2)(a)2.30 As stated in the FEIR;the purpose of the Project is to supply electricity to the NEMA/Boston grid in 2016, by redeveloping old, fossil-fuel powered plants that have the necessary transmission infrastructure in place to accommodate the 2016 time frame,for generating electricity required by ISO-NE31 Using these criteria, the FEIR considered three alternative sites to the proposed Salem site. Two of the alternative sites, Somerset Station and Brayton Point Station, both in Somerset,MA, are located in Designated Port Areas and would similarly require a variance from the Waterways Regulations. While the Brayton Point site meets many of the criteria for the Project, significant environmental improvements were recently completed at the generating facility, and the site is not considered-a candidate for redevelopment32. In addition,Brayton Point is not located in the NEMA/Boston load zone and therefore has offered less market opportunity. Nor was the Somerset Station site considered feasible, both because it is not near a gas pipeline, and because 28 On June 12,2013,the Department held a public hearing on this matter at the Bentley Elementary School in Salem., 29 The factors at 310 CMR 9.21(1)(c)2.and 3.are not relevant to Footprint's request. 30 The presumption is required by 310 CMR 9.21(2)(c),provided,however,that"the Commissioner may require any modification of the project reasonably within the scope of an alternative within the final EIR" 31 Add citation here 32 Subsequent to the issuance of the FEIR Certificate,it was reported in a Reuters,October 8,2013 article that Brayton Point facility will be closed as of May, 2017(after the ISO/NE deadline of June 2016 for energy production from the Footprint Power facility). Waterways File No. WI 3-3886-N Page 13 Salem Harbor Station Redevelopment Project Decision on Variance Request and Written Determination . it did not:appear to have the support of the community for redevelopment into another generating facility. The third alternative site, the Mt. Tom.Station in Holyoke, MA, was also.considered infeasible,because it is not near a.gas pipeline and would require considerable improvements to the transmission infrastructure.to accommodate the proposed facility. _In addition, it, too, recently completed environmental.improvements and would be an unlikely candidate for redevelopment. Furthermore, allthree sites are located outside of the NEMA/Boston load zone and, therefore, are not well-suited for the purpose of supplying electricity to the load zone.33 The FEIR34 also considered alternative site layouts and facility designs, but these were considered infeasible. On-site alternatives that would not require a variance include: locating the Project on the portion of the Project site that does not contain filled tidelands (and would therefore not require a Chapter 91 authorization); using a cooling method that requires large volumes of;water to be withdrawn and discharged to a waterway; or receiving fuel by marine transportation:;,: Pursuant to 310 CMR 9.12(2)(c), the latter two alternatives would be presumed to be water-dependent if the proposed location was approved by the Energy Facilities Siting . Board ("EFSB").35 These three on-site alternatives are reviewed in more detail, below. 1. Alternative on-site locations outside of Chapter 91 jurisdiction. The Project site includes an area of approximately 19 acres that lies landward of the historic high water mark and is outside of Chapter 9,1 jurisdiction. The proposed generating facility occupies approximately 2.4 acres of this non jurisdictional area. Were the proposed generating facility to be constructed entirely in this area,.:it-would not require a variance (or even a Chapter 91 license). However, all but 7.5 acres of this upland area are already occupied and will remain so during the time period in which the Project-must be constructed to meet the ISO-NE June,-2016 deadline for becoming operational. Currently; this area is occupied by the existing power plant, switchyard, and parking areas. The switchyard is operated by National Grid, which holds easements over the switchyard and subsurface and overhead transmission line within this area. Because the existing power plant must remain in operation until June, 2014, followed by a period of demolition in preparation for future construction of the new facility, insufficient time would remain to construct the new plant in the locus of the existing facility in time to begin genetating electricity by the ISO-NE June, 2016 deadline. Therefore, construction of the Project on the non-tidelands portion of the site is not a feasible option. 2. Continued use of a wet-cooling system. a. Repowering of the existing plant using once-through cooling. The Applicant considered' reusing the existing generating facility, but switching from oil and coal as the fuel source, to gas. There are two options for doing so: existing boilers at the power plant could be refueled to burn 33 FEI R at 6-3—6-5 - 34FEIRat6-6 3s 3210 CMR 9.12(2)(1). - Waterways File No. W 13-3886-N Page 14 Salem Harbor Station Redevelopment Project Decision on Variance Request and Written Determination natural gas rather than oil or, in addition to the refueling of the boilers,the existing steam turbines could be used with new gas turbines to create a combined cycle unit. Such a facility could continue to employ once-through cooling,'as th6 current power plant does which requires large volumes of water to be withdrawn from the harbor and discharged at elevated temperatures into the discharge channel. Reuse of the existing power plant in this way would not require a variance because a) it is entirely located outside of Chapter 91 jurisdiction, and b) the facility and any ancillary structures and uses within jurisdiction would be presumed to be water-dependent industrial if the facility received any necessary approvals from the EFSB. The Applicant explained that neither option would be an efficient means of generating electricity, according to industry standards, and would not provide the environmental benefits of the proposed plant. In particular, the impacts to Salem Harbor associated with the intake and discharge of large volumes of water would continue. In addition to the thermal pollution of the discharge,the intake involves impacts to marine organisms due to impingement and entrainment. Finally;the existing building with its tall stacks would remain as a visual impacti36 b. Use of water-cooling technology at new facility. The Project could continue the exclusive use of water-cooling, as the current facility does, and continue the existing significant impact to Salem Harbor that an air-cooled facility would avoid. The Applicant considered two options that involve the use of water for cooling the generators in the proposed facility. The first option is once-through cooling, discussed above. Once-through cooling would require large volumes of water to be withdrawn from a water body and could make the facility water-dependent if approved by the EFSB.37 The significant impacts to the Harbor would remain with this option and, according to the Applicant; the permitting complexity of a new intake/discharge would affect the Project's ability to meet the 2016 ISO-NE capacity requirement.38 The second option would include the use of wet evaporative cooling, which employs cooling towers that would be filled with water drawn from either the City of Salem water supply or treated wastewater from the adjacent South Essex Sewerage District ("SESD") treatment facility. Evaporative cooling does not involve a discharge as once-through cooling does; instead, according to the Applicant; approximately 2,663,200 gallons of water per day would be drawn from one of the water sources and evaporated during the cooling process. While this process eliminates the thermal discharge into Salem Harbor, as well as the impingement and entrainment impacts associated with the intake of cooling water, the use of this method would not make the project water-dependent, since it would not require withdrawal of large volumes of water from a water body.39 3. Water-borne fuel delivery. 310 CMR 9.12(2)(c) also provides that a generating facility could be presumed to be water-dependent if it is dependent on marine transportation(and if the facility is approved by the EFSB). In the case of the proposed facility, this would require that the power plant continue to receive fuel deliveries by water-borne vessels. But this alternative would 36 Letter from Lauren Liss,counsel for the Applicant,to Alex Strysky, DEP,dated July 1,2013 37 310 CMR 9.12(2)(c). 3e FEIR at 6-6. 39 310 CMR 9.12(2). Waterways File No. W 13-3886-N Page 15 Salem Harbor Station Redevelopment Project Decision on Variance Request and Written Determination involve the delivery by vessel of liquefied natural gas ("LNG") to the site. However, according to-the Applicant, apart from communityopposition to the delivery of LNG to the site, the necessary storage and gasification infrastructure would potentially double the area devoted to the power plant,making the remainder of the site unavailable for redevelopment for other water- dependent industrial uses, and would significantly increase the cost of the Project. B. Mitigation Measures Analysis. As noted,proponents of projects seeking a variance must include"mitigation measures to minimize interference with the public interests in waterways" and incorporate "measures designed to compensate the public for any remaining detriment to such interests."40 The Project is located on filled private and Commonwealth tidelands in a DPA. In such areas, the primary public interest is for fill or structures to be used for water- dependent industrial purposes or accessory uses. In addition, this public interest includes uses to provide public pedestrian access and uses for certain other limited purposes.42,43 The primary impact of the Project-is the reduction of the area within the DPA that is available for water- dependent industrial use. Mitigation measures can include both design measures undertaken by the proponent to minimize interference by limiting the area of the nonconforming use and associated impacts, as well as measures undertaken by the Applicant to facilitate future water- dependent industrial use of the site. The primary form of mitigation offered by the Project involves the preparation of the unaffected part of the site for future water-dependent industrial uses within the same timeframe as the development of the proposed Project. The Department anticipates these substantial actions will enhance the site's potential for water-dependent industrial use. This mitigation includes: • demolition of all structures rendered obsolete by the shutdown of the existing power plant—which occupy nearly all of the tidelands in the DPA—approximately two to three years sooner than could be required by regulation; • . demolition and remediation of the obsolete power plant—which is located outside of Chapter 91 jurisdiction—in the same time frame as the accelerated demolition of structures located within Chapter 91 jurisdiction. • remediation of contaminated soil at the Project to a level that will enable permissible water-dependent industrial uses allowed in the DPA. • provision and long-term maintenance of an engineered concrete platform suitable for use by mobile cranes and as a roll-on, roll-off facility for use by future water-dependent industrial facilities; • a commitment to continue working cooperatively with the City as a co-applicant in the City's Notice of Project Change#14234/#14937("NPC") port redevelopment effort in order to reach a wharfing agreement giving the City long-term access to an existing dock on the Project site. 90310 CMR 9.21. 91310 CMR 9.32(1)(b)(1) - 42 310 CMR 9.32(1)(b)(3) 43 The Department has generally limited public access in DPAs to appropriately designed and located pedestrian walkways and related facilities that do not conflict with current or future industrial use of the site. Waterways File No. W13-3886-N Page 16 Salem Harbor Station Redevelopment Project Decision on Variance Request and Written.Determination During its review of the license application and variance request, the Department identified additional mitigation measures that the Applicant will be required to"undertake to enhance`` further the site's potential for water-dependent industrial use. These additional mitigation measures include: • a commitment to construct or provide funding of up to $180,000 for improvements to the run-off pond revetment, as identified in the City of Salem's Notice of Project Change #1423 4/#1493 7("NPC"); • marketing of the site to attract new water-dependent industrial uses • Prior to commencement of construction of the facility, the Licensee, at its sole cost and expense, subject to the Department's.prior approval, shall grant an irrevocable restriction to the City of Salem prohibiting any use of approximately nine (9) acres of non- jurisdictional land, including all the`waterfrontland-in the non-tidelands portion of the site, other than those uses expressly allowed under the Salem Municipal Harbor Plan's DPA Master Plan, as it may be amended. Said restriction shall run with the land for a term of years equal to the length of the Chapter 91 license term; including any renewals or other extensions of the license term. Provided, however,that if the maximum term for such restriction allowable,under law,is less than the required term herein, then Licensee shall establish the required restriction for the maximum term allowable under law and it shall be a further condition of this license that Licensee renew the required restriction prior to its expiration as necessary in order achieve the required term herein. The Licensee shall submit a proposed restriction for the Department's review and approval no later than sixty (60) days after the effective date of this license, and shall implement said restrictions only after written approval from the Department in accordance with any conditions contained therein. 1. Minimizing impact by constructing a facility with a smaller footprint on tidelands. The Applicant provided a rationale for the design and layout of the various components of the facility relative to one another. The proposed layout reflects efforts to minimize noise and visual impacts to the surrounding neighborhood,maintain a compact'footprint that minimizes the footprint of the Project on tidelands in the DPA, and achieve the Project purpose. The Applicant reviewed alternative Project layouts that, while not eliminating the need for a variance, would reduce the footprint of the facility on filled tidelands in the DPA. Options for reducing the footprint on filled tidelands include moving a portion of the plant into the area of the site where there are no filled tidelands, building a more compact facility on tidelands, or building a smaller plant. As described below, the location and orientation of the facility as proposed by the Applicant sought to minimize adverse effects of the facility while still achieving the Project purpose. One option for minimizing the area of tidelands occupied by the proposed facility would involve moving its layout toward the northern part of the site. The National Grid switchyard and subsurface transmission lines are located in this part of the site and provide important existing transmission infrastructure that is needed in connection with both the existing and proposed Waterways File No. WI3-3886-N Page 17 Salem Harbor Station Redevelopment Project Decision on Variance Request and Written Determination generating facilities.. Reuse of such existing infrastructure was a primary reason for selecting the proposed site. The required ongoing presence of this existing infrastructure means that insufficiemt space exists in.this area to construct the-Project. Nor is physically splitting the facility, so.that elements of the plant,are located on either side of the National Grid easements, a feasible alternative, according to the Applicant,for construction and operational reasons. In particular,the,design of the facility has been planned for optimal interaction of its components and to lessen visual and noise impacts of the facility. Furthermore, splitting the facility in this way would require the use of part of the site currently being used by the existing power plant, and that area of the site would not be ready for construction within the timeframe necessary for the new facility to be generating electricity by the ISO-NE June, 2016 deadline45. The Applicant also contends that a smaller power plant is not feasible for several reasons 46 First, while a�smaller output may meet the minimum needed generating capacity forecasted by ISO-NE; theApplicant began planning for the facility prior to the ISO-NE FCA-7 auction where its bid for the;;.entire output was accepted, even though it exceeded the minimum. The Applicant believes thatadditional capacity will eventually be needed when other facilities retire, and the power generated at this site will be available to meet that demand. The Applicant also notes that smaller plants tend to be"peaker" plants that generate electricity only when necessary. According to the Applicant, a peaker plant at this site would be too small to justify a new gas pipeline, so it would rely on oil as the fuel source, which would have fewer air quality benefits. In addition, peaker plants produce electricity at a higher cost, which is passed alongto ratepayers. 2. Site redevelopment/demolition and remediation. The Applicant proposes to demolish nearly all of the buildings on site and assess/remediate areas of soil contamination, consistent with the Massachusetts Contingency Plan ("MCP"), to make the site suitable for Designated Port Area redevelopment. The timing of this demolition and clean up and the extent to which the property owner would be required.to do so regardless of the current Project proposal was addressed in detail by the Task Force and raised in a comment letter received by the Department during the comment period for this Application. According to the Waterways Regulations, licenses expire if the fill or structures are abandoned for five consecutive years or more.47 Upon expiration, revocation or nullification of a license, and upon written notice to and at the direction of the Department, the licensee must remove all structures authorized in the license above the high water mark, if the Department determines that continued existence would have a significant adverse effect on the public interests served by Chapter 91.48 All of the structures associated with the existing plant are located above the high water mark. To date;the Department has yet to exercise this provision to require structures to be removed. So, while the Department could in theory exercise this regulation to require the removal of existing structures on filled tidelands, the timeframe in which to do so would likely 46 FEIR at 6-2. 45 Add cite 46 Letter from Lauren Liss,counsel for the Applicant,to Alex Strysky, DEP,dated July 1,2013 - 47310 CMR 9.25. 98 310 CMR 9.27 Waterways File No. W 13-3886-N Page 18 Salem Harbor Station Redevelopment Project Decision on Variance Request and Written Determination be substantially greater than the Applicant proposes,49 and in any event would not include existing structures on the upland portion of the site. Significantly,the upland area includes the existing power plant. The'proposed Project,however, would remove all of the oil tanks not needed to maintain the operability of the existing facility until its closure in June 2014, in order to make room for the proposed plant and to provide a staging area for construction. The Applicant will also be required to demolish any remaining oil tanks and the existing power plant by December 31, 2016. The Applicant intends to remediate the site to appropriate MCP standards, and represented at the Chapter 91 public hearing that it will do so by December 31, 2016. The Department will require the proponent to complete necessary remediation and file a Response Action Outcome or other appropriate closure document with the Department's Bureau of Waste Site Cleanup by December 31, 2016. 3. Construction/repair/maintenance of WDI Infrastructure. During the Department's review of the license Application,the Applicant confirmed that an approximately$3,000,000 engineered concrete platform; suitable for use by mobile cranes and as a roll-on,roll-off facility, will be installed for use by future water-dependent industrial uses occupying the site: The Department will require the Applicant to ensure that, upon completion of the Project, the engineered concrete platform, suitable for use by mobile cranes and as a roll-on, roll-off facility will be in good working order for future DPA users on the Project site. The Applicant shall maintain the crane during the license term. The Applicant will construct or provide funding,separate from the provision of the engineered concrete platform described above, of up to $180,000 for improvements to the run-off pond revetment;as identified in the City of Salem's NPC#14234/#14937.In addition, the Department will require that the Applicant construct for future DPA users a vehicular access way of sufficient width in good condition on the site to allow access from either Fort Avenue or Derby Street to the waterfront portion of the site and its future laydown areas. The Applicant will be required to maintain the vehicular access way in good working order for the term of the License. The Department believes that ensuring that this type of infrastructure is present and available for future uses will attract water-dependent industrial uses to the site. 4. Marketing. In addition to the demolition and remediation activities to be performed to prepare the site, the Applicant will be required to actively market the site for water-dependent industrial use. This will include the development of a pro-forma available to prospective tenants/owners and advertising the availability of the site in local and regional media, as well as trade journals of wide circulation. 5. Dedication of non-tidelands areas to DPA—compatible use. Approximately 20 acres of the Project site in the DPA, including the location of the present power plant, are not within Chapter 49 Most structures on filled tidelands at the site,except for structures to be reused by the new facility or those necessary for the continued operation of the existing plant,will be demolished by the Applicant as part of the preparation of the site for the construction of the new generating facility. Waterways File No. W 13-3886-N Page 19 Salem Harbor Station Redevelopment Project Decision on Variance Request and Written Determination 91 jurisdiction. Without the requirements for authorizing structures through Chapter 91 lice'n'sing, uses that.are incompatible with the DPA could be sited in this location. Conflicts between water-dependent industrial uses and adjacent or nearby incompatible uses, such as housing, could create pressure on themaritime use to change:its operations to reduce the impact on the incompatible use The Department notes that, historically, this type of pressure makes it more difficult for a water-dependent industrial use to maintainits unfettered operational needs and frequently undermines the ability of marine industries to stay in business. The Applicant shall, at its sole cost and expense, subject to the Department's prior approval, provide an irrevocable restriction to the City of Salem prohibiting any use of approximately nine (9) acres of non jurisdictional land, including all the waterfront land in the non-tidelands portion of the site, other than those uses expressly allowed under the Salem Municipal Harbor Plan's DPA Master Plan, as it maybe amended. Said restriction shall run with the land for a term of years equal to the length of the Chapter 91 license tern, including any renewals or other extensions of the license term. Provided, however; that if the maximum term for such restriction allowable under law is less than the required term herein, then Licensee shall establish the required restriction for the maximum'.term allowable under law and it shall be a further condition of this License that Licensee renew the required restriction prior to its expiration as necessary in order achieve the required term"herein. The Licensee shall submit a proposed restriction for the Department's review and approval no later than sixty (60) days after the effective date of this license, and shall implement said restrictions only after written approval from the Department in accordance with any conditions contained therein. C. Necessity for a Variance/Overriding Municipal, Regional, State, Federal Interest Analysis. The overriding public interest in this case involves the reuse of the existing power plant site by a new generating facility that will provide a reliable source for the needed electricity to the NEMA/Boston load zone, and that also meets the.intent of the legislation to redevelop•the site so that an important economic use of the'site is maintained once the existing power plant ceases operations in June 2014. In addition,the Department believes that the Project will attract new water-dependent industrial uses to this DPA which has been used.exclusively until recent years by the existing power plant. 1. Legislature identified a public interest in redevelopment of site. On August 3, 2012, Governor Patrick signed into law Chapter 209 of the Acts of 2012,An Act relative to competitively priced electricity in the Commonwealth (the Act). Two sections of the Act are of particular relevance in establishing the public interest served by this project. Section 40 of the Act required the Massachusetts Department of Public Utilities ("DPU")to "investigate the need for additional capacity inthe NEMA region within the next 10 years" and furthermore stated that "Such a demonstration shall be conclusive proof of the need for additional electric generating capacity in the NEMA load zone." Section 42 of the Act established a task force, discussed below, to develop a plan for the revitalization of the site in recognition, in part, of its ongoing importance in maintaining existing jobs and municipal tax revenue. Section 42 of the Act specifically addressed the upcoming decommissioning of the existing power plant by establishing a"Plant Revitalization Task Force" ("Task Force")that is to "implement a plan, adopt rules and regulations and recommend necessary legislative action to Waterways File No. W 13-3886-N Page 20 Salem Harbor Station Redevelopment Project Decision on Variance Request and Written Determination ensure the full deconstruction, remediation, and redevelopment or repowering of the Salem Harbor Power Station by December 31, 2016." The plan of action was to include "(i) the full deconstruction of the existing facility; including financing,if necessary,of such.deconstruction; (ii) remediation of environmental issues on the site; (iii) maintenance of jobs and preexisting municipal tax revenue associated with the site;(iv) ensuring the responsible parties are held liable for costs of environmental remediation; and (v) additional mitigation efforts necessary for the redevelopment or repowering of the site." The Task Force identified and considered a range of options, including the proposal by Footprint Power, for meeting the stated goals of the legislation, and issued its report on June 15, 2013. Most of the recommendations offered by the Task Force are directly related to the , implementation of the Project as a way of revitalizing the site and achieving the redevelopment and other economic goals of the legislation. Among its recommendations,Recommendation47 of the Task Force states: "Without formally endorsing the present owner's plans the Task Force supports repowering the Salem Harbor Power Station with a new-generating facility as the best means to ensure full demolition and remediationof the'site by December 311-2016." 2. Project will help reestablish WDI use of the DPA. As discussed above, the site has been used for energy generation almost exclusively since the DPA was designated as such in 1978. The proposed Project maintains that historical use while facilitating the use of the remainder of the DPA for water-dependent industrial uses. The situation at this site is unique in that the retirement of the existing power plant in June 2014 will result in the cessation of almost all industrial activity within the DPA and render approximately 95% of the land area within the DPA inactive. Other than approximately 3 acres located within the DPA that contain the Salem Wharf property (recently purchased by the City from a prior power plant owner), residences along Blaney Street, and a portion of a marina, the entire DPA land area is in use by the power plant and has been since the DPA was established. Redevelopment of the DPA for water-dependent industrial uses faces challenges and constraints that are outlined in a recent Site Assessment Study that examined the feasibility of various reuse options for the project site.50 Among the Conclusions of the Site Assessment Study are that the site remediation costs are a burden to the redevelopment of the site; the limited rail and road access to the site are barriers to redevelopment by water-dependent industrial uses and other uses; market analysis suggests that a phased approach to redevelopment is more realistic than a single substantial development; and that the existing infrastructure at the site makes it particularly suited to a new generating facility.51 As contemplated by the Site Assessment Study, the proposed Project can serve as a catalyst for redevelopment of the site. The Department also believes that the redevelopment of the Project site, consistent with the goals of the legislature, will be accomplished primarily by water- dependent industrial uses that are appropriately sited in the DPA. 50"A Site Assessment Study on Potential land Use Options at the Salem Harbor Power Station Site"dated January, 2012. Prepared for the City of Salem by Jacobs,Sasaki Associates,LaCapra Associates,and Robert Charles Lesser Co. 51 Site Assessment Study at pp.101-102. Waterways File No. WI 3-3886-N Page 21 Salem Harbor Station Redevelopment Project Decision on Variance Request and Written Determination 3. Project will provide electricity determined to be necessary for grid reliability in NEMA. The 1997 Restructuring Act left electricity generation to market_forces. Footprint's bid to supply electricity was accepted byISO-NE, a private non-profit entity which is responsible for managing the electricity grid in this region and ensuring its reliability, ,The primary means by which ISO ensures reliability is through the Forward Capacity Market("FCM") and annual auctions ("Forward Capacity Auction" or"FCA") through which ISO purchases capacity resources projected to be necessary in a three year forward time frame.52,53 In its most recent FCA, ISO accepted.Footprint's bid and closed the auction.54 Subsequently, ISO stated that without the generating capacity associated with the proposed generating facility, "there would be A shortage of capacity in the NEMA/Boston capacity zone for the 2016 through 2017 commitment period. In other words, without Footprint, the NEMA/Boston capacity zone would it not meet reliability standards...."55 ISO also noted that although there are "backstop actions that . the ISO can take,if available, if the Forward Capacity Market does not produce sufficient resources,"reliance on these tools in the first instance "distorts market signals and would produce a lesssecure system in the future."56 Chapter 209 of the Acts of 2012 required DPU to determine whether additional future capacity is needed in NEMA/Boston. On March 15, 2013, DPU issued order 12-77 which concluded that "absent Footprint, there is a need in NEMA/Boston for additional capacity resources beginning in the 2016/2017 capacity year. Furthermore, as described above, the generating facility will be constructed to have quick-start capability;4acilitating the integration of renewable energy generation by solar and wind energy facilities. 52 Letter dated August 9,2013,from Raymond W.Hepper and Kevin W.Flynn of ISO New England, Inc.,to Alex Strysky of DEP,p.2 53Accordingto ISO's 2012 Markets Report,Section 3.4(page 77), "The Forward Capacity Market is a long-term market designed to procure the resources needed to meet the region's local and systemwide resource adequacy requirements. It does this by compensating generation and demand resources for fixed capacity costs not covered through the other markets.The FCM is designed to send price signals to attract new capacity resources(e.g., generation, imports,and demand resources)and maintain existing resources to meet the region's resource adequacy standard. To allow enough time to construct new capacity resources, Forward Capacity Auctions(FCAs) are held each year 40 months in advance of when the capacity resources must provide service, called the capacity commitment period (CCP). Both new and existing capacity resources that qualify for an FCA can participate in the auction" ISO's 2012 Markets Report is available at http://www.iso- ne.com/markets/mkt anlvs rets/annl mkt rots/2012/amr12 final 051513.pdf 54 Massachusetts Department of Public Utilities, Order issued for D.P.U.12-77 on March 15,2013 55 Letter dated August 9,2013,from Raymond W.Hepper and Kevin W.Flynn of ISO New England, Inc.,to Alex Strysky of DEP,p.4. 56 Letter dated August 9,2013,from Raymond W. Hepper and Kevin W.Flynn of ISO New England;Inc.,to Alex Strysky of DEP,p.5. Waterways File No. W 13-3886-N Page 22 Salem Harbor Station Redevelopment Project Decision on Variance Request and Written Determination D. Variance Findings. I. Finding Relative to Alternatives Analysis When the need for a variance is addressed in a final EIR, the Commissioner must presume that the description of alternatives contained in the final EIR satisfies the regulatory requirement to describe "alternative designs, locations,.or construction methods which would achieve the purpose of the project without the need for a variance...."57' 58 The scope of alternatives contained in the FIR was appropriate given the Project purpose and included consideration of an off-site and several on-site alternatives that would not require a variance, but were deemed infeasible. With respect to alternatives relying on continuing marine delivery of oil or coal as fuel, or wet-cooling of the generating facility, these alternatives lack the environmental benefits of the proposed facility. Therefore, the Department finds that there are no reasonable conditions or alternatives that would allow the Project to proceed in compliance with 310 CMR 9.00. 2. Finding, Relative to Mitigatiorr Measures Analysis. The.Project will provide significant mitigation to ensure that the remaining DPA area will be used for water-dependent industrial uses. This is particularly important with the pending closure of the existing facility, which represents the predominant, current water-dependent industrial use of the DPA. The Department finds that the Project includes mitigation measures adequate to minimize interference with the public interests in waterways and incorporates measures designed to compensate.the public for any remaining potential detriment to such interests. These include significant measures to prepare the site for redevelopment by water-dependent industrial uses, attract such uses to the site, and maintain most of the DPA land area for water-dependent industrial use. 3. Finding Relative to Necessity/Overriding Interest Analysis. The Project serves an important public purpose, as reflected by the Legislature's recognition of the importance of the site and by helping to ensure a reliable energy supply in the NEMA/Boston region. The redevelopment Project, while not water-dependent, is an industrial use compatible with typical DPA uses and will facilitate the redevelopment of the remainder of the DPA from the historical energy production use to new forms of water-dependent industry appropriate for the site. Therefore, the Department finds that the Project is necessary to accommodate an overriding public interest. VI. Decision. Based on the discussion above, the Department finds that the Applicant has satisfied the requirements for obtaining a variance pursuant to 310 CMR 9.21. Therefore, the Department hereby varies the requirements of 310 CMR 9.32 to allow a new nonwater-dependent use on filled tidelands within a Designated Port Area, in accordance with the terms and conditions of this decision. 57 310 CMR 9.21(2)(c) 58 310 CMR 9.21(2)(a)(2) Waterways File No. WI3-3886-NPage 23 Salem Harbor Station Redevelopment Project Decision on Variance Request and Written Determination VII. Findings. 1. The Department determines that the use of private tidelands for a gas-fired generating facility is a nonwater-dependent use pursuant to 9:12(4). Given that the project does not consist entirely of water-dependent uses, the Department has processed the application as a nonwater-dependent use project in accordance with 310 CMR 9.12(1). 2. The Department determines that relevant documentation regarding compliance with the Massachusetts Environmental Policy Act (EEA No.14937), planning board receipt of application, and zoning certificate, have been provided. 3. The Department determines that the required public notice was published.by the Applicant on May 22, 2013in the Environmental Monitor and on May 24, 2013 in the Salem News. A public hearing was held at Bentley Elementary School in Salem on June 12, 2013. Public comments at the hearing were generally favorable to the Project. Concerns about the effect of sea level rise were raised;°and the proponent responded that the ground floor of the buildings has been elevated to six feet above the 100 year flood elevation. The Department received letters of support for the project from'the Representative Keenan and Senator Lovely, who represent Salem in the Legislature, and the City of Salem. Several letters were received from Salem residents who do not believe a nonwater-dependent use should be allowed in the DPA. A letter submitted by the Conservation Law Foundation, also on behalf of Clean Water Action, Healthlink, and group of Salem residents, questioned whether the Project qualifies for a variance. The CLF letter contendedahat the.Project does not serve an overriding public interest, is an inappropriate use for the DPA; and that there are reasonable alternative sites for the facility. The CLF letter also stated that-the Project is inconsistent with the MHP/DPA Master Plan and the state's Greenhouse Gas policy-goals. 4. 4. The Department incorporates by reference the findings in Section VI above, and determines that the Project, as conditioned, complies with all other applicable standards of the Waterways Regulations, including the special standards for nonwater-dependent infrastructure facilities at 310 CMR 9.55. Furthermore, no overriding detriment to a public interest has been identified to overcome the presumption that the Project serves a proper public purpose in accordance with 310 CMR 9.31(3). Therefore; the Department determines that the proposed Project serves a proper public purpose that provides greater public benefit than detriment to the public's rights in said tidelands. VIII. Section 61 Findings. These Findings for the Salem Harbor Station Redevelopment Project (EEA# 14937) have been prepared in accordance with the provisions of M.G.L. c. 30; Section 61 and 301 CMR .11.00. On May 17, 2013 the Secretary of the Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs issued a Final EIR Certificate stating that the Project's Final Environmental Impact Report , dated April 1, 2013, complied with the MEPA statute and regulations. Waterways File No. W 13-3886-N Page 24 Salem Harbor Station Redevelopment Project Decision on Variance Request and Written Determination Construction of the proposed gas-fired generating facility has the potential to impact the use of the Salem Harbor Designated Port Area DPA for water-dependent industrial use. The Department has reviewed the MEPA documents and the documents submitted in connection with the application for a license. The Applicant performed an alternatives analysis to minimize impacts of the Project and has proposed mitigation to prepare the remainder of the site for reuse by water-dependent industrial use, provide and maintain infrastructure for water- dependent industrial use, and to take measures to attract such uses to the site. The Project will also dedicate non-jurisdictional areas to water-dependent industrial use, partly compensating for the use of tidelands in the DPA for nonwater-dependent use. Based upon its review, the Department finds that implementation of the terms and conditions of this proposed license constitute all feasible measures to avoid damage to the environment and will minimize and mitigate such damage to the maximum extent practicable. In making this finding, the Department has considered reasonably foreseeable climate change.impacts, including additional greenhouse gas emissions; and effects;such as predicted•sea level rise. As listed in the . Certificate on the FEIR, implementation of the.mitigation measures with respect to greenhouse gas emissions includes use of combined cycle natural gas turbines; $4.million in CO2 allowances for RGGI offsets; solar PV array to offset 175 tpy GHG emissions; design of the Administrative Building for LEED Certification at the Platinum level; and designing the Operations Building to include the use of a high albedo roof, geothermal heat pumps, increased insulation, climate control, and water conserving fixtures.. In addition, as noted in the FEIR Certificate, GHG commitments will also include a commitment to analyze GHG emissions associated with future redevelopment of the site and to provide a Certification to the MEPA Office indicating that all of the measures proposed to mitigate GHG emissions, or measures that will achieve equivalent reductions, are included in the Project.59 IX. Conclusion. On the basis of the foregoing analysis;the Department.will approve the proposed structures and uses described herein, as shown on the plans submitted with the application, and attached hereto at Attachment D, and as shall be modified and delineated on the final license plans in accordance with the terms of this Decision on Variance Request and Written Determination. This Decision on Variance Request and Written Determination is subject to the attached Special Conditions and General Conditions, set forth in Attachment A and Attachment B, respectively, to be carried out by the Applicant. These Special Conditions will be included, in substantially the same form, along with the standard conditions, with the final Chapter 91 Waterways license to be issued pursuant hereto. This Decision on Variance Request and Written Determination,including the attached Special Conditions, is subject to appeal as described in more detail in Attachment C, on pages 33-34. The Department will grant a Chapter 91 Waterways license, pursuant to the 59 Additional detail is set forth in Applicant's"Revised Draft Section 61 Findings;'an attachment to correspondence from Lauren A.Liss,on behalf of Applicant,to Richard K.Sullivan,Secretary, EOEEA,dated June 10,2013 and filed with the MEPA Office. Waterways File No. W 13-3886-N Page 25 Salem Harbor Station Redevelopment Project Decision on Variance Request and Written Determination procedure outlined herein, if no appeal is filed within 21 days of the issuance of this Decision on Variance Request and Written Determination. Please contact Ben Lynch at (617)292-5615 if you have any questions. THIS DETERMINATION IS ISSUED BY THE DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION ON THE 1st DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2013. Kenneth . Kimmell Commissioner Cc: Representative Keenan Senator Lovely Mayor Kimberley Driscoll, City of Salem Salem City Council Salem Conservation Commission Salem Planning Board Salem Harbormaster Karen Adams, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Bruce Carlisle, CZM Bob Boeri, CZM Shanna.Cleveland, CLF Jeffrey;Brooks, 14 Webb St., Salem 01970 Linda Haley, 43 Turner Street, Salem, MA 01970\ Andrea Maubourquette, 14 Webb St Salem MA 01970 Waterways File No. W 13-3886-N Page 26 Salem Harbor Station Redevelopment Project Decision on Variance Request and Written Determination Attachment A WRITTEN DETERMINATION AND CONDITIONS Footprint Power Salem Harbor Development LP of—Bridgewater --, in the State of—New Jersey--, has applied to the Department of Environmental Protection to—construct and maintain a generating facility and ancillary structures and fill, including a landscaped berm;.to perform soil remediation;to construct and maintain public access walkways; and install and maintain water-dependent industrial infrastructure including, but not limited to, an engineered concrete platform, suitable for use by mobile cranes and as a roll-on, roll-off facility-------- and has submitted plans of the same; and whereas due notice of said application,and of the time and place fixed for a hearing thereon, has been given, as required by law, to the-Mayor-- of the - City-- of-- Salem. ----------------------- ------------------------------------------------------------------ NOW, said Department, having heard all parties desiring to be heard, and having fully considered said application, hereby, subject to the approval of the Governor,authorizes and licenses the said ---------------- ---- Footprint Power Salem Harbor Development LP----, subject to the provisions of the ninety-first chapter of the General Laws, and of all laws which are or may be in force applicable thereto,to—construct and maintain a generating facility and ancillary structures and fill, including a landscaped berm; to perform soil remediation;to construct and maintain public access walkways; and install and maintain water-dependent industrial infrastructure including, but not limited to, an engineered concrete platform, suitable for use by mobile cranes and as a roll-on, roll-off facility-------- in and over filled tidelands of—Salem Harbor -- in the -- City -- of—Salem-- and in accordance with the locations shown and details indicated on the accompanying draft DEP License Plan No. (to be assigned) dated October 31, 2013 (15 sheets). The uses of structures and fill authorized hereby shall be limited to the following: nonwater- dependent infrastructure facilities for the production of electricity for the public; water- dependent industrial infrastructure, and public pedestrian access. Existing fill and structures on the site were authorized by the Waterways authorizations listed in Attachment 1. Waterways File No. WI 3-3886-N Page 27 Salem Harbor Station Redevelopment Project Decision on Variance Request and Written Determination This License is valid for a term of thirty(30) years from the date of issuance. By written request of the Licensee for a new amendment, the Department may grant a renewal for the term of years not to exceed that authorized in this License. Special Conditions 1. This License is issued pursuant to the Variance and Written Determination issued by the Commissioner of DEP on November 1, 2013. 2. The Licensee shall demolish the existing structures shown in Figure 4 of the Applicant's Request for Approval for Removal of Obsolete Structures, dated August 2013, on file with the Department. Upon demolition of structures, the.Licensee shall remove all demolition debris from the site and disposeof the same in accordance with all applicable laws, and shall prepare the site for soil remediation in accordance with Special Condition 3. The Licensee shall complete demolition and removal of debris no later than close of business on December 31, 2016. 3. The Licensee, in addition to assessing and remediating the soil in connection with site preparation and construction of the Project (including the associated berm) as necessary and in accordance with the MCP, shall remediate the soil of all parts of the site outside the footprint of the proposed generating facility, its associated berm, and the National Grid Switchyard as necessary,=in accordance with the MCP and to an extent sufficient to allow water-dependent industrial use at those parts of the site. The Licensee shall complete remediation and file a Response,Action Outcome, or other appropriate document, with DEP's Bureau of Waste Site Cleanup no-later than close of business on December 31, 2016. 4. The Licensee shall construct and maintain for the term of the License an engineered concrete platform, suitable for use by mobile cranes and as a roll-on, roll-off facility, for use by future water-dependent industrial uses occupying the site. The crane platform shall be maintained in good working order by the Licensee for the referenced activities necessary for said DPA users. 5. The Licensee shall construct or provide funding, separate from the provision of the engineered concrete platform described above, of up to$180,000 for improvements to the run-off pond revetment; as identified in the City of Salem's Notice of Project Change #14234/414937("NPC"). Said commitment shall be exclusive of the provision and maintenance of the engineered concrete platform in Special Condition#4. The Licensee shall provide documentation to the Department that said funding has been provided to the City pursuant to this proposed Port Development project within six (6) months of said transaction. In the event for any reason that said construction commitment or funds'are not fully performed or expended, respectively, prior to the completion of the proposed power facility or December 31, 2016, whichever is later, the Licensee shall notify the Department and include a proposal for alternative mitigation of equal or greater value of the remainder of the unperformed construction Waterways File No. WI 3-3886-N Page 28 Salem Harbor Station Redevelopment Project Decision on Variance Request and Written Determination or unspent funds,as the case may be, to facilitate water-dependent industrial use on the Project site. 6. The Licensee shall provide and maintain in good condition an interior service access way of sufficient width from either Fort Avenue or Derby Street to the waterfront portion of the site to allow future site access to future water-dependent industrial users of the site. Said interior service access way shall be completed no later than five (5) years from the date of License issuance. In the event that said interior service access way is not completed within this time frame, the Licensee may request a one-year extension from the Department. The Licensee shall show good cause for said request. The Department may extend said term without public hearing or notice. The Licensee shall submit plans for the interior service access way lay-out to the Department for its prior review and approval. 7. Prior to commencement of construction of the facility, the;Licensee, at sole cost and expense, subject to the Department's prior approval, shall grant an irrevocable restriction to the City of Salem prohibiting any use of approximately nine (9) acres of non-jurisdictional land; including all the waterfront land in the non-tidelands portion of the site, other than those uses expressly allowed under the Salem Municipal Harbor Plan's DPA Master Plan, as it may be amended. Said restriction shall run with the land for a term of years equal to the length of the Chapter 91 License term, including any renewals or other extensions of the License term. Provided, however, that if the maximum term for such restriction allowable under law is less than the required term herein, then Licensee shall establish the required restriction for the maximum term allowable under law and it shall be a further condition of this License that Licensee renew the required restriction prior to its expiration as necessary in order achieve the required term herein. The Licensee shall submit a proposed restriction for the Department's review and approval no later than sixty (60) days after the effective date of this License, and shall implement said restrictions only after written approval from the Department in accordance with any conditions contained therein. 8. Six (6) months prior to completion of the generating facility, the Licensee shall provide to the Department, for its review and approval, a Marketing Plan describing measures to be undertaken by the Licensee to attract water-dependent industrial uses to the site. Upon approval, the Licensee shall implement the approved actions in the Plan. Said plan shall include a list of the types of businesses which will be directly solicited and the means by which the site will be advertised, including local newspapers and maritime or other trade journals: Marketing of the site shall commence within 3 months of the Department's approval of said plan. The Licensee shall submit to the Department updated Marketing Plans every three (3) years from the anniversary of the first Plan, including any revised or updated information included in the original Plan, as well as an accounting of the water-dependent industrial uses so located and operating on the Project Site at the time of the revised Plan. 9. The Licensee shall construct and maintain the public pedestrian pathway network on the site, as shown on the license plans. The publicly accessible facilities authorized in this License shall be available to the general public, free of charge, from dawn to dusk on a year round basis. The Licensee shall remove ice and snow as necessary, and ensure that said pathways remain in an Waterways File No. W 13-3886-N Page 29 Salem Harbor Station Redevelopment Project Decision on Variance Request and Written Determination unobstructed condition. The Licensee may adopt reasonable rules for use of these publicly accessible facilities, subject to prior review and written approval by the Department, as are necessary for the protection of public;health and safetyand private property, and to ensure public use and enjoyment by minimizing conflicts between user groups. No amendment to said rules shall be made without prior written approval by the Department. The exercise by the public of free on- foot passage:in accordance with this condition shall be considered a permitted use to which the limited liability provisions of M.G.L. c. 21,section 17(c) shall apply. 10. All activities for which a license has been issued shall be completed within five (5)years of the date of issuance of the license or permit, unless otherwise specified herein. This period may be extended upon written request to MassDEP at least sixty(60)days in advance of the deadline specified herein. 11. Pursuant.to310 CMR 9.22;Licensees may undertake minor project modifications upon written notice to, an&written prior approval by, MassDEP. 12. The Licensee shall allow agents of MassDEP at all times to enter the Project site to verify compliance with the conditions of this License. 13. Within 60 days of the completion of the Project,but in no event later than five years from the date of License issuance,the Licensee shall request in writing that MassDEP issue a Certificate of Compliance in accordance with 310 CMR 9.19, for each license issued. 14.-The Licensee shall maintain in good repair all fill, structures, facilities, and landscaping to be licensed hereunder for the term of the license, including any renewal. With the prior written approval of the Department, the Licensee may assign the obligation to maintain all or portions of such fill, structures, and facilities to another responsible party following license issuance. A written legal agreement between the parties requesting a transfer of said maintenance responsibility shall be submitted to the Department clearly identifying the area to be maintained and the associated Waterways License number, and stating that the maintenance responsibility shall run with the term of the license,that failure to maintain said area will result in a violation of the Waterways License, and any structural alterations or changes in use to said area are subject to prior review and approval by the Department. 15. The Licensee shall ensure that passive recreational use by the general public of the facilities required herein is fully and safely allowed on the site pursuant to any Activity and Use Limitations ("AULs")that may be adopted in full compliance with the Massachusetts Contingency Plan, 310 CMR 40.0000. Such passive recreational use shall include that associated with public open space use involving more than casual contact with the ground, including,but not limited to,walking, strolling,bicycling,picnicking, and sitting. The Licensee shall ensure that the on-site areas specified in this License as publicly accessible open spaces, are fully remediated to levels that will not impede or prohibit the public use of open space, including passive recreational use. Any AUL adopted by the Licensee shall fully allow for such public open space and passive recreational uses. Any interpretation regarding what uses are allowed under an AUL shall be decided by the Department's Bureau of Waste Site Cleanup in MassDEP's Northeast Regional Office. Waterways File No. W 13-3886-N Page 30 Salem Harbor Station Redevelopment Project Decision on Variance Request and Written Determination 16. The Licensee shall submit to MassDEP, prior to License issuance,final mylar plans drawn in accordance with MassDEP's'plan specifications which meet the terms of this Written Determination;which conform to all relevant engineering and construction standards at 310 CMR 9.37, and which show all required information pursuant to 310 CMR 9.11. Pursuant to 310 CMR 9.37(1), a Registered Professional Engineer shall certify that all fill and structures shall be designed and constructed to be structurally sound, comply with State Building Code requirements for construction in flood plains, and will not pose an unreasonable threat to navigation,public health or safety, or.adjacent buildings or structures if damaged or destroyed in a storm. 17. This Written Determination shall remain valid until the license is issued or for up to one year after the Written Determination is issued, whichever is sooner. Said term may be extended for one or more one year periods, provided that the Licensee submits to MassDEP, thirty (30) days prior to the expiration of said term,a written request to extend the term and provides an adequate justification for said extension. Please see page 31 for additional conditions to this license. ---------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Duplicate of said draft plan, number (to be assigned) (15 sheets) on file in the office of said Department, and original of said plan accompanies this License, and is to,be referred to as a part hereof. Waterways File No. W1 3-3886-N Page 31 Salem Harbor Station Redevelopment Project Decision on Variance Request and Written Determination Attachment B STANDARD WATERWAYS LICENSE CONDITIONS 1. Acceptance of this Waterways License shall constitute an agreement by the Licensee to conform with all terms and conditions stated herein. 2.This License is granted upon the express condition that any and all other applicable authorizations necessitated due to the provisions hereof shall be secured by the Licensee prior to the commencement of any activity or use authorized pursuant to this License. 3.Any change in use or any substantial structural alteration of any structure or fill authorized herein shall require the issuance by MassDEP of a new Waterways License in accordance with the provisions and procedures established in Chapter 91 of thd:Massachusetts General Laws. Any unauthorized substantial change in use or unauthorized substantial structural alteration of any structure or fill authorized herein shall render this Waterways License void. 4.This Waterways License shall be revocable by MassDEP for noncompliance with the terms and conditions set forth herein. This License may be revoked after MassDEP has given written notice of the alleged noncompliance to the Licensee and those persons who have filed a written request for such notice with MassDEP and afforded them a reasonable opportunity to correct said noncompliance. Failure to correct said noncompliance after the issuance of a written notice by MassDEP shall render this Waterways License void and the Commonwealth may proceed to remove or cause removal of any structure or fill authorized herein at the expense of the Licensee, its successors and assigns as an unauthorized and unlawful structure and/or fill. 5. The structures and/or fill authorized herein shall be maintained in good repair and in accordance with the terms and conditions stated herein and the details indicated on the accompanying license plans. 6.Nothing in this Waterways License shall be construed as authorizing encroachment in,on or over property not owned or controlled by the Licensee,except with the written consent of the owner or owners thereof. 7. This Waterways License is granted subject to all applicable Federal, State,County, and Municipal laws, ordinances and regulations including but not limited to a valid final Order of Conditions issued pursuant to the Wetlands Protection Act, G.L. Chapter 131,s.40. 8. This Waterways License is granted upon the express condition that the use of the structures and/or fill authorized hereby shall be in strict conformance with all applicable requirements and authorizations of the DEP. This License authorizes structure(s)and/or fill on: X Private Tidelands. In accordance with the public easement that exists by law on private tidelands,the Licensee shall allow the public to use and to pass freely upon the area of the subject property lying between the high and low water marks, for the purposes of fishing,fowling,navigation,and the natural derivatives thereof. X Commonwealth Tidelands. Except as provided by M.G.L. c. 90 sec.61,the Licensee shall not restrict the public's right to use and to pass freely,for any lawful purpose,upon lands lying seaward of the low water mark. Said lands are held in trust by the Commonwealth for the benefit of the public. _a Great Pond of the Commonwealth. The Licensee shall not restrict the public's right to use and to pass freely upon lands lying seaward of the high water mark for any lawful purpose. No restriction on the exercise of these public rights shall be imposed unless otherwise expressly provided in this License. Waterways File No. W13-3886-N Page 32 Salem Harbor Station Redevelopment Project Decision on Variance Request and Written Determination The amount of tidewater displaced by the work hereby authorized has been ascertained by said Department, and compensation thereof has been made by the said—Footprint Power Salem Harbor Development LP-- by paying into the treasury of the Commonwealth-N/A-- for each cubic yard so displaced, being the amount hereby assessed by said Department. Nothing in this License shall be so construed as to impair the legal rights of any person. This License shall be void unless the same and the accompanying plan are recorded within 60 days from the date hereof, in the Registry of Deeds for the County of--Essex--. IN WITNESS WHEREAS, said Department of Environmental Protection have hereunto set their hands this day of in the year two thousand and thirteen. Program Chief Department of Environmental Program Director Protection Commissioner THE COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS This license is approved in consideration of the payment into the treasury of the Commonwealth by the said—Footprint Power Salem Harbor Development LP-- --the further sum of--N/A the amount determined by the Governor as a just and equitable charge for rights and privileges hereby granted in the land of the Commonwealth. BOSTON, Approved by the Governor. Governor Waterways File No. W 13-3886-N Page 33 Salem Harbor Station Redevelopment Project Decision on Variance Request and Written Determination Attachment C STATEMENT REGARDING'APPEAL RIGHTS 1. Who has the right to appeal? The following persons shall have the right to an adjudicatory hearing concerning this decision by the Department to grant or deny a license or permit, in accordance with 310 CMR 9.17(1):'(a) an applicant who has demonstrated property rights in the lands in question, or which is a public agency; (b) any person aggrieved by the decision of the Department to grant a license or permit who has submitted written comments within the public comment period; (c) ten (10) residents of the Commonwealth who, pursuant to M.G.L. c. 30A, § 10A, have submitted comments within the public comment period with at least 5 of the 10 residents residing in the municipality(s) in which the license or permitted activity is located. The appeal shall clearly and specifically state the facts and grounds for the appeal and the relief sought, and each appealing resident shall file an affidavit stating the intent to be part of the group and to be represented by its authorized representative; (d) the municipal official in the affected municipality who has submitted written comments within the public comment period; and (e)CZM, for any project identified in 310 CMR 9.13(2) (a) for CZM participation or,in an Ocean Sanctuary, if it has filed a notice of participation within the public comment period. 2. How can I request an adjudicatory hearing? A person requesting an adjudicatory hearing must submit a"Notice of Claim"to the Department, with a copy of the MassDEP Transmittal Form and including the detail specified below, within twenty-one (21) days of the date of issuance of this decision. The MassDEP Fee Transmittal Form is available at the following website: http://www.mass.gov/dep/service/adr/adiheifm.doe. The Notice of Claim must be made in writing and sent by certified mail or hand delivery to: Case Administrator, Office of Appeals and Dispute Resolution MassDEP One Winter Street, 2nd Floor Boston,MA 02108 A copy of the complete Notice of Claim must be sent at the same time by certified mail or hand delivery to: (1)the applicant, (2) the municipal official of the city or town where the project is located, and (3) the issuing office of the MassDEP, which in this case is located at: MassDEP Waterways Regulation Program One Winter Street, 5`h Floor Boston, MA 02108 The MassDEP Fee Transmittal Form and a valid check payable to the Commonwealth of Massachusetts in the amount of one hundred dollars ($100) must be mailed to: Mass. Department of Environmental Protection Waterways File No. W 13-3886-N Page 34 Salem Harbor Station Redevelopment Project Decision on Variance Request and Written Determination Commonwealth Master Lockbox P.O. Box 4062 Boston, Massachusetts 02211 3. What information must be included in the hearing request? Pursuant to 310 CMR 9.17(3), any Notice of Claim requesting an adjudicatory hearing must include the following information: (a) the MassDEP Waterways Application File Number; (b) the complete name, address, fax number and telephone number of the applicant; (c) the address of the project; (d) the complete name; address, fax number, and telephone number of the party filing the request and;if represented by counsel, the name, address, fax number, and phone number of the attorney; (e) if claiming to be a person aggrieved, the specific facts that demonstrate that the party satisfies the definition of"aggrieved person" found in 310 CMR 9.02; (f) a clear statement that a formal adjudicatory hearing is being requested; (g) a clear statement of the facts which are the grounds for the proceedings,the specific objections to the MassDEP's written decision, and the relief sought through the adjudicatory hearing, including specifically the changes desired in the final written decision; and (h) a statement that a copy of the request has been sent to: the applicant and the municipal official of the city or town where the project is located. Dismissal of request The request for appeal will be dismissed if the filing fee is not paid, unless the appellant is exempt or is granted a waiver. The filing fee is not required if the appellant is a city or town (or municipal agency), county, or district of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts,.or a . municipal housing authority. The Department may waive the adjudicatory hearing filing fee pursuant to 310 CMR 4.06(2) for a person who shows that paying the fee will create an undue financial hardship. A person seeking a waiver must file an affidavit setting forth the facts believed to support the claim of undue financial hardship together with the hearing request as provided above. Waterways File No. W13-3886-N ' Page 35 Salem Harbor Station Redevelopment Project Decision on Variance Request and Written Determination Attachment D DRAFT LICENSE PLANS I CERTIFY THAT THIS PIAN,AS PREPARED,CONFORMS TO THE RULES AND REGULATIONS OF THE REGISTERS OF DEEDS OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS. BRUpR. CIVIL '^�'•344 . MAR T11 9 NO,40MM9 W REGI5TERED�PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER DATE NOTESc J 1. HISTORIC HIGH WATER FROM'PART OF SALEM IN 1700, FROM THE RESEARCHES OF SIDNEY PERLEY"AND'MAP - OF SALEM HARBOR INCLUDING THE CITY AND ISLANDS - •x w x U.S.COAST SURVEY,1849 AND 1850;REG,NO.303B' 2.. FEMA FLOOD INFORMATION-FIRM ESSEX COUNTY, MASSACHUSETTS Panel 25009CO419F(July 3,2012). 3. VERTICAL DATUM IS NAVD88 sire 1 2 4. HORIZONTAL DATUM IS NAD83 5.- MEAN LOW WATER=-5.2' 6. MEAN HIGH WATER=4.1' 7. SEE LICENSE PLANS 10066 FOR AUTHORIZATION OF FILL LOCUS MAP B. SELECT STRUCTURES SHOWN HEREIN ARE TO BE DEMOLISHED AS APPROVED BY THE DEPARTMENT IN A LETTER DATED SEPTEMBER 23,2013'APPROVAL TO DEMOLISH AND REMOVE OBSELETE STRUCTURES' SALEM HARBOR STATION REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT IN THE CITY OF SALEM ESSEX COUNTYR. ¢ aRL1N INDEX OF DRAWINGS "" ' CIV L W.cane w SHEET NO. TITLE I COVER SHEET 2 EXISTING CONDITIONS OVERVIEW n - 3 EXISTING CONDITIONS KEY PLAN AND NOTES s s 4 - EXISTING CONDITIONS DETAIL VIEW(SOUTH) 5 EXISTING CONDITIONS DETAIL VIEW(PLANT AREA) 6 - EXISTING CONDITIONS DETAIL VIEW(NORTH) 7 PROPOSED CONDITIONS OVERVIEW - 8 PROPOSED CONDITIONS KEY PLAN AND NOTES 9 PROPOSED CONDITIONS DETAIL VIEW(SOUTH) 3 10-12 PROPOSED CONDITIONS DETAIL VIEW(PLANT AREA) 13 PROPOSED CONDITIONS DETAIL VIEW(NORTH) 14 NORTH ELEVATION VIEW �- 15 SECTION VIEW SHEET 1 OF 15 PLANS ACCOMPANYING THE PETITION OF FOOTPRINT POWER SALEM HARBOR DEVELOPMENT LP TO CONSTRUCTA NATURAL GAS FIRED POWER PLANT ON 9 - FILLED TIDELANDS ADJACENT TO SALEM HARBOR IN SALEM MASSACHUSETTS IN R ESSEX COUNTY OCTOBER 2013 1� V � 'R^a rte IL S 1 r �.." o iv Y -VAD W 7 � TANKS` ± o.o r 173 I 5 03Ri e0 " v a i31Y oaf ��^ v •1 ' �' w w , /� '� .'' '�ti 7 _.8+5 1 �b 3 •.�t4 rK^yr�i EXISTING NGRID w¢ ctfw i�j N R A ,}' ; .....-.�Uf 't H'Ml5 '._ EASEMENT 1-7 .� w IJ '`^fir. ww F—Q Z �I V"Ot _.�� R{�S• '+s 11B yIN M 4� , I LL (9 . r h 1e . ' f -� 4,,.�,,,, t✓_..J. 17j { l 7 �fr w z a �11 cl2',} t§ j � 34 gam eg9 O0 iNwn \ VIeCROGUAONLOPDFILFEt ';vfi 't=`T!P" Yr'r� li _ f dLIIL't}��{Si` aS�-{'+4 � "; ►0x l',�C�' ��i.5a •r`;t _ ¢ 79 � `Ow BTAGJ z COAL b x�O � PILE - tall�T. . •,k µr j LLO ef . BOUNDARY l s- iW \�- 3.'`f o LEGEND ... . HISTORIC MEAN HIGH WATER EXISTING _ - —EXISTING EASEMENT DOCK A SALEM •�DESIGNATED PORT AREA HARBOR MEAN HIGH WATER - 'v' EEFF 3r 1 melW 300 feet •••'MEAN LOW WATER Zq OF°+ w ` . 0 150 300 $ M ---'HISTORIC MEAN LOW WATER YN�RBOR Up e Feel WATER DEPENDENT USE ZONE ®PROPERTY LINE_ _ a D YAo J'C EXISTING CONDITIONS OVERVI ❑ ABUTTER SEE SHEET 3) ` •" \1�J OVERVIEW G' _ SHEET20F 15 .'��EXISTING STRUCNRES �; I CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,AS PREPARED,CONFORMS TO THE RULES AND REGULATIONS OF THE REGISTERS OF DEEDS OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHU TT SHOP BRMN F`y*eyrtA^ ebW z 6E REGISTEREID PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER DATE _.. EXISTINGBUILDINGSKEY _._. __ . _. ._.. .. .. ID NAME 10 NAME 1 INDIA ST WATER METERING BLDG. 23 TRAINING CENTER&WAREHOUSE 2 WASTEWATER TREATMENT PUMP HOUSE 24 POWER PLANT SHEAT TRACE BLDG. 25 FAN HOUSE 4 OIL TRANS.PUMP HOUSE - 26 F.A.R.BLDG. _ S COAL PILE RUNOFF POND PUMP HOUSE 27 WAREHOUSE .. 6 COAL TUNNEL BLDG, 28 FLY•ASH.SILO BLDG, 7 S.DOCK MOTOR CONTROL CENT.BLDG. 29 WAREHOUSE 8 DOCK OFFICE 30 CHANGE HOUSE 9 BOAT STORAGE S MACHINE SHOP 31 WAREHOUSE 10 GARAGEISTORAGE HOUSE 32 STORAGE 11 JUNC.HOUSE TA 33 STORAGE 12 YARD OFFICE - 34 NGRIO RELAY HOUSE 13 BREAKERHOUSE 3501LPUMPHOUSE 14 CO2STORAGE BLDG.BHYDROGEN STORAGESLAS 36 CHLORINE ANALYZER BLDG. 15 GATE HOUSE 37 DERBY STWATER METERINGBLDG. 16 SECURITY.BLDG. 38 N DOCK MOTOR CONTROL CENTER BLDG, 17 ASH SLUICE PUMP HOUSE 39 SCREEN HOUSE UNIT I AND 2 ? 16 HYOROBINS 40$CREEN HOUSEUNIT3 .{ 19SWITCHGEAR BLDG. 41SCREEN HOUSE UNIT _ 20 FANSMI-EC.IPRECIPI BLDG I 42NGRIO PUMP HOUSE 21 GARAGE 22 SUBSTATION BLDG. Project Abutters Plan Assessor's Parcel Address Parcel Owner Owners Mailing Address 10 Parcel ID 1 42-0098 26-34 Fort Avenue South Essex Sewerage Board 50 Ford Avenue Salem,MAGI 970 Salem,MA 01970 2 41-0321 2 Block House Square City of Salem Salem City Hall Salem,MA 01970 93 Washington Street Salem,MA 01970 3 410275 81 Derby Steel Jean Pierre Draczuk 5 Rue Ou Mont Salem,MA 01970 93800 Edney Sur Seine France 4 41-0276 83-85 Derby Street Richard E.Savickey 36 Dearbom Street Salem,MA 01970 Salem,MA 01970 - S - 41-0277 - 5 Blaney Street H O E T Really Trust PO Box 366' Salem,MA 01970 Daniel J.Mackey,Trustee Salem,MA 01970 6 41-0278 10 Blaney Street City of Salem Salem City Hell Salem,MA 01970 93 Washington Street xoFys Salem,MA 07970 C BR s� R. _ v MANCTNL TTI ya NO.48378 be •ayrtpEO �b d r A fNb . 79 EXISTING CONDITIONS 1✓e'^. BUILDING KEY AND NOTES SHEET 3O 15 r I CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,AS PREPARED,CONFORMS TO THE RULES AND REGULATIONS OF THE REGISTERS OF DEEDS OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS RRPm .. HBTT p 'so "CM7, bo- - P �vrerA° \rb A O REGISTEREDIPROFESSIONAL ENGINEER DATE 1 11_ Lj I_ � aj LJ L i SYSTREET J I : HISTORIC MEAN 10ie 37 jHtGH WATER \ WEB §T Y 'TAN 'ENTRANCE / '-� .r.• '' tI FEMA 3 r . r i€, � � ZONE A4 � Z �IEL10) TANN WALL T � fj 7., 4f - +TANK SAN fx0.6,s � —aa s tS s //�'�— . 1 � r j'...: \VA// u I COAL PILE (EL-16 RUNOff POND a — ( d COAL a•.: m �, � - .�, � d PILE _ bl<h, J I��i F 1 t 1•� A—r' X� �'7(�'.��'rf w r.. Tan. SALEM EXISTING HARBOR DOCK- �,910s BRµ 1 inch=750 feet 75 1501H7'TI m Feel EXIST I NG CONDITIONS DETAIL VIEW(SOUTH) ��1—� Oa. �•'•���:f SHEET 4 OF 15 I CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,AS PREPARED,CONFORMS TO THE RULES AND REGULATIONS OF THE REGISTERS OF DEEDS OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS a,Fa` BRIµ R. "ARO"Er" q NO yZ1Y c RE GISTERE15 PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER DATE S 4 J r r r i i r �. .,HOTORYRQ4O r� r a .. F'l _ 1 1 Ir jz Y4 j EXISTIN NOFY/ NGRID EASEMENT J BRVW - / ti" r 1 77-- EXISTING 7-EXISTING PARKING 1-r{( EXISTING FORT AVE GATE / r r r IS Ik 6 SOUTH ESSEX ? r SEWAGE DISTRICT I PLANT , STACNNG N 42 m 1 T l 42t th•\� / A . (TYP.) kip n s .�r TANK`S=h t 30i l ra `' t `F,4. 43-7„g 24yr--- SALEM r'• 39ax�..ss'+.°':A� to HARBOR HISTORIC MEAN HIGH WATER F��do 1 inch=1EO feel 0 75 ISO EXISTING CONDITIONS DETAIL VIEW(NORTH AREA) �nY/� Feel SHEET 6 OF 15 DESIGNATED PORT AREA PATH `� RT` + PROPERTY LINE o it� �. B �$�ro >w / O HISTORIC MEAN HIGH WATER r LL r 2f 0 Q d K O p r 10 rc _ I 1_ ( 0 i0 1 �°` J t(/Q}2 p / _ 1B l) e�j Aid aI J W LL=O rmJ _ n'9 G j of r N USW z -- _moo I , z wsrowcMEAN LOW WATER �\ ��C.11 I �J WATER �tl� Poilo DEPENDENT ¢r - ss USE ZONE ` �I � 1f ` l WATER DEPENDENT. OUIPMENT BELON[ USE ZONE LANDSCAPED BERM — _ � . 0 75' 150' 300' SECTION VIEW(SEE SHEET 1Sj" LOW LANDSCAPE WALL SCALE: 1'=150' I I CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,AS PREPARED,CONFORMS TO THE RULES AND REGULATIONS OF THE REGISTERS OF DEEDS OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSE �AaoFl4ay.H^ +Yc end �n 1AFR PAL NO.16TT11 W 9"s 4er.�'oe REGIGTEREO POOFESSIONAL ENGINEER DATE Label Stmttme S STACK ,SMOF,W_ 2 FLUE 3 HEAT RECOVERY STEAMGENERATOR BUILDING SRM `fir 4 COMBUSTION TURBINE GENERATOR BUILDING CTGRCMETTI - 5 AUXILIARY TRANSFORMER NQ AL t 6 CTGSTEP-UP TRANSFORMER F 'OyAo +dW 75TATIC STARTISOLATION TRANSFORMER B2 A - 8 EXCITATION_TRANSFORMER 9 RACK 1000MBINED FIRE PROTECTION WATER/SERVICE WATER STORAGE TANK 11 FIRE PUMP/SERVICE WATER PUMPS ENCLOSURE _ 12 DEMINERALIZED WATER STORAGE TANK 13 DEMINERALIZED WATER TRAILER PARKING 14 STG ELECTRICAL SWITCHGEAR/MCC PDC&AUXILIARY BOILER BUILDING 15 STG GSU TRANSFORMER - 16DRAIN SUMP PIT 17 DEMINERAUZED WATER PUMPS ENCL05URE 18 CTG AIR INLET PLENUM 19 STG BUILDING 20 FUELGAS FILTERISEPARATOR DRAIN TANK 21 DIESELGENERATOR 22 AUX COOLING.SYSTEM COOLING TOWER/CHEM FEED 2319%AQUEOUS AMMONIA STORAGE TANK/UNLOADINGAREA 24 115KV GIS SWITCHING STATION tln 25 GIS CEK RAL BUI LDI NG y � 26 OPERATIONS BUILDING 27 H2 TRAILER 28 AIR COOLER CONDENSER(ACC) 29 SOUND WALL s 301 MAIN POWER DISTRIBUTION CENTER(PDC) 31 GAS COMPRESSORS POWER DISTRIBUTIONCENTER PDC 32 GAS REGULATION AND METERING STATION S 33 UTI UTY GAS METERI NG 57ATION F 34 ADMINISTRATION/CONTROL BUIONG 35 GATE HOUSE)EX(STING) 36 CTG REMOVAL HATCH(ON CTG BLOG ROOF 37 CCW PLATE AND FRAME HEAT EXCHANGERS PUMPS y 38 METE RING BUI LOIN G g 39 GAS REGULATION BUI LDING a 40 GAS FILTER d1 VACUUM PUMPS HOUSE 421CTG GENERATOR CIRCUIT BREAKER _ 43 ISO PHASE BUS DUCT 44 FIRE WALL. E 45 FUEL GAS TREATMENT AREA _ 46 N2 MANIFOLD 47 ROOF RAI N WATER UN DERGROUN D CISTERN (30.000 CUBIC FOOT) ! 48 INHIBITOR DOSING OPEN COOLING SYSTEM 49 GRAIN POT AND DRAIN PUMS 50 N2/002 TRAILER "v 51 GASKET FILTERS 52 ACCTRANSFORMER 53 ACC ELECTRICALPDC 54CONDENSATE RECEIVER _ PROPOSED CONDITIONS KEY PLAN AND NOTES SHEET'8 OF 161 I � I CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,AS PREPARED,CONFORMS TO THE RULES AND REGULATIONS OF THE REGISTERS OF DEEDS OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSE I BRIAN R. WARCH m j y NO.AQAY 4e � - 1 REGISTERED PR FESSIONAL ENGINEER DATE '. �ySNOfy,- ,t � DESIGNATED PORT AREA BRIAN MARCREm - Vim.( P (Kf SS 1 — Sxi tlMl tNCK 40M ii p+ hllt$ '�'�. ��.. / �i i tai__ tltltl a ` I r . /Nib TORICMl�i � ri "` -T4 htt'� v ite rs 9!!!1 S/ HIGHWATER j//�'e 5 105r�`��i•�t �� 'f[L "rt�"yl /FEMA VE ZONE STORMWATER an COLLECTION %y AREA x 9.5 -1'v110T�m Ulu 0 0 r ' I r� ick wx q �r 7�a t ':x10.5 10.5x6 '105 MERGENCY v;x¢hSPIC WAV � !� R MEAN LOW WATER .. MEAN HIGH WATER FEMA VE ZONE LSZO — 115 r ���HRIC MEAN z LOW WATER--_ i WATER DEPENDENT i X yam` x 11 5 USEZONE� PROPERTY LINNOTE.MEAN HIGH WATER AND E MEAN LOW WATER ARE COINCIDENTAL I WITH SEAWALL IN THIS LOCATION - SALEM PROPOSED C0NDITIpN$:OMIL VIEW(SOUTH)SHEET 9 OF 15 1 I NOTES: 0 50' 100' 200' 1y m WITHIN PLANTAREA,PROPOSEaGRADESINTERIOR M w k+�SftTg ggg�O < m it o OF GABION WALL VARY BETWEEN .f ELEV. AN �, SCALE i"-100' ELEV.16'.PROPOSED LANDSCAPED AREAS OUTSIDE M r OF GABION WALL VARY FROM ELEV.10'TO ELEV.3T, O y �j,i$ m - ;,.� LEGEND s gOkOp V g ia``'' \` _pr—W_. WATERLINE 3 x p6 rc y w 2 s v r - CONNECT TO EXISTINGlTg. w O VICE Y a -S—S— SEWER LINE Z W p 6 F*ot GAS SERf \ J DESIGNATED _ z a DRAIN LINE F PORT AREA wC g el -G—G— GAS LINE p PROPERTY LINE e m go, N � 70A— PROPOSED CONTOUR z" w LL wO ��.' ",�•---' Raga"'�.."�^ �.,.. a P0.Mom 0ff'9 2fr3 0 /� A ` .tV �4 w "w w 'a /� �� HISTORIC MEAN HIGH WATER 'mw 2 TIONAL . NT `884-� -. \�� iATK+110 ` \ SEApEpAREA— [r a \ I \ Nlj / o - MATCH LINE ��l I1 � � � I ��l/ SEE SHEET"1 . ter,. .. I CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,AS PREPARED,CONFORMS TO THE RULES AND REGULATIONS OF THE REGISTERS OF DEEDS OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETT � tiBRI N ` . o MggGNETTI CML N0.48YT9 90 'Ra�enPP G FSS/Ox AiE`� REGISTERED ROF�NGINEER DATE �+ O YPAIESINEUNATHN o `Fl10M14.0''36.'J [ .6133HS 33S z z zz — m m \ 20 TIN 9 0 41r, 1 [� v z — m m m - P, _ NO.49218 W t �I; I i E PfMIRPfO �W o O e_99997a-r y r l "�' I n d 0, •tll _ J q" D A 115 i kV �..I� SWITCHING SEE SHEET I3 ' 3 I STATION PROPOSED CONDITIONS DETAI VIEW SHEET 11 OF 15 MATCH LINE SEE SHEET '� '',I - I { 7� 53L� i•3.,5 2Yic 48 1` !! o _,�yETi9 Yid, � T�t� �O h i ¢ k ` �� s " GABION WALL �EQUIT'Xi1ENT B LO}N _ 3 k 1 m. u$ --- —. � w p 4J W W �q,ow ow a� 1ry°' "�" : =Om, – LANDSCAPED BERMS � . Q ow¢ = STpG'� -� -LOW LANDSCAPE HISTORIC MEAN v w a w m �VN�c Rq/N / fEM410D YEAR HIGH WATER q t w '^ "!P /� WATER DEPENDENT p w LL O z u - ) USE ZONE FLOOD ZONE ELEV-10 Ot z .................... O 0E- w \ ` .... .�._tiv,.`...................... 41O a o.w < "�.., REINFORCED CONCRETE ;e F' z DECK FOR LOADING/ _ "" """" "' S z UNLOADING hW I OPERATIONS FEMA VE ZONE p0, pp •••..... MEAN HIGH WATE jLL rc I 5G" DESIGNATED / HISTORIC MEAN 10 wO� PORT AREA J LOW WATER o m w w •• MEAN LOW WATER / ' g a I. / m& D o w a ♦" ` SALEM LEGEND N • I J HARBOR -w—w— WATERLINE 1 -$—S— SEWER LINE 0 501 100 2W' DRAIN LINE GAS LINE + SCALE'. V=100' —1a0— PROPOSED CONTOUR i I CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,AS PREPARED,CONFORMS TO THE RULES AND REGULATIONS OF THE REGISTERS OF DEEDS OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETT BRIAN �Zc R ] Cm s 9 Nq o,AB319 3!EJ RED REGISTEROFESSIONAL ENGINEER 0 TE � 'T� BWAN `a hill TfI NATIONAL GRID EASEMENT DESIGNATED PORT AREA - 7L-)- lo�3��I S PROPERTY LINE(TYP.) r 0 STy�PIN Cj OMETING PAVEMENT TO � Sk a"e-' -J •' ELINEATE CCESS ROAD LIMIT"S +� y`•'' 1 5• e .Y,' rf 1 DESIGNATED PORT AREA IX 4lA 17 q i . I 00 YEAR NLOOO ZONE - .ELEV 50.. / •-� HISTORIC MEAN IGH WATER > 1 � 4 RM DRAIN(TYP) Pill, ' _, rrp MEAN HIGH WATER s � `MEAN LOW WATER n - DESIGNATED PORT AREA . FEMA VE ZONE HISTORIC MEAN \\ - LOW WAl"ER 'L J �� PROPOSED CONDITIONS DETAIL VIEW(NORTH)SHEET 13 OF 15 TTS b93'b' w z k- x ^nYpp PA STACK(M HAV +230'_0')__ O va0i NAV088 246'-0" --ARCH ENCLOSURE AROUND ACC w o a T.O. NRSG 4NCLASORE_(H7+175-0' 1 ---- ARCH ENCLOSURE AROUND STC �wg w HAVD88141'-0' \—___—_ ______ as w zyl CONCRETE STACK w O T.O.ACC ENCLOSURE M+12D'-O') - O r z NAV088 136'-0" \ ARCH ENCLOSURE AROUND HREC z¢- T.O. STG/CTG ENCLOSUkE_(M+76-0) O w ¢ \ _ EXIST COMMUNITY NAV088 92'-0" \-- — _ OUTREACH BLDG O O co T.O.CABIGN WALL(HT.+i6'-0") _ N O w NAVD88 31'-0" \ r,- - i -. ...- ACOUSTIC BERM z¢O p T.O. FOUNDATION CHT h0'-0" " 1 .., c V, W BEYOND MVD88 16,_01 DISCHARGE w LL M HARBOR CHANNEL SALEM u INLET & ROAD FACILITY DERBY w ow JETTY STRE NORTH ELEVATION 0' 75' 150' :m, ORyW L.4. -1/150'=1'-0'. R. MARCRETTICML . 0 NO--1216. �oNA ° NORTH ELEVATION VIEW SHEET 14 OF 15 it I CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,AS PREPARED,CONFORMS TO THE RULES AND REGULATIONS OF THE REGISTERS OF DEEDS OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS. o`er g 0. a'lr� E4IRCHETTi CML NO.4MM We ' F. 'RaramKP 2� REGISTERED P. FESSIONAL ENGINEER DATE 'y�USEtt6 bd 4 \ a d a � 5`5 0 PO OP r l S y�j o W Q U n 3 g Q E d_ E g " SECTION VIEW SHEET 15 OF 15 t I CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,AS PREPARED,CONFORMS TO THE RULES AND REGULATIONS OF THE REGISTERS OF DEEDS OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS . W . �Ci •+EW�tl+�O4 REGISTERE PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER DATE HISTORIC ME4N A' HIGH WATER�l DPA ANROItETTT RBY TREET .J. 0ou'pA 't 2!•KIM sty, `, "•a....7R't"'...y' �' F04 ♦ \ FNGE e rawc . I EXISTING, I CONTIAMMENT BERM Je +Rv t ;?i "t •�. It \ r`^+ I(TYP) C} I ,+} +TANi4 w�� ♦ I � �`a x �'(I��A\�\.,.� .. �a t EXI TNGN(iR S t�++ 14:.v.-} + "'r'y % FP{P rt+kt ,•`E�,qy ENT c +L TANK ' ; TANK f *u 6ax R t r� s �' 7t v e1 �z 'H TANK 6� 71 1 r 71A�N ASIN jBASIN• 'i � t-*'•— 1���{I _. is .w+ {t TN ', i VV i. I 34 STING Sl COAL l3V'(^" (TYP.) r PILE ; I_ r. } W TANK yt 1 � B "FEMAAE ZONE+ [ .. J � 12 ' �-^ate -tE"°t -ta ' f ` at e y: J -.aa.322r cis X11'. y:a m I • �, s � �Nra-- l : •�.-� SALEM `M1 HARBOR i Inch=150 feet - G4'4 0 75 150 EXISTING CONDITIONS 4\y4�•pQ'.!!^ {'' ',*"•• • �Y � DETAIL VIEW ( NSAREA) Feet SHE5OF ' O ,0 0 IO i„ O 9 ' 0 O C) 0 .0 0 O ' 0 0 0 ,O 0 O O 0 I ' O ' O 1-0 ; O '. 0 0 O 0 i 0 Complex world O CLE AIR SOLUTIONS� O 0 `0 0 0 0 0 � � TETRATECH ��.0 1. 0 _ _ __. Q Q :� '� � ' � ' J � � i :� i � I ;� ,�' � I ,� :� • •"Y • V • t � • e 'Stormwater Management Report Salem Harbor Station Redevelopment Project 24 Fort Avenue i' Salem, Massachusetts April 4, 2013 r' •g FJ��H�M� c 8q left"FL 9G �AhRCH m �� yly J13 i f � Table of Contents l0 Introduction � lJExisting Conditions............................................................................. ................................ l 12 Proposed Conditions........................................................... ................................................2 1.2] CCG Facility within Acoustic Landscaped Berm..................................................2 1.2.2 Existing Parking Area and Access Roadway.-......~.~^`...-...~.-..3 1.2'3 Landscaped Area....................................................................................................3 1.2.4 Northern and Southern Por600v ..-..~. 3 1.3 Ground Cover..-'-..-.... -,..`3 2.0 St000wutorManagement.................................................................................................................4 2] Method ofCalculation.--.^--..... 4 22 Sources ofData.-,~..-...-.-~...-�—~.^.~..,..~.^-....-.....�-.�4 2.3 Rainfall Depths...................................................................................................................j 2.4 Soil Conditions--...--...--,.~......~--,..^-`.~^^--....-....'.`.5 % 5 � E^wuug Conditions.............................................................................................................6 2l1 Existing Watershed...... ......^-.....-....-,...--...--,.-.,~..�6 2.5.2 Existing Runoff Calculations.................................. ...............................................7 -' 2.1 Proposed Conditions...........................................................................................................8 , 2ll VVu��r�bod � � rn!po�cu ....................................... ~~~--_~--.- .....................8 2]-2 Proposed Runoff Calculations...............................................................................9 %J] Drainage Collection System Design................. ....................................................9 ^ 3.0 l}BPStocmvvu1xz ManagementStandards............................................................................... .... 1O 3.1 Standard# ) -NoNew Untreated Discharges .................................................................lO 3.2 Standard#2-Peak Rate Attenuation.............................................................................. }0 3.3 Standard#3-Recharge................................................................................................... ll 3/1 Standard#4-Water Quality............................................................................................ ll 3.4.1 Deep Catch Basins....................................................................... )2 3/12 7tcut000t Structures..................................................................... 12 3.5 Standard# 5-Land Uses with Higher Potential Pollutant Loads o\................ l2 3.6 Standard#6-Critical Area.............................................................................................. l3 3.7 Standard#7-Redevelopment Projects ........................................................................... l3 3.8 Standard# 8-Pollution Prevention and Erosion and Sedimentation Control................. 13 3.9 Standard#V-Operation and Maintenance Plan.............................................................. l4 3.10 Standard# l0-Prohibition ofIllicit Discharges.............................................................. 14 4.0 Conclusion..................................................................................................................................... l4 Tetra Tech | • • List of Tables Table 1 Ground Cover Distribution-Hydrologic Area...................................................................4 • Table2 Rainfall Depths...................................................................................................................5 Table 3 Existing Peak Runoff Rates................................................................................................7 Table 4 Proposed Peak Runoff Rates...............................................................................................9 Table 5 Comparison of Peak Runoff Rates....................................................................................l l List of Figures Figure 1 USGS Site Location Map Figure 2 MRCS Soils Map Figure 3 Existing Site Soils Map Figure 4 Proposed Site Soils Map Figure 5 Existing Conditions Watershed Plan Figure 6 Proposed Conditions Watershed Plan . Figure 7 Subcatchment Drainage Area Plan List of Appendices • Appendix A Checklist for Stormwater Report Appendix B Subsurface Investigation Data Logs • Appendix C HydroCAD Input/Output Data 0 Appendix D StormCAD Drainage Collection System Design Calculations Appendix E Water Quality Structure Efficiency Calculations • Appendix F TSS Removal Calculations • Appendix G Stormwater Operation and Maintenance Plan • 0 • • • 0 • • Tetra Tech • • 0 i1 1.0 Introduction • This Stormwater Management Report, prepared in accordance with Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) Stormwater Standards, is submitted on behalf of the applicant, Footprint Power Salem Harbor Development LP. The report summarizes the drainage analysis and Stormwater Management Plan for the proposed "Salem Harbor Station Redevelopment Project" at 24 Fort Avenue in Salem, Massachusetts. See Figure 1, USGS Site Location Map. » ° The purpose of the Stormwater Management Plan is to provide a comprehensive framework for t the long-term protection of natural resources in and around the Site from degradation as a result of stormwater discharges. This is achieved through the use of a variety of water quality and quantity control measures designed to decrease the amount of pollutants discharged from the Site and control discharge rates and volumes. The following sections describe the regulations pertinent to stormwater management and the specific components of the Stormwater Management Plan to be implemented at the Site. 1 " 1.1 Existing Conditions The approximately 65 +/- acre Project Site varies in elevation from roughly nine(9) feet to sixteen (16) feet North American Vertical Datum of 1988 (NAVD 88) and is currently occupied by the Salem Harbor Station, a coal-fired electric generation facility. According to review of historic maps and records, much of the Site was developed by filling tidal marsh areas within stone seawalls. Groundwater beneath the.Site is brackish and influenced by tidal fluctuations, #j and is not used as drinking water supply in the vicinity of the Site. Groundwater flow is generally eastward towards Salem Harbor and commonly ranges from 1.2 to 8.5 feet below �) ground surface. A portion of the Project Site is located within Flood Zone AE— 100 Year Floodplain per the City of Salem Flood Insurance Rate Map; Community Panel No. 250102 0419 F; July 3, 2012. Major structures and infrastructure associated with Station operations include a 108,067 square foot power house building, an aboveground fuel oil tank farm and associated piping transfer •i system, a coal storage pile and coal moving equipment, a coal pile runoff basin, a marine �l terminal, a parking area, and a wastewater treatment system. A 115 kV National Grid switchyard is located to the west of the Station's main powerhouse building and three smaller - warehouse buildings are located north of the main building. •° �) There are six (6) outfalls located on the Project Site, all of which are permitted under the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) Multi-Sector General Permit(MSGP). Of the six (6) MSGP outfalls,there are two which convey stormwater runoff in addition to process water. The first conveys stormwater from the existing parking area and yard via catch basins, manholes and • storm drain pipes located in the main entrance driveway and eventually discharges to the outfall located at the discharge channel. The second conveys stormwater from yard drains and coal pile runoff to an outfall located approximately halfway along the discharge channel. c Tetra Tech • 1 • t i �r All of the outfalls, including those co-mingled with stormwater as described above, receive process water and are considered industrial activity stormwater discharges authorized by EPA through the MSGP. The facility maintains an on-site wastewater treatment system which is used to pre-treat process water prior to discharge to the harbor. 1.2 Proposed Conditions The proposed redevelopment program includes the demolition of the unwanted components at the existing coal-fired electric generation facility and related structures and infrastructure and • construction of a new state-of-the-art Combined Cycle Gas (CCG) fired electric generation facility and related structures and infrastructure on a twenty (20) +/- acre central portion of the r Site. Note that at the time of any future development of the remaining 40+/- acres,portions of the ` now-existing impervious surfaces (including without limitation the tanks and buildings) will i consist of stabilized pervious surfaces. Accordingly, any future build out development of the i remaining 40+/- acres will assume that the pre-demolition state of the site is the existing • condition. That is, any site work that is conducted in connection with the proposed Project i would be considered an interim step in any future development of the remaining 40+/- acres. • The proposed stormwater management system is comprised of four distinct management • components: the CCG Facilities area inside of the berm; the existing parking area and access roadway; the landscaped area; and the remaining forty (40)+/- acres to the north and south of the CCG Facility. Three of the areas, namely the CCG Facilities area inside of the berm, the existing parking area and access roadway, and the landscaped area will be conveyed to a new tide gate structure and discharged to Salem Harbor through the existing discharge channel outfall. The S remaining land to the north of the CCG Facility will be conveyed to a new tide gate structure.and discharged to Salem Harbor through an existing discharge tunnel. The remaining land to the r south of the CCG Facility will discharge to an existing overflow spillway and into Salem Harbor. • Reuse of existing discharges is proposed and no new discharge points will be constructed. Each portion of the proposed redevelopment and stormwater management system is described in further detail below: 1.2.1 CCG Facility within Acoustic Landscaped Berm The CCG Facility layout includes both impervious and pervious surfaces. The impervious surfaces include the roofs and perimeter access driveway. The pervious surfaces include a layer • of clean washed stone underlain with filter fabric and placed in all areas not occupied by buildings, access roadway and supporting facilities. There is also a small grassed area. All i roofing materials will consist of non-metal surfaces and as such the "clean"roof runoff will be directed to a subsurface 30,000 cubic foot stormwater vault and used for landscape irrigation. • Excess water in the vault will be directly discharged to Salem Harbor through the CCF Facility i drainage infrastructure. i Runoff from the paved access perimeter roadway, gravel surfaces and grassed area will be • collected in a series of catch basins, routed through water quality structures, conveyed to a new tide gate structure and discharged to Salem Harbor via the existing discharge channel. i Tetra Tech 2 • •F, ` ) 1.2.2 Existing Parking Area and Access Roadway • Runoff from portions of the main access driveway and the existing parking area to the north of ` `.• the proposed redevelopment is currently collected by a series of catch basins and discharged into Salem Harbor via the existing discharge channel. The existing system will be upgraded with a -.r series of deep sump/hooded catch basins,manholes, storm drainage pipes, and water quality • `' structures. Under proposed conditions,runoff from the existing parking lot and portions of the main access driveway will be collected in a series of deep sump/hooded catch basins, routed -a through a water quality structure, conveyed to a new tide gate structure and discharged to Salem Harbor via the existing discharge channel. Y 1.2.3 Landscaped Area The landscaped area provides approximately seven (7) acres of vegetation consisting of native is species of trees, shrubs, perennials, grasses, seeded lawn and an upland wildflower meadow. A continuous berm around the CCG Facility has been designed to form an acoustic barrier as well as a visual transition between the street and the Facility itself. Landscape walls and paths will also be an integral feature. Paths will be located on the west and south sides of the acoustic landscape berm. Direct precipitation will infiltrate the acoustic landscaped berm and landscaped 16 s areas and any residual runoff will flow to a series of drop inlets located on both sides of the path. 461. Landscape walls will have under drain systems that.connect to the landscape system. The drop inlets will convey stormwater,runoff to a new tide gate structure and directly to the existing i outlet at the discharge channel. 1.2.4 Northern and Southern Portions i; The northern and southern portions of the Site will be stabilized upon the completion of demolition and construction. On the northern portion, several existing buildings will be removed e and the areas will be backfilled with a stabilized surface treatment such as clean washed stone. Runoff from this portion of the Site will be collected in a series of deep sump/hooded catch i) basins installed in select low points,routed through a water quality structure, conveyed to a new tide gate structure and discharged to Salem Harbor via the existing discharge tunnel. On the a southern portion of the Site,minor regrading will occur to fill in areas where the tanks will be �e removed and some soil will be placed in areas requiring remediation based on the MCP compliance. These areas will be stabilized and graded to drain to the Site interior such that runoff infiltrates and overflow is routed to the existing spillway at the southeastern edge of the Site. �5 1.3 Ground Cover f' The overall hydrologic study area for the proposed redevelopment is 64.93 acres. Table 1, *' below, summarizes the ground cover distribution for the hydrologic study area for existing and proposed conditions. There is a decrease of approximately 14.8 acres in impervious area with the proposed redevelopment. Tetra Tech 3 • • • Table 1 Ground Cover Distribution - Hydrologic Area • Asphalt and Concrete 18.86 16.09 i Buildings 5.18 4.93 • Storage Tanks 4.08 0.0 Steel Plates 2.81 0.0 • Coal Pile 4.88 0.0 • Gravel Roads 23.17 9.39 • Crushed Stone 0.0 5.57 Grass and Landscaping 5.95 28.95 Total 64.93 64.93 • 2.0 Stormwater Management • 2.1 Method of Calculation • The hydrologic model created to analyze the hydrology of the Project Site was developed using the Soil Conservation Service (SCS)Technical Release No. 20 (SCS Unit Hydrograph runoff procedure), SCS Technical Release No. 55 (Runoff Curve Numbers and calculating Time of M Concentration),and U.S. Department of Commerce, Technical Paper No. 40, Rainfall Frequency • Atlas of the United States (Rainfall Depths). • The hydrologic model was created and calculated with HydroCAD, Version 10.0 software, developed.by Applied Microcomputer Systems. The reach routing calculations were modeled' • using.the;Storage-Indication plus Translation Method and the pond routing calculations were modeled using the Storage-Indication Method. • Pipe sizing calculations were performed with StormCAD, a computer program by Haestad • Methods,Inc., utilizing the Rational Method to determine the runoff. The Intensity Duration • Frequency Curves for the Boston area were used to obtain the rainfall intensity data for the hydraulic design standard twenty five (25)year storm event. 'See Appendix C for HydroCAD !] Input/Output Data and Appendix D for StormCAD Drainage Collection System Design • Calculations. 2.2 Sources of Data • SCS Technical Release No. 20 (TR-20) • • SCS Technical Release No. 55 (TR-55) • U.S. Department of Commerce, Technical,,Paper No. 40 (TP-40), Rainfall Frequency Atlas of the United States • • Natural Resources Conservation Service (MRCS) Soil Survey of Essex County, Massachusetts, Southern Part Tetra Tech • 4 • • • r ' • Site Specific Subsurface Investigation Data (Performed by Tetra Tech) Intensity Duration Frequency (IDF) Curves for the Boston, Massachusetts Area 2.3 Rainfall Depths In accordance with the DEP Stormwater Management Guidelines, the 2, 10, 25, and 100-Year storm events were analyzed. Type III-24 Hour storms were used for the stormwater runoff calculations. The following are the rainfall depths used for each storm event taken from TP-40. �) Table 2 Rainfall Depths �y i; 2-Year 3.20" 10-Year 4.60" 25-Year 5.50" 03 100-Year 6.60" 2.4 Soil Conditions NRCS Soil Survey of Essex County, Massachusetts, Southern Part, 1984 indicates that soils onsite consist of Urban Land and according to-a review of historic maps and records,much of the site was developed by filling tidal marsh areas within stone seawalls. See Figure 2,NRCS Soil n g Subsurface soil investigation consisting of soil borings and test pits has been performed by Tetra Tech. Evidence of fill soil was observed over much of the site. Typical fill includes granular natural soil and gravel with varying percentages of silt and/or clay. In some locations asphalt, �F brick fragments, coal, coal ash, and debris were observed within the fill. In certain specific f locations of the site evidence of limited oil or hazardous material impacts to fill soils was observed. s The historic record suggests that much of the fill on the site was derived from harbor dredging operations. Apparent marine clay, with varying proportions of silt and sand, and occasionally organic material and/or shells were observed at depths ranging from four(4) to twenty (20) feet below ground surface. In some locations,particularly at the northerly and westerly extents of the site, apparent glacial till was encountered at depths ranging from approximately two (2)to nine (9) feet below ground surface. See Appendix B for Subsurface Investigation Data Logs and Figure 3,Existing Site Soils Map representative of the compiled Subsurface Investigation Data. In areas of the site where subsurface investigation data is not available Hydrologic Soil Group C is used. Under proposed conditions roughly six (6) feet of fill will be imported onto the approximately thirteen(13) central acres of the Site where the CCG Facility will be located. Additionally, fill will be imported onto the approximately seven (7) central acres of the Site where the acoustic landscaped berm and landscaping area surrounding the CCG Facility will be located. The r Tetra Tech 5 0 • • • • proposed material composition for the fill imported for the CCG Facility shall meet MassDOT Standard Specifications for Gravel Borrow. See Figure 4,Proposed Site Soils Map representative of the proposed fill area and existing site soils outside of the proposed CCG Facility redevelopment limits. 2.5 Existing Conditions • 2.5.1 Existing Watershed • Under existing conditions, the Site is divided into twelve(12) drainage subcatchment areas. Characteristics of each drainage subcatchment area is noted below and shown on Figure 5, Existing Conditions Watershed Plan. • There are five (5) design points of analysis for the Site as follows: • • Design Point 1 —The Discharge Channel located on the easterly side of the Site which • ultimately discharges into Salem Harbor. • Design Point 2A—The Coal Pile Runoff Basin Spillway located on the southern portion of the Site adjacent to the Coal Pile Runoff Basin which ultimately conveys stormwater • to Salem Harbor. A • Design Point 2B—The Plant Sump Pump house located on the eastern portion of the Site between the Discharge Channel and Storage Tanks S-1 and S-2 which ultimately conveys • stormwater to the Wastewater Treatment System for treatment prior to discharge into the Drainage Channel which ultimately discharges into Salem Harbor. • • Design Point 3 — Salem Harbor located on the northeasterly side of the Site. • Design Point 4—The Plant screen well located on the northeasterly side of the Site which ultimately discharges into Salem Harbor. • The following is a description of each drainage subcatchment area: Subcatchment 1 consists of pervious gravel material and stormwater sheet flows offsite to the southeast into Salem Harbor(Design Point 1). . • Subcatchment 2 consists of pervious and impervious material and storrawater drains to a • system of catch basins, trench drains,manholes and storm drain pipes which discharge to • the Coal Pile Runoff Basin (Design Point 2A). • Subcatchment 3 consists of pervious and impervious material and stormwater is captured within the tank farm secondary containment berms (Design Point 2B). • • • Subcatchment 4 consists of pervious and impervious material and stormwater drains to a • trench drain which discharges to the Wastewater Treatment System Settling Basins (Design Point 2B). • Tetra Tech • 6 • • • F III • Subcatchment 5 consists of pervious and impervious material and stormwater is captured within the tank farm secondary containment berm (Design Point 2B). • Subcatchment 6 consists of pervious and impervious material and stormwater drains to a € system of catch basins, manholes and storm drain pipes which discharge to the �l> Wastewater Treatment System(Design Point 2B). • Subcatchment 7 consists of pervious and impervious material and stormwater sheet flows offsite to the cast into the Discharge Channel (Design Point 1). • Subcatchment 8 consists of pervious and impervious material and stormwater sheet flows ° offsite to the east into the Discharge.Channel (Design Point 1). r • Subcatchment 9 consists of pervious and impervious material and stormwater sheet flows offsite to the east into Salem Harbor(Design Point 1). Subcatchment 10 consists of pervious and impervious material and stormwater drains to a ,) system of catch basins, manholes and storm drain pipes which discharge to the Drainage a Channel (Design Point 1). • Subcatchment I I consists of pervious and impervious material and stormwater drains to a system of catch basins, trench drains, roof drains,manholes and storm drainpipes which discharge to the Plant Sump Pump House (Design Point 213). �y • Subcatchment 12 consists of pervious and impervious material and stormwater sheet flows offsite to the northeast into Salem Harbor(Design Point 3). 2.5.2 Existing Runoff Calculations In order to determine the peak rate of discharge for existing conditions, runoff hydrographs were generated for the storm events using the SCS TR-20 Method. See Appendix C for HydroCAD i) Input/Output Data. Table 3,below, summarizes the existing stormwater discharge rates. Table 3 Existing Peak Runoff Rates 1 25.88 42.01 52.52~ 65.42 2A 2.82 15.12 20.18 24.88 2B 49.6277.24 95.07 116.82 3 8.66 13.86 17.19 21.24 4* 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Net to Salem Harbor 86.98 148.23 184.96 228.36 Design Point 4,the Plant screen well, is used for cooling water intake under.existing conditions �3 Tetra Tech 7 • • • • 2.1 Proposed Conditions 2.1.1 Proposed Watershed • Under proposed conditions, the Site is divided into ten (10) drainage subcatchment areas. Characteristics of each drainage subcatchment area is noted below and shown on Figure 6, • Proposed Conditions Watershed Plan. The same design points were utilized under proposed conditions; however design point 213, The Plant Sump Pump house, is demolished with the • proposed redevelopment. • Subcatchment 1 consists of pervious gravel material and stormwater sheet flows offsite to the southeast into Salem Harbor(Design Point 1 ). • • Subcatchment 2 consists of pervious and impervious material and stormwater drains to a • stormwater collection area(Design Point 2A). • • • Subcatchment 3 consists of pervious and impervious material and stormwater drains to a system of catch basins, drop inlets,manholes, water quality structures, and storm drain pipes which discharge to the Drainage Channel (Design Point 1). • • Subcatchment 4 consists of pervious and impervious material and stormwater sheet flows • offsite to the east into the Discharge Channel (Design Point 1). • • Subcatchment 5 consists of pervious and impervious material and stormwater sheet flows • offsite to the east into the Discharge Channel (Design Point 1). • • Subcatchment 6 consists of pervious and impervious material and stormwater sheet flows offsite to the east into Salem Harbor(Design Point 1). • • Subcatchment 7 consists of pervious and impervious material and stormwater drains to a system of deep sump/hooded catch basins,manholes,water quality structures, and storm . drain pipes which discharge to the Drainage Channel (Design Point 1). • Subcatchment 8 consists of the remaining impervious slab from the existing Turbine • Room and stormwater drains to a system of deep sump/hooded catch basins, manholes, storm drain pipes, and a water quality structure which discharge to Salem Harbor. • (Design Point 4). • • Subcatchment 9 consists of pervious and impervious material and stormwater drains to a system of deep sump/hooded catch basins, manholes, storm drain pipes, and a water quality structure which discharge to Salem Harbor(Design Point 4). • • Subcatchment 10 consists of pervious and impervious material and stormwater sheet • flows offsite to the northeast into Salem Harbor(Design Point 3). • • • Tetra Tech • 8 • • • e 2.1.2 Proposed Runoff Calculations In order to determine the peak rate of discharge for proposed conditions, runoff hydrographs were generated for the storm events using the SCS TR-20 Method. See Appendix C for HydroCAD Input/Output Data. Under the proposed conditions,runoff hydrographs were routed through the existing points of analysis. Table 4,below, summarizes the proposed stormwater discharge rates. `- Table 4 Proposed Peak Runoff Rates i` 1, 38.88 . . 75.23— ,.101.00 134.20 2A 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.46 y 213' 0.00 0.00" 0.00 0.00 3 8.66 13.86 17.19 21.24 'r 4 2219 32.84 39.64 47.90 2 Net to Salem Harbor 69.73 121.93 157:83 204.80 e 'Design Point 213,the Plant Sump Pump house, is demolished with the proposed redevelopment 2.1.3 Drainage Collection System Design The proposed stone drainage collection system consists of roof drains;catch basins, deep sump/hooded catch basins, drop inlets, manholes,water quality structures, and high density polyethylene pipes that will collect runoff from the roadway, rooftops, parking lot, and 1 landscaped areas within the proposed redevelopment and discharge into Salem Harbor. All stormwater runoff will be routed through water quality structures for treatment prior to discharge ,.a into Salem Harbor. z The proposed storm drainage collection system has been designed for a twenty five (25)year g stone frequency utilizing the Rational Method and Manning's Equation.'StormCAD was used to perform the hydraulic analysis for the stormwater management system. See Appendix D for StormCAD Drainage Collection System Design Calculations and Figure 7,Subcatchment Drainage Area Plan for the subcatchment drainage areas. The following criteria were used to design the pipe network: f �$ • Pipes shall be sized to convey the twenty five (25) year stone event. • Rainfall intensity of 6.0 inches per hour for afive (5)minute duration for the twenty five (25)year stone frequency. • A tail water elevation of 6.5 was used to analyze the pipe network under the spring high tide event. • All storm drain pipes shall be high density polyethylene(HDPE) with minimum cover of two (2)feet unless otherwise noted on the plans. • Manning's coefficient(n) of 0.012 for HPDE. Tetra Tech 9 • • • • • Pipe flow velocities are maintained at a maximum often (10) feet per second(fps). • Manholes are provided at all changes in direction or changes in pipe size. 3.0 DEP Stormwater Management Standards • • The purpose of the Stormwater Management Plan is to provide a comprehensive framework for • the long-term protection of natural resources in and around the Site from degradation as a result • of stormwater discharges. This is achieved through the use of a variety of water quality and quantity control measures designed to decrease the amount of pollutants discharged from the Site • and control`discharge rates and volumes. The following sections describe the regulations pertinent to stormwater management and the • specific-components of the Stormwater Management Plan to be implemented at the Site. • The ten standards contained in the DEP Stormwater Management policy relate to the protection • of wetlands and water bodies, control of water quantity, recharge to groundwater, water quality • and protection of critical areas, erosion/sedimentation control and stormwater maintenance. The • following summarizes the proposed Project's compliance with the Stormwater Management Standards. , • 3.1 Standard # 1 — No New Untreated Discharges • No new.point discharges of untreated stormwater to resource areas associated with the Project as proposed. Stormwater,quality control for the Project includes deep sump/hooded catch basins: • and water quality structures. • Runoff from portions of the main access driveway and the existing parking area to the north of • the proposed redevelopment is collected and conveyed via an upgraded stormwater management • system within the main Site access driveway consisting of deep sump/hooded catch basins, • manholes,-storm drainage pipes, and water quality structures. Runoff from the former plant area • to the north of the proposed redevelopment is collected and conveyed via a new stormwater management system consisting of deep sump/hooded catch basins, manholes, storm drainage • pipes,and a water quality structure. The proposed CCG Facility Area will include a new • stormwater management system consisting of catch basins, manholes, storm drainage pipes, and • water quality structures. All stormwater will be routed through water quality structures with the • exception of those areas where direct precipitation will infiltrate. • 3.2 Standard # 2— Peak Rate Attenuation • Stormwater management systems shall be designed so that post development peak discharge el rates do not exceed pre-development discharge rates. The standard may be waived for • discharges to land subject to coastal storm flowage. However, the proposed redevelopment will • not increase the peak runoff rates from existing conditions. • In order to determine the peak rate of discharge for existing and proposed conditions, runoff • hydrographs were generated for the 2, 10, 25, and 100-Year, 24-hour storm events using the SCS TR-20 Method and Type III rainfall distribution. See Appendix C for HydroCAD Input/Output • Tetra Tech • 10 • • • •.3 Data. Under proposed conditions, runoff hydrographs were routed through the existing points of 'yt analysis. Table 5, below, summarizes the pre- and post-development peak runoff discharge rates - determined in the hydrologic/hydraulic analyses performed for the Project Site. Table 5 Comparison of Peak Runoff Rates s 1 25.88 38.88 13.00 42.01 75.23 33.22 52.52 101.00 48.48 65.42 134.20 68.78 2A 2.82 0.00 2.82 15.12 0.00 -15.12 20.18 0.00 -20.18 24.88 1.46 23.42 213 49.62 0.00 -49.62 77.24 0.00 -77.24 95.07 0.00 -95.07 116.82 0.00 -116.82 3 8.66 8.66 0.00 13.86 13.86 0.00 17.19 17.19 0.00 21.24 21.24 0.00 4 0.00 22.19 22.19 0.00 32.84 32.84 0.00 39.64 39.64 0.00 47.90 47.90 Net to Salem 86.98 69.73 -17.25 148.23 121.93 -26.30 184.96 157.83 -27.13 228.36 204.80 -23.56 rt Harbor 3.3 Standard # 3 - Recharge The ability to recharge groundwater on the Site is limited due to environmental constraints, including contamination and Activity and Use Limitations. The opportunity to provide r infiltration,of stormwater runoff is limited to the proposed pervious areas both within and outside of the CCG Facility berm. Within the CCG Facility berm pervious areas will consist of a layer h of clean washed stone underlain with filter fabric and placed in locations between the buildings, access roadway and supporting facilities. Direct precipitation and runoff from the access roadways will be directed to a series of catch basins within the gravel areas, with some of the �3 runoff infiltrating through the gravel and underlying six(6) foot layer of fill. �g Other pervious areas in the CCG Facility Area consist of the acoustic landscaped bean and landscaped area to the southwest. Direct precipitation will infiltrate the acoustic landscaped t berm and landscaped areas and any residual runoff will flow to a series of drop inlets located on both sides of the path. The drop inlets will be routed directly to the existing outlet at the discharge channel. The landscaped area is located within an area where mitigation measures have been implemented in the past to address historic releases of oil and hazardous materials (OHM). Although these Sites have been closed under the MCP,residual OHM may be present at these locations consistent with the closure documents., Therefore, to minimize the potential for mobilization of potential OHM, infiltration in this particular area is minimized to the extent possible while still allowing for limited runoff and infiltration. 3.4 Standard #4 -Water Quality Best Management Practices (BMPs) will be used to provide water quality. The following BMPs will be provided on-site: deep sump/hooded catch basins and Stormceptor treatment structures. Tetra Tech �Y 11 • • • • 3.4.1 Deep Sump/Hooded Catch Basins All proposed catch basins within the main Site drive and the northern Site area will be deep • sump/hooded catch basins, which will serve to trap sediment and floatables before entering the • stormwater management system. Sumps will be four-foot deep. Catch basins will be inspected • monthly and, if necessary, cleaned when sediment reaches half full depth to ensure that the catch basins are working in their intended fashion and that they are free of debris. Sediments and hydrocarbons shall be properly handled and disposed of, in accordance with local, state, and • federal,requirements. All catch basins will be installed with sediment sumps and oil hoods. In accordance with DEP Standards a 25%total suspended solids(TSS)removal rate is credited for this BMP. • 3.4.2 Stormceptor®Treatment Structures Stormceptor structures are proposed to treat runoff from the CCG Facility Area, existing • parking area and former plant area to the north of the proposed redevelopment. These structures are located such that stormwater runoff will be routed through the water quality structures prior to discharging to Salem Harbor. • • In accordance with DEP Standards the MASTEP laboratory study found the Stormceptor STC • 900 achieved 75%removal of"Bulk TSS",which MASTEP considers equivalent to suspended sediment concentration (SSC). While this information references the STC 900,the performance • of the structures can be scaled upward or downward based on the size of the units, and areas and flows to be treated. The TSS Removal Calculations in Appendix F are representative of the • MASTEP 75%removal rate. However, according to the Stormceptor sizing program based upon independent test data, the Stormceptor®structures specified on the plans will achieve TSS • removal 'rates in excess of 80%. See Appendix E for Water Quality Structure Efficiency Calculations. • Although redevelopment projects are not required to achieve 80%removal of TSS, the • incorporation of these BMPs will achieve a cumulative TSS removal rate of greater than 80% • where practicable. Additionally, it should be noted that the potential generation of TSS from the • post construction CCG Facility operations is relatively low due to its intended function, as • operations are relatively clean, and exterior equipment/structures require little maintenance. All CCG Facility areas will be surfaced with either pavement or clean washed stone,providing • minimal sources for TSS. See Appendix F for TSS Removal Calculations and a copy of the • MASTEP Report. • 3.5 Standard # 5 — Land Uses with Higher Potential Pollutant Loads (LUHPPLs) • The Project is considered a land use with higher potential pollutant loads (LUHPPL) since it is • classified as an industrial sector regulated by the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination • System(NPDES)Multi-Sector General Permit. Conformance with LUPPHL requirements • includes the provisions of a detailed source control and pollution prevention plan which will be • prepared in conjunction with the NPDES permit coverage. All runoff in contact with potential • pollutants will be routed to water quality structures prior to discharge. • • Tetra Tech • 12 • • • •.x 3.6 Standard # 6 Critical Area The Site will not discharge stormwater within a Zone II or Interim Wellhead Protection Area. Critical areas include shellfish growing areas which are located in Salem Harbor. Construction 's term pollution controls will include the implementation of the Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan. Operation term source control and pollution prevention measures will be implemented as part of CCG Facility operations through the implementation of the Operations and Maintenance Plan. The stormwater management system is designed to treat the required one (1) inch water quality volume. 3.7 Standard # 7 — Redevelopment Projects Redevelopment projects include development, rehabilitation, expansion and phased projects on previously developed sites, provided the redevelopment results in no net increase in impervious area. As such,the proposed Project qualifies as a redevelopment project and is required to meet the following Stormwater Management Standards to the maximum extent practicable: Standard 2 i and 3, and the pretreatment and structural best management practice requirements of Standards 4, 5, and 6. The redevelopment Project results in a net reduction of impervious surface of approximately 14.8 acres. > 3.8 Standard # 8 — Pollution Prevention and Erosion and Sedimentation Control The Project will result in the disturbance of greater than one (1) acre of land and discharges to a ix Water of the U.S. and therefore requires the preparation and implementation of a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) in accordance with the EPA NPDES General Permit for ` Discharges from Construction Activities, effective date February 16, 2012. As more detailed i demolition and construction information is still being developed, and it is expected that the y Project Site will be demolished and constructed in phases, a Construction Period Pollution Prevention and Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan has not been included in the Stormwater Report but will be submitted before land disturbance begins. The SWPPP will be prepared describing the specific practices, installation methods and g inspection requirements for temporary and permanent erosion prevention and sediment control practices. The SWPPP will follow the template developed by the U.S.EPA and filed with the �j Salem Conservation Commission. At a minimum, the SWPPP will include the following i' measures: �s. • Minimize the extent and time of exposed soils; {. • Provide perimeter sediment control including silt fence and/or compost filter tubes; `f • Provide catch basin inlet protection including geotextile filter fabric and gravel drop; l • Minimize sediment track out with stabilized construction exits; �I • Dedicated concrete washout areas; • Control discharges from soil stockpiles include temporary erosion control measures and perimeter sediment controls; • Minimize dust and soil compaction; Tetra Tech 13 • • • • • Temporary stormwater management practices including basins, traps and swales; • Dewatering requirements; • • Temporary and permanent stabilization requirements, including seeding, mulching and • matting; • • Good housekeeping pollution prevention measures; • • Maintenance requirements; and • Inspection, recordkeeping, and reporting requirements • • 3.9 Standard # 9 — Operation and Maintenance Plan • The stormwater management system will be the responsibility of the Proponent and a project • specific Operations and Maintenance Plan is included in Appendix G. • 3.10 Standard # 10 — Prohibition of Illicit Discharges • • To the best of the owners and engineers knowledge,no illicit discharges exist on Site and no illicit discharges will be incorporated as part of the proposed redevelopment Project into the • proposed stormwater management system. • 4.0 Conclusion The stormwater management system addresses both the quantity and quality of stormwater • runoff from the Site and conforms to the ten (10) standards outlined by the Massachusetts • Department of Environmental Protection Stormwater Policy. • • • • • • • • • • • • • • Tetra Tech • 14 • • • • • • • • • � • • • • • • i • • i • • • • II� • • � • i i • • • i • • • • • • • • i �I • • .72 J on Mod �' ..✓` •.sS t�sCP..r"�Lfy�i •, 0011. +`�9�` 1 . . upe`i �'� i®e�� i��i:"� 1 1V�0EwWA 'J y par, r f�(ai ICL :.1 1-J�• •+� .sy���llrr��tilrr�Ill TI4 '��b TFr�o!w i fi'• ti A � e rig �. � 1:MW o L a f 1 � �f jy,n �� ��p✓•'�� �.�P-wl�Y' �.f>iY V=ia���� © 1 111 111 Legend r. L. ► p • y' ,� -` 102E rs • NRCS Statewide Soils .°-r,�,,,,,, _ u� • -`'" 74LV s • .Hydrologic Soil Group �'"'�_ s '` � � Phi -i • Other - " 10R • !/"`� • cro 657 • 'k. ► ���" 4,:- `,, lf."�r X,#�l+�fes.�_�',: �'S i' ;'.,`+. �`I�� 40 94 1000) Ir fhp- • � � Y r. s ! .v iii • i +' Lyy ry r' {� _ . ems` ' � (4 • • • • • Salem Harbor Station Redevelopment Project • ® 24 Fort Avenue • �J Salem,Massachusetts • O TETRATECH o zoo aoo Base Map: Feel MassGIS April 2008 Airphoto NRCS SOIIS Map Figure 2 • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • imL • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • a • x • Q • Q a ok • • • • O 0)44 0) 0 - - W 0 Appendix A 0) Checklist for Stormwater Report 0) 0 O Oma. • Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection ` Bureau of Resource Protection - Wetlands Program Checklist for Stormwater Report A. Introduction ., Important:when A Stormwater Report must be submitted with the Notice of Intent permit application to document r filling out forms on the computer, compliance with the Stormwater Management Standards.The following checklist is NOT a substitute for •_Y .use only the tab the Stormwater Report(which should provide more substantive and detailed information) but is offered key to move your here as a tool to help the applicant organize their Stormwater Management documentation for their cursor-do not Report and for the reviewer to assess this information in a consistent format. As noted in the Checklist, use the return the Stormwater Report must contain the engineering computations and supporting information set forth in key. Volume 3 of the Massachusetts Stormwater Handbook.The Stormwater Report must be• re ared and certified by a Registered Professional Engineer(RPE)licensed in the Commonwealth. p p X51 The Stormwater Report must include: •'` The Stormwater Checklist completed and stamped by a Registered Professional Engineer(see page 2)that certifies that the Stormwater Report contains all required submittals.' This Checklist is to be used as the cover for the completed Stormwater Report. • Applicant/Project Name • Project Address Name of Firm and Registered Professional Engineer that prepared the Report • Long-Term Pollution Prevention Plan required by Standards 4-6 - Construction Period Pollution Prevention and Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan required by Standard 8Z •' Operation and Maintenance Plan required by Standard 9 In addition to all plans and supporting information,the Stormwater Report must include a brief narrative •' describing stormwater management practices, including environmentally sensitive site design and LID 03 techniques, along with a diagram depicting runoff through the proposed BMP treatment train. Plans are required to show existing and proposed conditions, identify all wetland resource areas, NRCS soil types, 00 critical areas, Land Uses with Higher Potential Pollutant Loads(LUHPPL), and any areas on the site 0), where infiltration rate is greater than 2.4 inches per hour. The Plans shall identify the drainage areas for `a both existing and proposed conditions at a scale that enables verification of supporting calculations. As noted in the Checklist, the Stormwater Management Report shall document compliance with each of the Stormwater Management Standards as provided in the Massachusetts Stormwater Handbook. The ` soils evaluation and calculations shall be done using the methodologies set forth in Volume 3 of the Massachusetts Stormwater Handbook. To ensure that the Stormwater Report is complete, applicants are required to fill in the Stormwater Report Checklist by checking the box to indicate that the specified information has been included in the Stormwater Report. If any of the information specified in the checklist has not been submitted,the applicant must provide an explanation. The completed Stormwater Report Checklist and Certification must be submitted with the Stormwater Report. •;f 'The Stormwater Report may also include the Illicit Discharge Compliance Statement required by Standard 10. If not included in the Stormwater Report,the Illicit Discharge Compliance Statement must be submitted prior to the discharge of stormwater runoff to the post-construction best management practices. •'t 3 For some complex projects,it may not be possible to include the Construction Period Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan in the Stormwater Report. In that event,the issuing authority has the discretion to issue an Order of Conditions that approves the project and includes a condition requiring the proponent to submit the Construction Period Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan •" before commencing any land disturbance activity on the site. �V, .! Checklist for Stormwater Report•04/01/08 Stormwater Report Checklist Page 1 of 8 �ey w f Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection Bureau of Resource Protection -Wetlands Program s$. Checklist for Stormwater Report r ?. B. Stormwater Checklist and Certification ? The following checklist is intended to serve as a guide for applicants as to the elements that ordinarily need to be addressed in a complete Stormwater Report. The checklist is also intended to provide conservation commissions and other reviewing authorities with a summary of the components necessary for a comprehensive Stormwater Report that addresses the ten Stormwater Standards. Note: Because stonnwater requirements vary from project to project, it is possible that a complete �? Stormwater Report may not include information on some of the subjects specified in the Checklist. If it is •.z determined that a specific item does not apply to the project under review, please note that the item is not applicable(N.A.)and provide the reasons for that determination. A complete checklist must include the Certification set forth below signed by the Registered Professional .+ Engineer who prepared the Stormwater Report. Registered Professional Engineer's Certification •'f I have reviewed the Stormwater Report, including the soil evaluation, computations, Long-term Pollution Prevention Plan, the Construction Period Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan (if included), the Long- .t term Post-Construction Operation and Maintenance Plan, the Illicit Discharge Compliance Statement(if included)and the plans showing the stormwater management system, and have determined that they have been prepared in accordance with the requirements of the Stormwater Management Standards as further elaborated by the Massachusetts Stormwater Handbook. I have also,determined that the information presented in the Stormwater Checklist is accurate and that the information presented in the Stormwater Report accurately reflects conditions at the.site.as of the date of this permit application. �3a Registered Professional Engineer Block and Signature SHW.AIA *J a `� o MnRC►1ETT1 �, �J � CIVIL •O N0:1e27Y • 90�F� O kl d 01 signature and ate �3 Checklist Project Type: Is the application for new development, redevelopment, or a mix of new and redevelopment? } ❑ New development `0 ® Redevelopment �G ❑ Mix of New Development and Redevelopment Checklist for Stormwater Report•04/01/08 Stormwater Report Checklist•Page 2 of 8 ms�s„„ • Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection Bureau of Resource Protection - Wetlands Program a �\ Checklist for Stormwater Report Checklist (continued) LID Measures: Stormwater Standards require LID measures to be considered. Document what environmentally sensitive design and LID Techniques were considered during the planning and design of the project: ❑ No disturbance to any Wetland Resource Areas i% ❑ Site Design Practices (e.g. clustered development, reduced frontage setbacks) ® Reduced Impervious Area (Redevelopment Only) Minimizing disturbance to existing trees and shrubs ❑ LID Site Design Credit Requested: !, •} ❑ Credit 1 ❑ Credit 2 ❑ Credit 3 3 ❑ Use of"country drainage"versus curb and gutter conveyance and pipe ❑ Bioretention Cells(includes Rain Gardens) ❑ Constructed Stormwater Wetlands(includes Gravel Wetlands designs) �S a Treebox Filter ❑ Water Quality Swale ❑ Grass Channel • ® Green Roof WJ1 Other(describe): Stormwater Recapture and Reuse for Lanscape Irrigation Oa Standard 1: No New Untreated Discharges ® No new untreated discharges. �> ❑ Outlets have been designed so there is no erosion or scour to wetlands and waters of the Commonwealth 93 ❑ Supporting calculations specified in Volume 3 of the Massachusetts Stormwater Handbook included. �s Checklist for Stormwater Report•U4/01/08 Stormwater Report Checklist•Page 3 of 8 F • Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection Bureau of Resource Protection - Wetlands Program Checklist for Stormwater Report • Checklist (continued) • Standard 2: Peak Rate Attenuation ❑ Standard 2 waiver requested because the project is located in land subject to coastal storm flowage • and stormwater discharge is to a wetland subject to coastal flooding. • ❑ Evaluation provided to determine whether off-site flooding increases during the 100-year 24-hour • storm. ® Calculations provided to show that post-development peak discharge rates do not exceed pre- • development rates for the 2-year and 10-year 24-hour storms. If evaluation shows that off-site • flooding increases during the 100-year 24-hour storm, calculations are also provided to show that • post-development peak discharge rates do not exceed pre-development rates for the 100-year 24- hour storm. • Standard 3: Recharge (Not Applicable due to Environmental Constraints—Refer to.SW Report) • • ❑ Soil Analysis provided. • ❑ Required Recharge Volume calculation provided. • ❑ Required Recharge volume reduced through use of the LID site Design Credits.. • • ❑ Sizing the infiltration,BMPs is based on the following method: Check the method used. • ❑ Static ❑ Simple Dynamic ❑ Dynamic Field' • ❑ Runoff from all impervious areas at the site discharging to the infiltration BMP. • • ❑ Runoff from all impervious areas at the site is not discharging to the infiltration BMP and calculations • are provided showing that the drainage area contributing runoff to the infiltration BMPs is sufficient to generate the required recharge volume. • ❑ Recharge BMPs have been sized to infiltrate the Required Recharge Volume. • ❑ Recharge BMPs have been sized to infiltrate the Required Recharge Volume only to the maximum • extent practicable for the following reason: • ❑ Site is comprised solely of C and D soils and/or bedrock at the land surface • ❑ M.G.L. c. 21E sites pursuant to 310 CMR 40.0000 • • ❑ Solid Waste Landfill pursuant to 310 CMR 19.000 • ❑ Project is otherwise subject to Stormwater Management Standards only to the maximum extent • practicable. ❑ Calculations showing that the infiltration BMPs will drain in 72 hours are provided. ❑ Property includes a M.G.L. c. 21E site or a solid waste landfill and a mounding analysis is included. • • '80%TSS removal is required prior to discharge to infiltration BMP if Dynamic Field method is used. Checklist for Stormwater Report•04/01/08 - - Stormwater Report Checklist•Page 4 of 8 • • • Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection • Bureau of Resource Protection - Wetlands Program r3K Checklist for Stormwater Report Checklist (continued) • ' Standard 3: Recharge (continued) •.d El The infiltration BMP is used to attenuate peak flows during storms greater than or equal to the 10- •s year 24-hour storm and separation to seasonal high groundwater is less than 4 feet and a mounding • analysis is provided. •-'.H . ❑ Documentation is provided showing that infiltration BMPs do not adversely impact nearby wetland resource areas. •-� Standard 4:Water Quality •' The Long-Term Pollution Prevention Plan typically includes the following: • Good housekeeping practices; Provisions for storing materials and waste products inside or under cover; • Vehicle washing controls; • Requirements for routine inspections and maintenance of stormwater BMPs; • ) Spill prevention and response plans; • Provisions for maintenance of lawns, gardens, and other landscaped areas; . • Requirements for storage and use of fertilizers, herbicides, and pesticides; •-$ • Pet waste management provisions; �' ' • Provisions for operation and management of septic systems; • Provisions for solid wastemanagement; • Snow disposal'and plowing plans relative to Wetland Resource Areas; • Winter Road Salt and/or Sand Use and Storage restrictions; • Street sweeping schedules; • Provisions for prevention of illicit discharges to the stormwater management system; �. • Documentation that Stormwater BMPs are designed to provide for shutdown and containment in the event of a spill or discharges to or near critical areas or from LUHPPL; •• a Training for staff or personnel involved with implementing Long-Term Pollution Prevention Plan; .-' • List of Emergency contacts for implementing Long-Term Pollution Prevention Plan. • ❑ A Long-Term Pollution Prevention Plan is attached to Stormwater Report and is included as an • attachment to the Wetlands Notice of Intent. ❑ Treatment BMPs subject to the 44% TSS removal pretreatment requirement and the one inch rule for �1 calculating the water quality volume are included,and discharge: •_r ❑ is within the Zone 11 or Interim Wellhead Protection Area ❑ is near or to other critical areas •y •y ❑ is within soils with a rapid infiltration rate (greater than 2.4 inches per hour) •:' ❑ involves runoff from land uses with higher potential pollutant loads. ❑ The Required Water Quality Volume is reduced through use of the LID site Design Credits. •a ® Calculations documenting that the treatment train meets the 80%TSS removal requirement and, if applicable,the 44%TSS removal pretreatment requirement, are provided. •FK 0%0 Checklist for Stormwater Report•04/01/08 Stormwater Report Checklist•Page 5 of 8 W • Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection Bureau of Resource Protection -Wetlands Program Checklist for Stormwater Report • Checklist (continued) . • Standard 4:Water Quality(continued) • ❑ The BMP is sized (and calculations provided)based on: ❑ The''/z"or 1"Water Quality Volume or • ❑ The equivalent flow rate associated with the Water Quality Volume and documentation is • provided showing that the BMP treats the required water quality volume. • ® The applicant proposes to use proprietary BMPs, and documentation supporting use of proprietary • BMP and proposed TSS removal rate is provided. This documentation may be in the form of the propriety BMP checklist found in Volume 2, Chapter of the Massachusetts Stormwater Handbook • and submitting copies of the TARP Report, STEP Report, and/or other thirdparty studies verifying • performance of the proprietary BMPs. ❑ A TMDL exists that indicates a need to reduce pollutants other than TSS and documentation showing • that the BMPs selected are consistent with the TMDL is provided. • Standard 5: Land Uses With Nigher Potential Pollutant Loads(LUHPPLs) • ❑ The NPDES Multi-Sector General Permit covers the land use and the Stormwater Pollution • Prevention Plan(SWPPP) has been included with the Stormwater Report. • ® The NPDES Multi-Sector General Permit covers the land use and the SWPPP will be submitted prior to the discharge of stormwater to the post-construction stormwater BMPs. • ❑ The NPDES Multi-Sector General Permit does not cover the land use. • ❑ LUHPPLs are located at the site and industry specific source control and pollution prevention • measures have been proposed to reduce or eliminate the exposure of LUHPPLs to rain, snow, snow • melt and runoff, and been included in the long term Pollution Prevention.Plan. • ❑ All exposure has been eliminated. • ❑ All exposure has not been eliminated and all BMPs selected are on MassDEP LUHPPL list. • • ❑ The LUHPPL has the potential to generate runoff with moderate to higher concentrations of oil and • grease(e.g. all parking lots with >1000 vehicle trips per day)and the treatment train includes an oil grit separator, a filtering bioretention area, a sand filter or equivalent. • Standard 6: Critical Areas • ❑ The discharge is near or to a critical area and the treatment train includes only BMPs that MassDEP • has approved for stormwater discharges to or near that particular class of critical area. • ® Critical areas and BMPs are identified in the Stormwater Report. • • • • • • Checklist for Stormwater Report•04/01/08 Stormwater Report Checklist•Page 6 of 8 • • • Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection Bureau of Resource Protection - Wetlands Program Checklist for Stormwater Report �e Checklist (continued) Standard 7: Redevelopments and Other Projects Subject to the Standards only to the maximum extent practicable • ® The project is subject to the Stormwater Management Standards only to the maximum Extent �a Practicable as a: ❑ Limited Project ❑ Small Residential Projects:5-9 single family houses or 5-9 units in a multi-family development �j provided there is no discharge that may potentially affect a critical area. ❑ Small Residential Projects: 2-4 single family houses or 2-4 units in a multi-family development with a discharge to a critical area 5:1 ❑ Marina and/or boatyard provided the hull painting, service and maintenance areas are protected from exposure to rain, snow, snow melt and runoff } ❑ Bike Path and/or Foot Path ® Redevelopment Project ❑ Redevelopment portion of mix of new and redevelopment. �. ❑ Certain standards are not fully met(Standard No. 1,8, 9, and 10 must always be fully met)and an 0 explanation of why these standards are not met is contained in the Stormwater Report. ® The project involves redevelopment and a description.of all measures that have been taken to improve existing conditions is provided in the Stormwater Report. The redevelopment checklist found in Volume 2 Chapter 3 of the Massachusetts Stormwater Handbook maybe used to document that the proposed stormwater management system (a) complies with Standards 2, 3 and the pretreatment and structural BMP requirements of Standards 4-6 to the maximum extent practicable and (b) a improves existing conditions. i) Standard 8: Construction Period Pollution Prevention and Erosion and Sedimentation Control W11 A Construction Period Pollution Prevention and Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan must include the following information: Narrative; • Construction Period Operation and Maintenance Plan; !4 Names of Persons or Entity Responsible for Plan Compliance; Construction Period Pollution Prevention Measures; • Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan Drawings; • Detail drawings and specifications for erosion control BMPs, including sizing calculations; Vegetation Planning; !'e Site Development Plan; • Construction Sequencing Plan; Sequencing of Erosion and Sedimentation Controls; Operation and Maintenance of Erosion and Sedimentation Controls; • Inspection Schedule; •�` Maintenance Schedule; Inspection and Maintenance Log Form. �; ❑ A Construction Period Pollution Prevention and Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan containing the information set forth above has been included in the Stormwater Report. o ov, Checklist for Stormwater Report•04/01/08 Stormwater Report Checklist•Page 7 of 8 ov �G • Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection • Bureau of Resource Protection - Wetlands Program • Checklist for Stormwater Report • • Checklist (continued) • • Standard 8: Construction Period Pollution Prevention and Erosion and Sedimentation Control • (continued) ® The project is highly complex and information is included in the Stormwater Report that explains why • it is not possible to submit the Construction Period Pollution Prevention and Erosion and • Sedimentation Control Plan with the application.A Construction Period Pollution Prevention and • Erosion and Sedimentation Control has not been included in the Stormwater Report but will be submitted before land disturbance begins. • ❑ The project is not covered by a NPDES Construction General Permit. • ❑ The project is covered by a NPDES Construction General Permit and a copy of the SWPPP is in the • Stormwater Report. • ❑ The project is covered by a NPDES Construction General Permit but no SWPPP been submitted. • The SWPPP will be submitted BEFORE land disturbance begins. • Standard 9: Operation and Maintenance Plan • ® The Post Construction Operation and Maintenance Plan is included in the Stormwater Report and • includes the following information: ® Name of the stormwater management system owners; • ® Party responsible for operation and maintenance; ® Schedule for implementation of routine and non-routine maintenance tasks; • ❑ Plan showing the location of all stormwater BMPs maintenance access areas; • ❑ Description and delineation of public safety features; ❑ Estimated operation and maintenance budget; and • ® Operation and Maintenance Log Form. • ❑ The responsible party is not the owner of the parcel where the BMP is located and the Stormwater • Report includes the following submissions: • ❑ A copy of the legal instrument(deed, homeowners association, utility trust or other legal entity) • that establishes the terms of and legal responsibility for the operation and maintenance of the • project site stormwater BMPs; ❑ A plan and easement deed that allows site access for the legal entity to operate and maintain • BMP functions. • Standard 10: Prohibition of Illicit Discharges • ❑ The Long-Term Pollution Prevention Plan includes measures to prevent illicit discharges; • • ® An Illicit Discharge Compliance Statement is attached; • ❑ NO Illicit Discharge Compliance Statement is attached but will be submitted prior to the discharge of • any stormwater to post-construction BMPs. • Checklist for Stormwater Report•04/01/08 - Stormwater Report Checklist•Page 8 of 8 • • • • N • • • • • • • • • A • • • • • • • • • w • • • • • m • x 'v c • d a a � a • • • • • • • • • r • e\ . •: « � � •> � � •1 . � � � •, . . 11 � 1! � 1! � Appendix B ��. . . . : . Subsurface Investigation DBL g . 1. � . . o � . . 01 Imo. TEST PIT NUMBER TP-101 I NMI TETRATECH PAGE 1 OF 1 �� One Grant Street Framingham, MA 01701 CLIENT Footlxinl-Power PROJECT NAME Salem Habor Station ^' PROJECT NUMBER 127-62117-12002 - PROJECT LOCATION Salem,MA n DATE STARTED 9/19/12 COMPLETED 9/19/12 GROUND ELEVATION TEST PIT SIZE 6' y EXCAVATION CONTRACTOR Crawford DdI ing Services GROUND WATER LEVELS: EXCAVATION METHOD Excavator AT TIME OF EXCAVATION — LOGGED BY Michael Horton CHECKED BY Bill Phelps AT END OF EXCAVATION — NOTES AFTER EXCAVATION — Lu as}w o W w REMARKS Q O- MATERIAL DESCRIPTION p Rz a a z cp ur 0 TOPSOIL;fine to medium silly sand with organics Sample Collected 0.5 . $ (0-1) - fine to medium SILTY SAND With trace GRAVEL up to 2" fine to medium SAND,no groundwater observed,blast rocks al 3.5'at the west end of test t w 9 pi,possible w, seawall u �X 0 t 2 �a N oilH N Z K .,} w 3 U O � 2� a a `+. � 4 N 4.5 a End of Test Pd Bottom of test pit at 4.5 feet. •� o �} z vf � • TEST PIT NUMBER TP-102 TETRATECN PAGE , of , One Grant Street Framingham, MA 01701 CLIENT Footprint-Power PROJECT NAME Salem Habor Station PROJECT NUMBER 127-62117-12002 PROJECT LOCATION Salem,MA DATE STARTED 9/18/12 COMPLETED 9/18/12 GROUND ELEVATION TEST PIT SIZE 6' EXCAVATION CONTRACTOR Crawford Drilling Services GROUND WATER LEVELS: EXCAVATION METHOD Excavator AT TIME OF EXCAVATION — LOGGED BY Bill Phelps CHECKED BY Bill Phelps AT END OF EXCAVATION — NOTES AFTER EXCAVATION — W 0. c U W w z, W REMARKS Q O MATERIAL DESCRIPTION o a ¢ ¢Z � N 0 light brown fine SILTY SAND;some fine to medium GRAVEL;trace SILT -ps 1� brown/orange medium to course SAND;some fine to medium GRAVEL;trace SILT b'.tJ c.• 'a Gi N .h: W . . . N • • f_ LL 2 0. .. 2.0 F w black SILT with coal;trace wood;strong creosote odor(from wood) Encountered several o additional pipes and cables perpendicular i to hole Slopped excavation 2'5 Bottom of test pit at 2.5 feet 0 n 0 w LL N U O 0 0 a W _N a N_ F O Vi F Z U • Y ?. TEST PIT NUMBER TP-103 O TETRATEGH PAGE 1 OF 1 • One Grant Street Framingham, MA 01701 •k f CLIENT Footprint-Power PROJECT NAME Salem Habor Station PROJECT NUMBER 1272117-12002 PROJECT LOCATION Salem,MA I DATE STARTED 9/18/12 COMPLETED 9/18/12 GROUND ELEVATION TEST PIT SIZE 6' • EXCAVATION CONTRACTOR Crawford Drilling Services GROUND WATER LEVELS: • - EXCAVATION METHOD Excavator AT TIME OF EXCAVATION — LOGGED BY Bill Phelps CHECKED BY Bill Phelps AT END OF EXCAVATION — �'' NOTES AFTER EXCAVATION — LU _ K U W •t = W O MATERIAL DESCRIPTIONa� REMARKS 2z 0 • 0.0 Tan/brown fine to medium SAND with crushed stone,brick,and GRAVEL;dry,no odor •j Sample collected0.5 grey/dark brown fine to medium SAND with crushed stone;some SILT;dry,no odor •f •i tan/orange SANDY SILT;stiff with some fine to medium GRAVEL;trace COBBLE;dry,no odor R 2.5 aYY r g a w w� 1 � .l' O •� u . 3.5 mred/Wown medium to course SAND and GRAVEL;some fractured .t dry,no odor rock/cobbles;very dense/tough to dig; w u 0, o .✓' 0 .i•j d; 0 5.0 4'X 5.0 abrown/grey SILTY SAND with blast rock fragments from bottom of hole 0 w •3 LL N .? g •Y R' o g a g N O n 7.5 09 a � • • 8.5 •t - Bottom of test pit at 8.5 feet. w • TEST PIT NUMBER TP-104 TETRATECH PAGE 1 OF 1 One Grant Street Framingham, MA 01701 CLIENT Footprint-Power PROJECT NAME Salem Habor Station PROJECT NUMBER 127-62117-12002 PROJECT LOCATION Salem,MA DATE STARTED 9/18/12 COMPLETED 9/18/12 GROUND ELEVATION TEST PIT SIZE 6' EXCAVATION CONTRACTOR Crawford Drilling.Senvices GROUND WATER LEVELS: EXCAVATION METHOD Excavator AT TIME OF EXCAVATION — LOGGED BY Bill Phelps CHECKED BY Bill Phelps AT END OF.EXCAVATION — NOTES - AFTER EXCAVATION — w Q- U Q w g REMARKS a.p MATERIAL DESCRIPTION a- z t9 rn 0.0 0.3 orangabrown fine to medium SAND;well sorted;dry,no odor taMight brown medium to coarse SAND;trace fine to medium GRAVEL;trace COBBLES;dry to moist @ b 4' 'rJ:• o: . c:•: R 2.5 - t- LL xj�N N a 1� w :IJ 4.0 w 0 •u• greyttan medium to coarse SAND;well sorted;some fine to medium GRAVEL;trace COBBLES,moist to 0 wet 5 5.0 b:tJ 0 a w LL U L o '•q� K 7.5 a b•.tJ Hole collasped at 9', ,•; no signs of water • • 9.0 running in,weeping at grey fine SILTY SAND;some medium to coarse SAND;little fine GRAVEL;dense;moist;very poorly i 5' sorted;no ode u Bottom of lest pit at 9.0 feet. • • 1 TEST PIT NUMBER� GE I OF I' TETRATECH PAGE OF One Grant Street Framingham, MA 01701 - CLIENT Footprint-Power PROJECT NAME Salem Habor Station PROJECT NUMBER 127-62117-12002 PROJECT LOCATION _Salem MA j DATE STARTED 9/18/12 COMPLETED -9/18/12 GROUND ELEVATION TEST PIT SIZE 6' - �"* EXCAVATION CONTRACTOR Crawford Drilling Services. GROUND WATER LEVELS: 3 • EXCAVATION METHOD Excavator AT TIME OF EXCAVATION - -" LOGGED BY Bill Phelps CHECKED BY Bill Phelps AT END OF EXCAVATION — �ea NOTES AFTER EXCAVATION — - " w w U w a REMARKS O _ MATERIAL DESCRIPTION �Z 0.0 0.3 orange/brown medium to coarse SAND;some fine GRAVEL;dry,no odor Sr� b:tJ tan/brown fine to medium.SAND;some fine to medium GRAVEL(rounded);trace COBBLES;dry,no odor -f all:JJ a 2.5 0:�' F a .� o TT• •` •:Q: 0 rc 5 4 Water encountere . . ' . a.h grey fine to medium SAND,some fine to medium GRAVEL;trace rounded COBBLES and roots y s 5.0 . . a J.'. .yF LL U po rc :'. n G : ev LL •:�. a q� Ilk" �✓? a • 7.5 03 aZ End of excavation due . X' 8.0 - a h to hole collapse Bottom of test Or at 8.0 feet. r z_ • TEST PIT NUMBER TP-106 a TETtATECH PAGE 1 OF 1 One Grant Street Framingham, MA 01701 CLIENT Footprint-Power PROJECT NAME Salem Habor Station PROJECT NUMBER 127-62117-12002 PROJECT LOCATION Salem,MA DATE STARTED 9/18112 COMPLETED 9118/12 - GROUND ELEVATION TEST PIT SIZE 6' EXCAVATION CONTRACTOR Crawford Drilling Services GROUND WATER LEVELS: EXCAVATION METHOD Excavator AT TIME OF EXCAVATION — LOGGED BY Bill Phelps CHECKED BY Bill Phelps AT END OF EXCAVATION — NOTES AFTER EXCAVATION — W } U a= W REMARKS a O MATERIAL DESCRIPTION W- <z N 0.0 orangelbrown medium to coarse SAND well sorted;dry no odor ' 0.3 light brown medium to coarse SAND;some fine to medium GRAVEL;trace COBBLES;dry,no odor .Q. ;Q•; 1.7 •;Q; same as above;some orange SAND mixed in;dry;no odor 'a t'Z 2.5 d. C •:O: n w m 3.0 grey medium to coarse SAND;some SILT;moist to wet;no odor or sheen a r w - m (7 O z K O mm K O K 0 5.0 Water at 7.5'although w some water at 4.5' LL w U O K a a m 0 n' N a 7.5 0 o Excavation stopped 8.0 q due to sidewalk j caving Bottom of test pit at 8.0 feet. z z •S S TEST PIT NUMBER GE I r OF 1 TETRATEGH PACE of 1 One Grant Street Framingham, MA 01701 CLIENT Footprint-Power. PROJECT NAME Salem Habor Station PROJECT NUMBER 127-62117-12002 - - PROJECT LOCATION Salem.MA DATE STARTED 9/17/12 COMPLETED 9/17/12 GROUND ELEVATION TEST PIT SIZE 5 • EXCAVATION CONTRACTOR Crawford Drilling Services GROUND WATER LEVELS: EXCAVATION METHOD Excavator - AT TIME OF EXCAVATION — LOGGED BY Bill.Phelps CHECKED BY Bill Phelps AT END OF EXCAVATION — NOTES AFTER EXCAVATION — �` W • H� of = E a w co REMARKS a O - MATERIAL DESCRIPTION n `p NZ O a 0.0 i tantgrey SILT fine SAND;some fine to medium GRAVEL;dry;no odor 0.0 0.5 black COAL and ander fill with fine to medium SAND and GRAVEL;some metal and wood debris; dry,no oda 0.0 1.0 .Y v tan SILT;soft;dark to grey SILT;mast at 4' r a 2.5 w N L) 0.0 N t7 O L7 i Water enountered at . �i o 8',no samples were d.o "# m collected grey CLAYEY SILT;soft;non plastic;mast to wet;no oda � ezy} a 5.0 O 0 B a n VI � 0.0 N 6 0 7.5 7.5 y Bottom of test pit at 7.5 feet. r z a • TEST PIT NUMBER TP-108 TETRA.TECH PAGE 1 OF 1 One Grant Street Framingham, MA 01701 CLIENT Footprint-Power PROJECT NAME Salem Habor Station PROJECT NUMBER 127-62117-12002 PROJECT LOCATION Salem MA DATE STARTED 9117112 COMPLETED 9/17112 GROUND ELEVATION TEST PIT SIZE 6' EXCAVATION CONTRACTOR Crawford Drilling Services GROUND WATER LEVELS: EXCAVATION METHOD Excavator AT TIME OF EXCAVATION — LOGGED BY Bill Phelps CHECKED BY Bill Phelps AT END OF EXCAVATION — NOTES AFTER EXCAVATION — w }� U n-x REMARKS a 6 MATERIAL DESCRIPTION ov (L �J az O a 0.0 F�tt brown fine to medium SAND and fine to coarse GRAVEL;trace COBBLES;poorly sorted,dry;no odor Sampled TP-108-SS 0-2'09172012,no VOCs Encountered a 4' w'•D: - layer of asphalt at 2' '�• - p.�a Q. : 2.0 a c� Fu 2.5 W brown/black urban FILL voth COAL,ash,and bride some wood debris;dry;no odor;compact lough y digging;some treated timbeus in sidewall of test pit 0 F q Sampled TP-108-SS m 2.5-5 09172012,all 0.0 coal and ash u 0 u rc 0 m rc a 9 w S 5.0 5.0 o grey SILTY SAND,soft well sorted 0 rc a y r 0.0 N F b u N N 0 7.5 7.5 w Bottom of test pit at 7.5 feet. r z • •Y �+P TEST PIT NUMBER TP-109 •` TETRATECH PAGE 1 OF i One Grant Street Framingham, MA 01701 •� CLIENT Footprint-Power -3 PROJECT NAME Salem Habor Station •F PROJECT NUMBER 127-62117-12002 PROJECT LOCATION Salem,MA DATE STARTED 9/17/12 COMPLETED 9/17/12 GROUND ELEVATION TEST Prr SIZE 6' EXCAVATION CONTRACTOR Crawford Drilling Services GROUND WATER LEVELS: EXCAVATION METHOD Excavator AT TIME OF EXCAVATION — �'; LOGGED BY Bill Phelps CHECKED BY Bill Phelps AT END OF EXCAVATION — .� - NOTES AFTER EXCAVATION — W oa 2. REMARKS o MATERIAL DESCRIPTION a Z N 0 brain mixed FILL in 3/4"crushed stone;cinders and ash;some fine to medium SAND and GRAVEL;dry to moist Encountered concrete slab at 1.5',dug . I further west and found edge 1 Encountered platic pipe at west point of - pit,kinked it with the machine,no sign of u leak. Stopped b drigging and notified - Greg and Rant w FJectiidan. Greg and !, m Plant Electrician inspected the line. k The line was not live, �`t = 2 backfilled Test Pit 2.0 n r w FILL to CLAYEY SILT;moist;water at 3' N C7 0", 0 Z 03 0 m 2.5 Bottom of test pit at 2.5 feet. 0 4 W LL O d a yW � N •' O ti.. V O u N O 4 F U' F Z_ of O- - TEST PIT NUMBER TP-110 TETRATEC.H PAGE 1 OF 1 One Grant Street Framingham, MA 01701 CLIENT FooWnl-Power PROJECT NAME Salem Habor Station PROJECT NUMBER 127-62117-12002 - - PROJECT LOCATION Salem,MA DATE STARTED 9/17/12 COMPLETED 9/17/12 GROUND ELEVATION TEST PIT SIZE 6' EXCAVATION CONTRACTOR Crawford Drilling Services GROUND WATER LEVELS: EXCAVATION METHOD Excavator - AT TIME OF EXCAVATION — LOGGED BY Bill Phelps CHECKED BY Bill Phelps AT END OF EXCAVATION — NOTES AFTER EXCAVATION — W 0. W V a c w m REMARKS M O MATERIAL DESCRIPTION n w Q z X7 a 0 tan fine to medium SAND;well sated tp grey fine to coarse SAND with angular COBBLES;dry;no odor 0.0 b:�'j 0.3 grey/brown SAND and COBBLE FILL;poorly sorted;dry,no odor 1 a' ct P 2 w b N O a w r N o 3 Test Pit started caving u quickly,unable to dig - z past 735 0 0 m f 0 a 0 W 4 4.0 wet coarse SAND and fine to medium angular GRAVEL;some COBBLES;wet;no odor or sheen 0 !;;` grey coarse SAND and medium to coarse GRAVE;some rounded COBBLES;saturated;no sheen or odor a N 5 r'!` N �•�' R 6 6.0 Bottom of test pit at 6.0 feet. b Z_ L1 ?' TETRATECH TEST PIT NUMBER TP-1011 One Grant Street Framingham, MA 01701 PAGE 1 F 2 CLIENT footprint-Power PROJECT NAME Salem Habor Station • PROJECT NUMBER 127-62117-12002 PROJECT LOCATION Salem MA � - DATE STARTED 9/17/12 COMPLETED 9/17112 GROUND ELEVATION TEST PIT SIZE 6' a EXCAVATION CONTRACTOR Crawford Drilling Services GROUND WATER LEVELS: EXCAVATION METHOD Excavator AT TIME OF EXCAVATION — �' LOGGED BY_Bill Phelps CHECKED BY Bill Phelps AT END OF EXCAVATION — :y NOTES AFTER EXCAVATION — w LuU E 2Lu 0" 1-- W m REMARKS a.O MATERIAL DESCRIPTION 0� NZ p 0 �1 taniorange medium to course SAND,well sorted 0.3 greylbrown fine to course SAND;fine to medium GRAVEL and COBBLES;very poody sorted; moist to wet o'•D' •e.�a 0.�4 o.D: y 2 e Q° w N Q U 'y F 0814 0 3 Q: �y1 Z 'p,ft4 �. 00 E 0 A•D: �✓ LL 4 4.0 w 0 ;t o r y ` layer of black,oily SAND observed at 4'out from tank;petroleum odor;sheen;wet �1' S !•� Sampled ` 39.9 TP-111-SS09172012 i (4.56')Everything else !'s Pg, a Samped A b: TP-111-SS-09172012' �d (5.5')VOCs '..`-c 6 i.►: 6.0 Bottom of test pit at 6.0 feet. N �9 � ? Water in sheen at T (Continued Next Page) • TEST PIT NUMBER TP-111 TETRATEC.H PAGE 2 OF 2 One Grant Street Framingham,, MA 01701 CLIENT Footprint-Power PROJECT NAME Salem Hahor Station PROJECT NUMBER 127-62117-12002 PROJECT LOCATION Salem,MA DAT START 9/17/12 CO PLETED 9/17/12 GROUND ELEVATION TEST PIT SIZE 6' w EXC FFre ANION ONTRACTOR CDr Ilin Services GROUND WATER LEVELS: E I�EA VAIT I AETH%gQ6a§2tor a O AT J LrOG Ef ill Phel —r-HI CKED BY Bill Phelps AT END OF EXCAVATION — NOTE N AFTER EXCAVATION — u es and compacted 'a u t2 w a u O f a .n w r y O O O Z K m Q� K 0 a 0 w 0 0 0 a m N N n G a' N O F N J F Z • L� TEST PIT NUMBER TP-112 • TETRATECH PAGE 1 OF 1 One Grant Street Framingham; MA 01701 •�' CLIENT Footprint-Paver. •. ^� PROJECT NAME Salem Halwr Station# PROJECT NUMBER 127-62117-12002 PROJECT LOCATION Salem.MA •' DATE STARTED 9117/12 COMPLETED 9/17/12 GROUND ELEVATION TEST PIT SIZE 6' •�, EXCAVATION CONTRACTOR Crawford Drilling Services GROUND WATER LEVELS: EXCAVATION METHOD Excavator AT TIME OF EXCAVATION — •' LOGGED BY Bill Phelps CHECKED BY Bill Phelps AT END OF EXCAVATION — NOTES AFTER EXCAVATION — �,:a' W o- W = • w a= MATERIAL DESCRIPTION O <Z a 0.0 tan fine to medium SAND;well sorted;dry;no odor 0.1 0.3 .••�t brown/orange medium to course SAND;Tine to oeurse GRAVEL and COBBLES;dry to moist at 5.5' f S 2.5 p R ! W I. ZO z ` m,J 5.0 _ 4 0.0 N tt o ''f� 5.5 • z grey medium to coarse SAND and fine to medium GRAVEL;some rounded COBBLES;saturated;no odor or sheen a L'b o d? 0.0 7.5 : f 8.0 Bottom of test pit at 8.0 feet. 05 r z • TEST PIT NUMBER TP-113 TETRATECH PAGE 1 OF 1 One Grant Street Framingham, MA 01701 CLIENT Footprint-Power PROJECT NAME Salem Haber Station PROJECT NUMBER 127-62117-12002 PROJECT LOCATION Salem,MA DATE STARTED 9/20/12 COMPLETED 9/20112 GROUND ELEVATION TEST PIT SIZE 6' EXCAVATION CONTRACTOR Crawford Drilling Services GROUND WATER LEVELS: EXCAVATION METHOD Excavator AT TIME OF EXCAVATION — LOGGED BY Ian Cannan CHECKED BY Bill Phelps AT END OF EXCAVATION — NOTES AFTER EXCAVATION- — w Q. _ w TESTS a 'M ND a.0 MATERIAL DESCRIPTION wv 0.0.z REMARKS 9 1 Q rn 0 ASPHALT 3.0 0.5 dark grey medium to coarse SAND;some GRAVEL;trace CLAY;petroleum like odor b;b d} 1 .©. 1.0 light grey medium to coarse SAND;trace SILT;petroleum like odor a 1.3 Encountered 3 metal &10"pipes running North to South,pipes w were coaled. End of m excavation due to o Pipes F a 2 112.0 15 w Bottom of lest pit at 2.0 feet. 4 u 0 i w m O a 0 w LL N 0 O O a 0 N F ry m a N F p N J F Z U • TEST PIT NUMBER.TP-114 O TETRATECH PAGE 1 OF 1 • One Grant Street Framingham, MA 01701 CLIENT footprint-Power PROJECT NAME Salem Habor Station 9 PROJECT NUMBER 127-62117-12002 PROJECT LOCATION _Salem,MA • ? DATE STARTED 9/19/12 COMPLETED 9/19/12 GROUND ELEVATION TEST PIT SIZE 6' EXCAVATION CONTRACTOR Crawford Drilling Services GROUND WATER LEVELS: EXCAVATION METHOD Excavator AT TIME OF EXCAVATION — •� LOGGED BY Michael Horton CHECKED BY Bill Phelps AT END OF EXCAVATION — I NOTES AFTER EXCAVATION — _ ~w TESTS , w ruj 2 AND a O MATERIAL DESCRIPTION �p p o— REMARKS 0 013 GRAVELLY SAND with some SILT •.�` 0.3 •3 fine to medium SAND •y 2.6 �} 1 �1t Groundwater appears _ •� to be infultrating at _ about 2.5' _ Strong petroleum like C odor at 2.5' w .d h� y •.1' F a 2 '. 2.p w - grey GRAVELLY SAND layer with strong petroleum odor J z d i3a 0 .}, w 9 104 0- 0- 4 a4 Bottom of test pit at 4.0 feet. i' iq �+ B 0 �J o •t rn r � � r TEST PIT NUMBER TP-115 D TETRATE'CH PAGE 1 OF 1 One Grant Street Framingham, MA 01701 CLIENT Footprint-Power PROJECT NAME Salem Habor Station PROJECT NUMBER -127-62117-12002 PROJECT LOCATION Salem MA DATE STARTED9/20/12 COMPLETED 920/12 GROUND ELEVATION TEST PIT SIZE 6' EXCAVATION CONTRACTOR Crawford Drilling Services GROUND WATER LEVELS: EXCAVATION METHOD Excavator AT TIME OF EXCAVATION — LOGGED BY Ian Cannan CHECKED BY Bill Phelps AT END OF EXCAVATION — NOTES - AFTER EXCAVATION — w wc Fw U V = n Q. � 2 p MATERIAL DESCRIPTION w a-=) o a z L0 0. 0.0 tan/brovm SILTY SAND;some GRAVEL;on west side of Test Pit:sofk has tar like substance mixed in;brown/black and silty 0.0 1.0 grey SAND and GRAVEL,cily odor SArc R 2.5 'raT.►. R p�� W N �L,• N V' •� 6.9 O 4.0 tan/grey fine to coarse SAND,same GRAVEL m SAND;wet at 4.5' 0 a 0 5.0 w LL O 0 0 a N 0 N n N N a 7.5 0 8.0 m Bottom of test pit at 8.0 feet. z r' �? TEST PIT NUMBER TP-116 O TETRATECH PACE 1 OF 1 One Grant Street Framingham, MA 01701 �r CLIENT Footprint-Power PROJECT NAME Salem Habor Station aPROJECT NUMBER 127-62117-12002 PROJECT LOCATION_Salem,MA Y DATE STARTED 9/19/12 COMPLETED 9/19/12 GROUND ELEVATION _ TEST PIT SIZE 6' fi EXCAVATION CONTRACTOR Crawford Drilling Services GROUND WATER LEVELS: EXCAVATION METHOD Excavator AT TIME OF EXCAVATION — LOGGED BY Michael Horton CHECKED BY Bill Phelps AT END OF EXCAVATION — NOTES - AFTER EXCAVATION — W Ir 0n _ w = E H •y; W=, a g a O MATERIAL DESCRIPTION O 4Z (9 O a U) 0.0 GRAVEL and SAND - 4� a•b 0.5 •� SILTY SAND _ 2.1 "f 1.0 . . fine to coarse SAND with some GRAVEL up to.5" a q.(. -5.0 C o w 2.5 •••t�•2.5 grey fine to coarse SAND with GRAVEL up to 2';strong petroleum like odor •� N 0 0 Ilk 0 r w o w ^•� •yl LL u D O J ....: a 5.0 Uyy�� a t:Z a , ,F -^ 208 0 7.0 Bottom of test pit at 7.0 feet. - z z • TEST PIT NUMBER TP-117 TETRATEGH PAGE 1 OF 1 One Grant Street Framingham, MA 01701 CLIENT Footprint-Poser PROJECT NAME Salem Habor Station PROJECT NUMBER 127-62117-12002 PROJECT LOCATION Salem,MA DATE STARTED 9/19/12 COMPLETED 9/19/12 GROUND ELEVATION TEST PIT SIZE 6' EXCAVATION CONTRACTOR Crawford Drilling Services GROUND WATER LEVELS: EXCAVATION METHOD Excavator AT TIME OF EXCAVATION — LOGGED BY -Michael Horton CHECKED BY Bill Phelps AT END OF EXCAVATION — NOTES AFTER EXCAVATION — Lu a.S H of U S n o.c u REMARKS a 0 MATERIAL DESCRIPTION n w a z cp a 0 COAL 1 'a u 0 r 2 a N N C! O F a No water observed in 0 3 Test Pit. Cobble 0 - stone observed in material beneath coal. - 0 m 0 a 0 w 4 4.0 LL SAND with trace SILT and many large rocks up to 2" 0- 0- 5 05 F m g a N N N 6 6.0 Bottom of test pit at 6.0 feet. vi z z TEST PIT NUMBER TP-118 TETRATECH PAGE 1 OF 1 One Grant Street Framingham, MA 01701 . CLIENT Footprint-Paver PROJECT NAME Salem Habor Station -� PROJECT NUMBER 127-62117-12002 PROJECT LOCATION Salem_ MA .� DATE STARTED 9/19/12 COMPLETED 9/19/12 GROUND ELEVATION TEST PIT SIZE 6' AhEXCAVATION CONTRACTOR Crawford Drilling Services GROUND WATER LEVELS: EXCAVATION METHOD Excavator AT TIME OF EXCAVATION — ` r LOGGED BY Michael HortonCHECKED BY Bill Phelps AT END OF EXCAVATION — 3 NOTES AFTER EXCAVATION — 0 4 W �o U H� m O2U E a= a j REMARKS Q O MATERIAL DESCRIPTION a V K O NZ a -j COAL .�i �y �.. . 2.5 0 a N O J F ?� a Slight petroleum like odor at bottom of Test .o Pit. Water was also •t f in the bottom of the R 5.0 Test Rt. w w 6.0 �8 COAL mixed with soil 0 K .� a a 0 e� h 7.5 _ov a o � 108 0 �? 9.5 z Bottom of test pit at 9.5 feet. z • TEST PIT NUMBER TP-119 TETRATECH PAGE 1 OF 1 One Grant Street Framingham, MA 01701 CLIENT Footprint-Power PROJECT NAME Salem Habor Station PROJECT NUMBER 127-62117-12002 PROJECT LOCATION Salem,MA DATE STARTED 9/19/12 COMPLETED 9/19/12 GROUND ELEVATION TEST PIT SIZE 6' EXCAVATION CONTRACTOR Crawford Drilling Services GROUND WATER LEVELS: EXCAVATION METHOD Excavator AT TIME OF EXCAVATION — LOGGED BY Michael Horton CHECKED BY Bill Phelps AT END OF EXCAVATION — NOTES AFTER EXCAVATION — Lu w Lu x, d Z>REMARKS Q O MATERIAL DESCRIPTION 2 z c7 rn 0.0 COAL 2.5 n n w w O F 5.0 w N O zNo samples,no water rc mn ntered 0 0 n w 7.5 O p n' n 10.0 G ' N a N_ O_ F O y 12.0 Bottom of test pit at 12.0 feel. z u • •,t 01 TEST PIT NUMBER TP-120 TETRATECH PACE 1 of 1 !i ® One Grant Street Framingham, MA 01701 CLIENT Footprint-Power PROJECT NAME Salem Habor Station !�f PROJECT NUMBER 127-62117-12002 PROJECT LOCATION Salem.MA •" DATE STARTED 9/19/12 COMPLETED 9/19/12 GROUND ELEVATION TEST PIT SIZE 6' s 3 EXCAVATION CONTRACTOR Crawford Drilling Services GROUND WATER LEVELS: EXCAVATION METHOD Excavator AT TIME OF EXCAVATION — LOGGED BY Michael Horton CHECKED BY Bill Phelps AT END OF EXCAVATION — S�ysy NOTES AFTER EXCAVATION — �Y ui p. w ct x •l o W m REMARKS Q Lu O MATERIAL DESCRIPTION a a� J .; Co 0.0 COAL - •,i ..3 -s 2.5 • R a w �Y O f •� a r m 0 .5.0 •1i No samples,no water .� wencountered 0 �p a 0 c w 0 • 0 0 0 7.5 a m • ��' m h n N •y a 10.0 W o w 10.5 W Bottom of test pit at 10.5 feet. z_ •' h • C �a - TEST PIT NUMBER TP-121 TETRATECH PAGE 1 OF 1 One Grant Street Framingham, MA 01701 CLIENT Footprint-Power PROJECT NAME Salem Habor Station PROJECT NUMBER 127-62117-12002 PROJECT LOCATION Salem,MA DATE STARTED 9/20/12 COMPLETED 9/20/12 GROUND ELEVATION TEST PIT SIZE 6' EXCAVATION CONTRACTOR Crawford Ddlling Services- GROUND WATER LEVELS: EXCAVATION METHOD Excavator - - AT TIME OF EXCAVATION — LOGGED BY Ian Cannan CHECKED BY Bill Phelps AT END OFEXCAVATION — NOTES AFTER EXCAVATION — w }� U F- E a c REMARKS a 0 MATERIAL DESCRIPTION n 0- 2 z (9 a c 0.0 COAL 0.0 0.8 tan fine to coarse SAND;some SILT;some GRAVEL;dense COAL 2.5 N n N N F a 0.0 'm 0 u a 5.0 Water encountered at m_ 5' 0 a 9 w LL N 0 0 O a r 7.5 u 9.0 COAL and coarse SAND;some rounded GRAVEL a 0.0 9.5 Bottom of test pit at 9.5 feet. z • TEST PIT NUMBER TP-122 TETRATECH PAGE 1 of 1 One Grant Street Framingham, MA 01701 CLIENT Footprint-Power - PROJECT NAME Salem Habor Station PROJECT NUMBER 127-62117-12002 - PROJECT LOCATION Salem,MA DATE STARTED 9/19/12 COMPLETED 9/19/12 GROUND ELEVATION TEST PIT S¢E 6' 's EXCAVATION CONTRACTOR Crawford Drilling Services GROUND WATER LEVELS: •r •..a EXCAVATION METHOD Excavator AT TIME OF EXCAVATION - -' LOGGED BY Michael Halon CHECKED BY Bill Phelps AT END OF EXCAVATION — •✓ NOTES AFTER EXCAVATION — w }ul K U .'1 ar a g REMARKS a O - MATERIAL DESCRIPTION Ov K <Z O 0 T .jai same material entire depth;grey GRAVEL and SAND with some boulders up to 1' b 0.0 o r 2 o �• w �. 0) 00- z K3 s w m t •. 41 rc i l' sLL 0 •.af LL 0 tt a 4 Large piece of wood •may °a (T)encountered at 4' �. N J� N ., Groundwater appears to be at 4.5-5' 5 o ..: 5.5 u Bottom of test pit at 5.5 feet. N z z_ .3' • TEST PIT NUMBER TP-123 TETRATECH PAGE 1 OF 1 One Grant Street Framingham, MA 01701 CLIENT Footprint-Power PROJECT NAME Salem Habor Station PROJECT NUMBER 127-62117-12002 PROJECT LOCATION Salem,MA DATE STARTED 9/20/12 COMPLETED 9/20/12 GROUND ELEVATION TEST PIT SIZE IT EXCAVATION CONTRACTOR Crawford Drilling Services GROUND WATER LEVELS: EXCAVATION METHOD Excavator AT TIME OF EXCAVATION — LOGGED BY Ian Cannan CHECKED BY Bill Phelps AT END OF EXCAVATION — NOTES - AFTER EXCAVATION — Lu }x U Lu E ar Lu r0 REMARKS n-0 MATERIAL DESCRIPTION g pv Q.Z) �� o Q z i7 a 0 SAND and GRAVEL;little SILT;trace ORGANICS 0.0 .Vc r 1 1.0 FILL;SANDY angular GRAVEL with trace brick fragment;wet 'a t? N F W N� 0 O Groundwater N2 encountered at 4-5'. No sheen on water. 0 z tt 0 m 0 a 0 3 w 6 0- 0 0- 4 .0 0 6 ri 44.0 Bottom of test pit at 4.0 feet. a f ' o 0 y r ' z u • � 3 r TEST PIT NUMBER TETRATECH PAGE GE 1 1 OF OF 1 1 � . One Grant Street Framingham, MA 01701 CLIENT Footprint-Power PROJECT NAME Salem Habor Station PROJECT NUMBER 127-62117-12002 - PROJECT LOCATION Salem.MA DATE STARTED 9120112 COMPLETED 920112 GROUND ELEVATION TEST PIT SIZE 6' EXCAVATION CONTRACTOR Crawford Drilling Services GROUND WATER LEVELS: All EXCAVATION METHOD Excavator AT TIME OF EXCAVATION — LOGGED BY Ian Cannan CHECKED BY Bill Phelps AT END OF EXCAVATION — NOTES AFTER EXCAVATION — w _ lw v E wa REMARKS a O MATERIAL DESCRIPTION n o 2z o_ •,� m a 0.0 grey/brown/light greenish CLAY;highly plastic;trace shells ,j �T u r 2.5 ww N y � 3 O a y � t w y 00- 0.2 Refusal at 8',likely a due to bedrock. 0 m 0 0 5.0 LL QO F lei S2 K a w •a,�r F d 7.5 0 8.0 � Bottom of test pit at 8.0 feel r z_ 4� O ._S • -- �r�l TEST PIT NUMBER TP-201 TETRATECH PAGE 1 OF 1 One Grant Street Framingham,-MA 01701 CLIENT Footprint-Power PROJECT NAME Salem Haber Station. PROJECT NUMBER 127-62117-12002 PROJECT LOCATION Salem MA DATE STARTED 10/17/12 COMPLETED 10/17/12 GROUND ELEVATION TEST PIT SIZE 6' EXCAVATION CONTRACTOR Crawford Drilling Services GROUND WATER LEVELS: EXCAVATION METHOD Excavator AT TIME OF EXCAVATION — LOGGED BY Michael Horton CHECKED BY Bill Phelps AT END OF EXCAVATION — NOTES AFTER EXCAVATION — w }� U E Lu (L c w o' REMARKS a 0 MATERIAL DESCRIPTION n Lu 2 U) 0 fine to medium SILTY SAND with some GRAVEL up to 1" Native soil at 1' _ 1 1.0 0.1 black SAND with trace SILT 'a ••• 1.5 brown SAND and GRAVEL layer u o'. 2 0 . 4 2.0 black fine SAND with trace SILT n w w Water at 4.5' . N O Z O m f 3 1.0 0 rc a 0 w 0 0 0 rc Q a 4 4.0 GRAVEL and SAND ' F � ~ 2.8 a ' 0 5 5.0 Bell=of test pit at 5.0 feet. 0 u � I z (7 • • TEST PIT NUMBER TP-202 (1) TETRATECH PAGE 1 of 1 3' One Grant Street Framingham,.MA 01701 CLIENT Footprint-Power PROJECT NAME Salem Haber Station e, .+ PROJECT NUMBER 127-62117-12002 PROJECT LOCATION_Salem.MA •c' DATE STARTED 10/17/12 COMPLETED 10/17/12 GROUND ELEVATION TEST PIT SIZE IT •' EXCAVATION CONTRACTOR Crawford Drilling Services GROUND WATER LEVELS: r EXCAVATION METHOD Excavator AT TIME OF EXCAVATION — LOGGED BY Michael Horton CHECKED BY Bill Phelps AT END OF EXCAVATION — NOTES AFTER EXCAVATION — w _ Fw U E � . w a g REMARKS a p MATERIAL DESCRIPTION kQ Z - a 0 •'1 Structure filled in with �y soil,brick,broken _ glass,boulders up to 2',and steel u 0 y' 2 F found a large chunk of black shiny rubbery material 0 �J Sample m T 02SS-(2-3)-101720 2 - 9.6 •� collected from 2-3' 'o 3 13.0 �} LL CONCRETE floor oam es K a a J o w _✓ d acs o . r F O N f J F r TEST PIT NUMBER TP-202 (2) Q TETRATECH PAGE 1 OF 1 One Grant Street Framingham, MA 01701 CLIENT Footprint-Power PROJECT NAME Salem Haber Station PROJECT NUMBER 127-62117-12002 PROJECT LOCATION Salem.MA - DATE STARTED 10/17/12 COMPLETED 10117/12 GROUND ELEVATION TEST PIT SIZE -6' EXCAVATION CONTRACTOR Crawford Drilling Services GROUND WATER LEVELS: EXCAVATION METHOD Fxcavata AT TIME OF EXCAVATION — LOGGED BY Michael Horton CHECKED BY Bill Phelps :AT END OF EXCAVATION — NOTES AFTER EXCAVATION — }w of U E a c �2 REMARKS 0.0 MATERIAL DESCRIPTION n w� a-Z) o O G z (9 a U) 0 zv TOPSOIL - �Lr'J i 111.0 black SANDY COAL a v N 2 0 m H d N w No water encountered 2.5 N native SAND O J Z 0 3 0 m 0 a a w N U O rc 4 O a N O n 5 R 5.5 0.6 o - Bottm of test pt at 5.5 feet. u h z z • TEST PIT NUMBER TP-203 O TETRATEC'H PAGE 1 OF 1 One Grant Street Framingham, MA 01701 A CLIENT Footprint-Power PROJECT NAME Salem Habor Station ' PROJECT NUMBER 127-62117-12002- PROJECT LOCATION Salem MA DATE STARTED 10/17/12 COMPLETED 10/17/12 GROUND ELEVATION TEST PIT SIZE 6' •Z EXCAVATION CONTRACTOR_Crawford Drilling Services GROUND WATER LEVELS: ..� EXCAVATION METHOD Excavator AT TIME OF EXCAVATION — LOGGED BY Michael Horton CHECKED BY Bill Phelps AT END OF EXCAVATION — NOTES AFTER EXCAVATION — Lu ilk of H� m x� E LU x a j REMARKS O OMATERIAL DESCRIPTION v O N 0.0 TOPSOIL;SAND with SILT and GRAVEL Encountered foam encased in fabric • Within TOP 1.5'. Also• to encountered a sand layer with CDs,hand black FILL layer 1.6 dug to ensure there Were no utilities. �Y of m 2.5 13.0 {pp{ �.J N H F brown SAND Well graded ° Water encountered at i 6' K ' O r m Ilk 0.7 a 0 •? w g O � 5.0 � a m Sample TP203-SS (5-6')-10172012 collected sv T6.0 • . . .Ilk - — - grey fine SAND native material u •+, _ _ 2.7 N lei o 7.0 N Bottom of test pit at 7.0 feet. z �x z u • TEST PIT NUMBER TP-204 TETRATE:CH PAGE 1 OF 1 59 One Grant Street Framingham, MA 01701 CLIENT Footprint-Power PROJECT NAME Salem Habor Station PROJECT NUMBER 127-62117-12002 - PROJECT LOCATION Salem,MA DATE STARTED- 10/17/12 COMPLETED 10/17/12 GROUND ELEVATION TEST PIT SIZE G EXCAVATION CONTRACTOR Crawford Drilling Services GROUND WATER LEVELS: - EXCAVATION METHOD Excavator AT TIME OF EXCAVATION — - LOGGED BY Michael Horton CHECKED BY Bill Phelps AT END OF EXCAVATION — NOTES AFTER EXCAVATION — w �W U E a c REMARKSa 0 MATERIAL DESCRIPTION a W ° a z r, a 0 SAND with GRAVEL and SILT 1p i brown CLAYEY SAND 'a o r 2 Water encountered at - a 4 0 i 0 N a N F N 0 3 Excavated Test Pit to 0.6 i 6, � 0 ° Tl m Sample 3.5 04SS-(3-0')-101720 collected SAND i a o w 4 J 0 0 rc a a w ry N 6 :. 5.0 i u i 06 i o Bottom of test pit at 6.0 feet. N F 2 • i TEST PIT NUMBER TP-205 * TETRATECH - PAGE 1 OF 1 _ �� One Grant Street Framingham, MA 01701 �-° CLIENT Footprint-Power PROJECT NAME Salem Habor Station ' PROJECT NUMBER 127.62117-12002 PROJECT LOCATION Salem MA DATE STARTED. 10/17/12 COMPLETED 10/17/12 GROUND ELEVATION TEST PIT SIZE 6 > EXCAVATION CONTRACTOR Crawford Drilling Services GROUND WATER LEVELS: EXCAVATION METHOD Excavator - AT TIME OF EXCAVATION — �-' LOGGED BY Michael Horton CHECKED BY Bill Phelps AT END OF EXCAVATION — NOTES AFTER EXCAVATION - -; m Q. w O Lu a j REMARKS O MATERIAL DESCRIPTION 3 O mZ a 0 �.�.' SAND with SILT and GRAVEL;some stones up to 6";some debri observed in Test Pit 09 0.9 oWater.enoounteredal :.-. .) F 3.5' 2 F �y3U g �9 Z O 93 a 3 LL 0 • o u Sampled �,a y 05-SS{34}101720 0.9 collected c o O 4 « :'.4.0 G - Bottom of test pit at 4.0 feet. N �y` O •, y J F Z TEST PIT NUMBER TP-206 O TETRATECH PAGE i OF 1 One Grant Street Framingham, MA 01701 CLIENT Footprint-Power PROJECT NAME Salem Haber Station PROJECT NUMBER 127-62117-12002 PROJECT LOCATION Salem,MA DATE STARTED 10117112 COMPLETED 10/17112 GROUND ELEVATION TEST PIT SIZE 6' EXCAVATION CONTRACTOR Crawford Drilling Services GROUND WATER LEVELS: EXCAVATION METHOD Excavator AT TIME OF EXCAVATION — LOGGED BY Michael Horton CHECKED BY Bill Phelps AT END OF EXCAVATION — NOTES AFTER EXCAVATION – Lu o - i Lu a c L g REMARKS 0-6 MATERIAL DESCRIPTION 8 o p.� 4a� o az a U) 0 Petroleum oclor in me ASPHALT with GRAVEL that was 6'in size beneath asphalt first 2" 0.5 SAND •••• 0.8 1.4i 1 SAND and GRAVEL FILL i i Sample o - TP206SS-(1.52') 1.7 collected r 2 2.0 S grey CLAY layer u 0 F a m N 0 3 No water observed 1 1 z due to day layer rc _0 0 a 0 w LL 4 N 0- 0 0 n N F N 5 r a m s 6.0 Bottom of test pit at 6.0 feet. zr z TEST PIT NUMBER TP-207 O TETRA TECH PAGE 1 OF 1 �b One Grant Street Framingham;MA 01701 •T CLIENT Footprint-Power PROJECT NAME Salem Habor Station PROJECT NUMBER 127-62117-12002 PROJECT LOCATION Salem,MA DATE STARTED 10/18/12 COMPLETED 10/18/12 GROUND ELEVATION TEST PIT SIZE 6' •'�„ EXCAVATION CONTRACTOR Crawford Drilling Services GROUND WATER LEVELS: EXCAVATION METHOD Excavator AT TIME OF EXCAVATION •% LOGGED BY Michael Horton CHECKED BY Bill Phelps AT END OF EXCAVATION — �- NOTES AFTER EXCAVATION — w • x Yof U_ 1-w x c7 E a.c 'm REMARKS O MATERIAL DESCRIPTION a •� w o rail a • 0.0 grey GRAVEL FILL _ �f 1.0 brown SANDY FILL;water seeping in at this layer but dry beneath i 1.5 .'.9 grey GRAVEL and SAND layer;with many large boulders .> Sampled ,? TP 07-SS(1.5-22)-1018 ' collected beneath �. + 12 u gravel 2.5 0 a �l Excavated Test Pit to 0 7.5'then too many i boulders to continue - - d and almost to wdenl - °m of the boors. !s+ ix a rc n + 6 5.0 u i►. d �YN Fi ►: 6.5 — black grey SANDY ORGANIC material;smelled like low tide N Sample — N 7-SS(6.5-7.5')-1016 12— OA collected _ �a` o 7.5 _ 7.5 �r y . Bottom of test pit at 7.5 feet. 7 z z_ •3 • - TEST PIT NUMBER TP-208 TETRATECH PACE i OF 1 One Grant Street Framingham,MA 01701 CLIENT Footprint-Power PROJECT NAME Salem Haber Station PROJECT NUMBER 127-62117-12002 PROJECT LOCATION Salem,MA DATE STARTED 10/18/12 COMPLETED 10/18/12 GROUND ELEVATION TEST PIT SIZE 6' EXCAVATION CONTRACTOR Crawford Drilling Services GROUND WATER LEVELS:. EXCAVATION METHOD Excavator AT TIME OF EXCAVATION — LOGGED BY Michael Horton CHECKED BY Bill Phelps AT END OF EXCAVATION — NOTES AFTER EXCAVATION — Lu Q.w U E a z w M REMARKS o-O MATERIAL DESCRIPTION a Lu az a N 0.0 dark grey layer of GRAVELY FILL 1.0 light grey layer of FILL that varied with depth from 1.5'to about 4' u 2.5 Water filled in Test it to about 5'bgs - S O N r Sample Tl 08-SS{3-4' 101820 0.7 collected o No deep sample collected,did not i reach bottom of fill 0 0 until 7-8'and could not get past boulder layer 0 0 5.0 w LL N 0 O G O a 9 0 n' b N_ a 7.5 n 0 8.0 m Bottom of test pit at 8.0 feet. z z • i ?- TEST PIT NUMBER TP-209 • TETRATECH PAGE 1 OF 1 "r One Grant Street Framingham, MA 01701 CLIENT Footprint-Powe PROJECT NAME Salem Habw Station PROJECT NUMBER 127-62117-12002 PROJECT LOCATION Salem MA 0i DATE STARTED 10/18/12 COMPLETED 10/18/12 GROUND ELEVATION - TEST PR SIZE 6' •'F EXCAVATION CONTRACTOR Crawford Drilling Sevices GROUND WATER LEVELS: •U EXCAVATION METHOD Excavate AT TIME OF EXCAVATION — LOGGED BY Michael Horton CHECKED BY Bill Phelps AT END OF EXCAVATION — _=€ SES AFTER EXCAVATION — w = E w- w m REMARKS o-O MATERIAL DESCRIPTION n a'a �� 0 aZ 0 0 •� light grey GRAVEL FILL •l' • 1 1.0 • dark grey GRAVEL FILL Sample T 209SS(1-2')-101820 0.7 rcollected a r 2 2.0 09� y lighter grey GRAVEL FILL •N 0 N F ._eCL N l Ended excavation at 0 3 6'because loo many �. i boulders and unable E to dig deeper. °m 0 y a 0 LL 4 U Y p R n Y VI � O 5 6.0 • ; brown and grey CLAYEY SILTY SAND �- Sample T 09SS(5-6')-101820 1.3 •�` a collected 6 6.0 Bottom of test pit at 6.0 feet. z_ �E TEST PIT NUMBER TP-210 TETRATECH PAGE 1 OF , One Grant Street Framingham, MA 01701 CLIENT Footprint-Power- PROJECT NAME Salem Habor Station PROJECT NUMBER 127-62117-12002 PROJECT LOCATION Salem,MA DATE STARTED 10118/12 COMPLETED 10118112 GROUND ELEVATION TEST PIT SIZE G EXCAVATION CONTRACTOR Crawford Drilling Services GROUND WATER LEVELS: EXCAVATION METHOD Excavator AT TIME OF EXCAVATION LOGGED BY Michael Horton CHECKED BY Bill Phelps AT END OF EXCAVATION — NOTES AFTER EXCAVATION — Lu a. U E a= Lu M REMARKS o.O MATERIAL DESCRIPTION W aD �� o a z C7 a Co 0.0 dark grey/brown GRAVEL and SAND FILL - 2.5 Water encountered at cLLi $ 0 Z3 w Sample F 10SS-(34')-101820 0.2 n collected r W u ° No deep sample collected,unable to z reach native material 5.0 0 a a w LL H 0 0 a m n W 7.5 n F a r 9.0 Bottom of test pit at 9.0 feet. r z u • >� TETRATECH TEST PIT NUMBER TP 301 '' 01 One Grant Street Framingham, MA 01701 PAGE 1 of 1 i CLIENT Footprint-Power PROJECT NAME Salem Harbor Station PROJECT NUMBER 127-62117-12002 PROJECTLOCATION Salem.MA •�1. DATE STARTED 11/20/12 COMPLETED 11/20112 GROUND ELEVATION TEST PIT SIZE 6' •" EXCAVATION CONTRACTOR Crawford Drilling Services GROUND WATER LEVELS: EXCAVATION METHOD Excavator - AT TIME OF EXCAVATION — ��t LOGGED BY B.Phelps CHECKED BY B.Phelps AT END OF EXCAVATION — NOTES AFTER EXCAVATION — Y w 0. S Lu U ula j REMARKS �O MATERIAL DESCRIPTION 2z N �y A black COAL,medium dense,dry. A ou R 04 C7 N 0 2 z f r w FL m a a w r 3 x w R !'q O O O N of 4 4.6 •' gray/Mack COAL,some rocks,very dense,dry. gray SILT in day. N d: 01 End of exploration. 4.5 a No water. Bottom of test pit at 4.5 feet. s z_ • TEST PIT NUMBER TP 302 TETRATECH PAGE 1 OF 1 One Grant Street Framingham, MA 01701 CLIENT Footprint-Power PROJECT NAME Salem Harbor Station PROJECT NUMBER 12762117-12002 PROJECT LOCATION Salem,MA DATE STARTED 11/20/12 COMPLETED 11/20/12 GROUND ELEVATION TEST PIT SIZE 6' EXCAVATION CONTRACTOR Crawford Drilling Services GROUND WATER LEVELS: EXCAVATION METHOD Excavator AT TIME OF EXCAVATION — LOGGED BY B.Phelps CHECKED BY B.Phelps AT END OF EXCAVATION — NOTES AFTER EXCAVATION — w }W U F W 2 wREMARKS 0.0 MATERIAL DESCRIPTION p o K 2 z c� 0 black COAL,medium dense,dry. 1 'a d c z f n w F a r w a a 2 2.0 gray fine to medium SAND and SILT mixed with coal,some brick,concrete,and rock,dense. yN_ W V O Q O a N O H N 3 End of exploration. 3.0 a No water. gray SILT,SAND,and GRAVEL,dense,dry,no odor. om es p ee. 0 y z z • TEST PIT. NUMBER TP 303 TETRATEGH PAGE 1 OF 1 �s One Grant Street Framingham, MA 01701 CLIENT Footprint-Power PROJECT NAME Salem Harbor Station - •+'' PROJECT NUMBER 127-62117-12002 PROJECT LOCATION Salem,MA S DATE STARTED 11/20/12 COMPLETED 11/20/12 GROUND ELEVATION - TEST PIT SIZE 6' - • EXCAVATION CONTRACTOR Crawford Drilling Services GROUND WATER LEVELS: - EXCAVATION METHOD Excavator AT TIME OF EXCAVATION — S LOGGED BY B.Phelps CHECKED BY B.Phelps AT END OF EXCAVATION — • NOTES AFTER EXCAVATION — •i W }W U = HW = • w a 7 REMARKS O MATERIAL DESCRIPTION Q 2 O N 0.0 ` •' black COAL,medium dense,dry. •i �S 1.5 •� gray SILTY CLAY layer. �� to '^a gray/black SILTY SAND with coal,very dense,dry. Y •.9' - 2.5 u N 0 F 3L •S!t .3 W y F 1 R N p • : 5.0 F • N X wo V O • 0 u r n y r � n n a 7.5 1 T 7.5 a gray/tan fine SANDY SILT in some fine to medium gravel,trace Gay,dry,no odor. End of e>plorafion. 8.0 No water. Bottom of test pit at 8.0 feet. z •t: u s • TEST PIT NUMBER TP 304 TETRATECH PAGE 1 OF 1 One Grant Street Framingham, MA 01701 CLIENT Footprint-Paver PROJECT NAME Salem Harbor Station PROJECT NUMBER 127-62117-12002 PROJECT LOCATION Salem,MA DATE STARTED 11/20/12 COMPLETED 11/20/12 GROUND ELEVATION TEST PIT SIZE 6' EXCAVATION CONTRACTOR Crawford Drilling Sewices GROUND WATER LEVELS: EXCAVATION METHOD Excavator AT TIME OF EXCAVATION — LOGGED BY B.Phelps CHECKED BY B.Phelps AT END OF EXCAVATION — NOTES AFTER EXCAVATION — a. >w ui Fui U a c w REMARKS a 0 MATERIAL DESCRIPTION u,�- rl qa o a z c0 CO) 0.0 black/gray COAL,dense,some cobbles and debris. 2.5 a u z a a r a w a 5.0 0 m r w z w U O 0 0 a w n F 7.5 N 8.0 a dark gray SANDY SILT in some fine to medium gravel,trace boulders,dense. v End of exploration. ' . ' 8.5 —i m Bottom of test pit at 8.5 feet. z u • TEST PIT NUMBER TP 305 TETRATE.CH PAGE 1 OF 1 One Grant Street Framingham, MA 01701 CLIENT Footprint-Power PROJECT NAME Salem Harbor Station PROJECT NUMBER -127-62117-12002 PROJECT LOCATION_Salem MA f DATE STARTED 11/20112 COMPLETED 11/20112 GROUND ELEVATION TEST PIT SIZE V •.a EXCAVATION CONTRACTOR Crawford Drilling Services GROUND WATER LEVELS: EXCAVATION METHOD Excavates AT TIME OF EXCAVATION — LOGGED BY B.Phelps CHECKED BY B.Phelps AT END OF EXCAVATION — �� NOTES - .AFTER EXCAVATION — w n~. w m J REMARKS a 0 MATERIAL DESCRIPTION ` a -� Q Z (7 j N ••� 0.0 - black COAL,dense,dry. l • t 3 ..y es � 2.5 0 z F •� n h -,� Refusal on concrete y slab,no sample. " a J. Q � W g r N K O M 5.0 • D • N a 6.5 a Bottom of test pit at 6.5 feet N z 2_ �N a IOU • TEST PIT NUMBER TP 306 TETRATECH PACE 1 of 1 One Grant Street Framingham, MA 01701 CLIENT Footprint-Power PROJECT NAME Salem Harbor Station PROJECT NUMBER 127-62117-12002 PROJECT LOCATION Salem,MA DATE STARTED 11/20/12 COMPLETED 11/20/12 GROUND ELEVATION TEST PIT SIZE V EXCAVATION CONTRACTOR Crawford Drilling Services GROUND WATER LEVELS: EXCAVATION METHOD Excavator AT TIME OF EXCAVATION — LOGGED BY B.Phelps CHECKED BY B.Phelps AT END OF EXCAVATION — NOTES AFTER EXCAVATION — w }w U F W S w x �Co REMARKS O - MATERIAL DESCRIPTION, o az 2z � N 0.0 black COAL,medium to dense,dry to wet @ 9'. 2.5 a u 0 Z y n f f a w r w r r xN W N O O n 7.5 'm V N G a _m a a j 10.0 End of e)yloration. 10.0 dark gray SANDY SILT in some fine to medium gravel,trace clay,moist. itsottorn oi test fit at 10.0 feet. • BORING LOG FOR: FOOtpd2!PowerPlant,Salem MA PROJECT NO.: 127-6211�.122 'BORING NO,: 4LOV�— LOGGED BY: M.Horton START DATE: DRILLED BY(Company/Driller): Crawford D TRANSCRIBED BY: COMPLETION:DATE: �mg�selvipes -9� ��� GRD.SURFACE ELEVATION: MON.WELL NO.:ELEVATION FROM; /JA CHECKED BY: SAMP SAMPLING ;1111m= DEPTH REC. TIME MAT'L DENSITY/ REMARKS FIELD (FEET) & CHGJ CONSIS. LISCS (molstum concliflon; SCREENING SAMP SAMPLE NO. WELL or ROCK or Odom;geologica; DATA LENG. (QA/OC STATUS) PROPIL HARD. MATERIAL ROCK clasaffication;rock METHOD-PID 4 (F-JA CLASSIFICATION. BRKN weathering;etc.) RPM) 0-o. i-op 6c�I Z-0 � —0.If- 1,9 (=.0 _.CA OX0 w:44A Tog:") .o tai 05pMf r tLr�q 061 -0 � & OIo2ECOVERY Cc� -�ao bjt- I (F-AAA) .S', &AA 0 Rl�,,Ill 6�qft,14 eAZf1vvCA Dek�.gfouw) 1-46 - 0 0 r.� 0.g— C)cf)o ROIR MATEiQ41 I I.*;. (F-A ce g;j� IU v (V-AA) 6i I San GREY 6cr4ur cxxc, �r- 0 3.3 (K) 6jlk4e4nd - Trtkte OEM I 146C spol- H-4 o Ib 6ND 1 g3 OF %mrNr, TYPE Or DRILLING RIG: GeoProbe METHOD OF ADVANCING BORING: Direct Push TechnologV Tetra Tech,Inc. METHOD OF SOIL SAMPLING: Dual Tube METHOD OF ROCK CORING: NA GROUNDWATER LEVELS: OTHER OBSERVATIONS: �130R ING�:NOj()Q PAGE: f OF Tatra Tech inc BORING LOG FOR: _Footprint Power Plant Salem MA - PROJECT NO.: 127.62117-12002 ._ BORING NO.: 'Q3 LOGGED BY: M.HortonSTART DATE: yp•! -.DRILLED By(Corr,pany/Driller): Crawford DrI11Ina ServlCes TRANSCRIBED BY: COMPLETION:DATE: 10-/a ORD.SURFACE ELEVATION: MON.WELL NO.: rl" ELEVATION FROM: CHECKED BY: - SAMP SAMPLING DEPTH SOIL` (FEET) REMARKScscsss� FIELD DEPTH REC. TIME MAIL DENSITY/ g CHGJ CONSIS. USCS (moisture condition; SCREENING - / - SAMP SAMPLE NO. WELL or ROCK or odors;geological DATA LENG. (QA/OC STATUS) PROFL HARD. MATERIAL ROCK classification: rock METHOD=PID CLASSIFICATION 9RKN weathering;etc.) $163550.3• �:(� d-0,14 . Top3A( 5'i 6)-) Q� t� t3yt070i2 O.'+ f l 1 Son r 1 " wk;l ZE-p0 a•I 13a8 }yf I:u. ; =;a 1 Sranvl tv ��l Inlc49rc�cf 1 e s m•o v 12 y pRY F 5'/ Su w lois dP9 rive/ So CORE -D.o r-'�'•SAM�L� H POOR Rr_COUETVY � 54fc Pvo'R RfCEUkit Y gIvSS a 11 (E-L 5A w. +ncece 5;1 qn Iok> D 9rAv-c sp CORP- 0.0 it D20 la 1v (390 ve 6zm oWvc wed FM nu,`i1C 3M 5 ^c�h� ,vjcttc.�al N^u (� P007 RIFeouR 16 TYPE OF DRILLING RIG: GeoProbe ' METHOD OF ADVANCING BORING: Direct Push Technoio�y - Tetra Tech,Inc. METHOD OF ROIL CK COMING: Dual Tube O METHOD OF gOCKCORING: NA -GROUNDWATER LEVELS: OTHER OBSERVATIONS: BORING NO.: PAGE: OF Tetra Tech Inc 0 0,0 ,4 _P0 .00 -901 " Poo BORING LOG FOR: Footprint Power Plant,.Salem MA PROJECT NO.: BORING NO.: 1O y DRILLED By(Company/Driller):LOGGED BY: J'�Hdo, TRANSCRIBED BY: START DATE: PRO.SURFACE urawford Drilling Services COMPLETION:DATE-- ELEVATION FROM: MON.WELL NO.: NA CHECKED BY: SAMP DEPTH SAMPLING DE SOIL REC. TIME MArL. DENSITY/ REMARKS (FEET) FIELD & CHGJ CONSIS. USCS (MOWUM condition; SCREENING SAMP SAMPLE NO. WELL or ROCK Or Odom;geological DATA LENG. (OA/OC STATUS) PROPL HARD. ROCK classification;rock METHOO=PID MATERIAL SRKN weathering:etc.) CLASSIFICATION [(PPM)) 1 1,41-1 �,I�,I dhtoao; D- sm Odiel� CORE -o.o 53 v Ix? 000 A 5- I I - �e 6;1�— Sin q 4 AM UFO -0-o el .(3 10.70 9, ID -(9.0 14 96AI YPE,OF DRILLING RIG: GeoProbe METHOD OF ADVANCING BORING: Direct Push Technology Tet i Twh,Inc. METHOD OF SOIL SAMPLING] Oval Tube - - O METHOD OF ROCK CORING: NA GROUNDWATER LEVELS: OTHER OBSERVATIONS: BORING LOG FOR: Footpdnt Power Plant,Salem MA BORING NO.: BlUS PROJECT NO.: 127-62117.12002 - START DATE: 6 -IZ LOGGED BY: M.Horton TRANSCRIBEOBY: COMPLETION:DATE: q•Ip-1,2 DRILLED BY(Company/Ddller): Crawford Ddlling Services - - " "� ' - MON.WELL NO.: � GRD,SURFACE ELEVATION: ELEVATIO14 FROM: CHECKED N SAMP SAMPLING DEPTH SOIL" DEPTH RED, .TIME MAIL DENSITY/ - REMARKS FIELD (FEET) I g CHGJ CONSIS. USCS (moisture condition; SCREENING SAMP SAMPLE NO. WELL or ROCK - or odors;geological DATA LEND. ) PROPL HARD. ROCK classification;rock METHOD.PID d (QA/OC STATUS MATERIAL SRKN weathering:etc.) [(Pp CLASSIFICATION K) $los o 3- F11 C1.1 rri Ji i(u,-5i1� arc{ P0551 � cDai S a�wl� �, D^J fro=orrDhk G91�1a a a• 0510 1-2 e 64 w I t1A T?Qe 5, I ranJA Ftg6p Say gza.:t �y GM K� n o ebtC F C 5tr w• 1 ire 511•-a 6 O- •g (F-AN) 54+ -qo&ic 9fwnuP mCOKE- O..T• � a)v5• �-g, : v: a- I CF-cX;� sa,d w�' sb•.,e 9��e sM srA��1 k f F.77D-6•1? c�4 to 12 06h6nag cvG 8 0�� Pown RFeousfty 5 LU.. G;6io,(F M 5:1+1 SkA tin I COK9-Q Nal� VIA* w Eruct 5; pts p1^D' o_o f1 #c�Sal 5 W clr Sil r y VEZY "t Rreov2' IN Gn)D GF�$JG- TYPE OF DRILLING RIG: GeoProbe METHOD OF ADVANCING BORING: Direct Push Technology Tetra Tech,Inc. METHOD OF SOIL SAMPLING: Dual.Tube O METHOD OF ROCK CORING: NA GROUNDWATER LEVELS: OTHER OBSERVATIONS: BORING NO:: �j(J PAGE: OF / Tela Tech Inc � � � 00000000000000000 00100000000000 000009 • 0 1110 q f Of f ip Vp If f @ *Of ff I @to ffoe :ew offP * eepp * �� * BORING LOG FOR: Foo lant,Salem M PROJECT NO,: '02'p A SVC 7-12052 BORING NO.: LOGGED BY: M.Horton TRANSCRIBED BY: START DATE: Zj- DRILLED By(COmpany/Driller): Crawford Drilling swm-ces COMPLETION:DATE: GIRD.SURFACE ELEVATION: ELEVATION FROM: MON.WELL NO.: CHECKED BY: SAMP SAMPLING DEPTH SOIL DEPTH REC. TIME MAIL DENSITY/ REMARKS �FIELD (FEET) & CHGJ CONSIS. USCS (moishim condition; SCREENING SAMP SAMPLE NO, WELL or ROCK or Odom;geological DATA 0 UENG. (OA/OC STATUS) PROPL HARD. MATERIAL ROCK classification;mck METHOD a PID CLASSRCAT40N BRKN weathering;etc,) I(PPM)1 V45/6(--*5 J 3 0- 0.7 ztto6t 1 IL 5A4 0, -s"- 60 saki rcr¢� 55- 0,3 A I vc: ' fiND OF[STN TYPE OF DRILLING RIG: GeoProbe METHOD OF ADVANCING BORING: Direct Plmh Technology Tetra Tech,Inc. G F TH 7 0 SOIL SAMPLING: ETHOD OF SOIL SAMPUN,; DualTube O METHOD OF ROCK CORING: NA TYPE LEVELS: I OTHER OBSERVATIONS: :NO:: BORING LOG FOR: Footpn i QowerPlant Salem MA - BORING NO,: PROJECT NO.: 127-8211712002 START DATE: 9-ll-Il LOGGED BY: M.Horton i" - TRANSCRIBED BY: ' COMPLETION:DATE: Q-ll-12 DRILLED F CE ELEVATION: Crawford DrIllina Services - - - MON.WELL ND.: 13107 GRD.SURFACE ELEVATION: ELEVATION FROM: + CHECKED BY: IL..r' FIELD 4EPTFJ REC TIME � `y ; USC1S „ ,QfBtyte"`cAn[Iltlo(y SCREENING ..(FEET) COTdSist s x. ; d S%5MP " SAMPLE NO ''S } roOOC{�r - x +” RQk'KpJ` NatisGnrocek METHOD=PID ,... LENG -' (QA/OC STATUS) RQ , �. ' s� aa .'( ,/A' 'fl(A. - .4. BRKN wealheAngratc) [(PPM)1 55 DLA )FID TION' . �� b1;P-Coat .7 77-7k d c ." 7� A ks -. 77777 G " �( — xifun7{p �1 x, to %iw. e NN�+ty t: .,u � ,,. ` w th Y dsr„ ry•d+,,5.Y :_ :t a EVEN �)oti 77777777 S' .rv1. -6 41- wa,�r ]x� " 77 q F s S? 'M"+y..r F ItaY 'Z✓�.` MT L f _. �V' i t �•,l 3(c ..MJ�N`�J Y�:r}% {ke_}.,t.r "i'�ICLL '� l`dM y.�,� � '( '1>. k 2i�Y O� A�.�4'.�%e!�+ S - �' y � I� .� w�, „, rtY `v w`a"w 5*� u,�&'rnrys 1 .c:, c z:. - G � pFllh}R ✓ ( �„ ,¢ ' u n TYPE OF DRILLING RIG: GeoProbe - - �Ar _JT" Tetra Tech,Inc. METHOD OF ADVANCING BORING: Direct Push Technology METHOD OF IL SAMPIrING: Dal Tube METHOD OF ROCKC�ORINGF GROUNDWATER O. LEVELS: ..xl ., ,2 fMt K._.5 -,Ft°-� ....x-3i43Pr .? T OTHER OBSERVATIONS: �_ " . E_>:.. ,,,"' T'. ?. 6. . .<..,' . • ..,:�,<: ,,.:;BpFNhfO TJG ` .. : PAGE: OF 0nr""`,' Tetra Tech Iris ww Vow' fix. . ' . =ti9Jr art e-J •m .G,rl 4 BORING LOG FOR: Footprint Power Plant,Salam MA ' QORINGNO.: �Jpg PROJECT NO.: 127.62117.12002 START DATE: LOGGED BY: M.Horton -ll•r TRANSCRIBED BY: - COMPLETION:DATE: -ll•I DRILLED BY(Company/Driller): Crawford Dn1101ro Services z - - MON.WELL NO.: 1�I p,T ,ORD.SURFACE ELEVATION_. ELEVATION FROM: - CHECKED BY: SAMP SAMPLING, DEPTH SOIL - REMARK`S DEPTH REC. TIME - MAT'L DENSITY/ - USCS (moisture KKSon; SCR- ELD (FEET) / g CHG1 CONSIS. SAMP SAMPLE NO. WELL or ROCK or odors;geologira! DATA LENG. (QA/QC STATUS) PROFL HARD. MATERW� ROCK c 1iugtbrc rock METHOD a PID CLASSIFICATION BiiKN weathering;etc.) [(PP") CGAL C6AL &dN DRY n a a,rd 5 H 5 glDB-i5 -CoA L• og1I9a12 ;;,It - fr -n/ 5r( e 5 R�l!sh brace, k5 t. 3a µ )r3 - St - �� (E•M �unra 5W DRY a•a•� - Fr,rn)�,�a q�; SQau-yr�l, mar ti�,'��-a C�.H r�lg.,�,,,,� •ow a, g. 3,a1 � L.ort Cy�• w( wt,L, F M , ;, ,.. v v ScZ Ne/'+ Rs'C TYPE OF DRILLING RIG: GeoProbe - - - Tetra Tech,Inc. - METHOD OF ADVANCING BORING: Direct Push Technology O METHOD OF SOIL SAMPLING: Dual Tube - - METHOD OF ROCK CORING.� NA - GROUNDWATER LEVELS OTHER OBSERVATIONS: BORING.NO.: 10 pgGE:. 1 OF Tetra Tech Inc BORING LOG FOR:- Footprint Power Plant,Salem MA - - BORING NO.: �io� PROJECT NO.: 127.82117-12002 ... .. START DATE: cl • IA LOGGED BY: M.Horton TRANSCRIBED.BY: - COMPLETION:DATE: DRILLED.BY(Companymmuery Crawford Drilling Services _. ._ MON.WELL NO.: GRD.SURFACE ELEVATION: ELEVATION FROM: CHECKED BY: ?. { DEpTI;iS01t„ .x, .... _. REMARKS FIELD S SAMPLING MAT L DEN DEPTH RECP TIME - SFTYl. uses (moisture cgndltlon; SCREENING (FSET) ! g CHGJ or odor8Z geplogIcAl DATA sAMP SAMPLE NO,� - ` WELLx ar (Ch RDGK alaeslflcetion-:rock .•METHOD=PID LSNG OA/OC STATUS eROFL s H r' MATERIAL BRkN, wealhedng,'elo,) ((PPM)]:.' V GLASSIr CkTl N { ' - �u f 18 'c'i I r z. . V Q T- 7-7 - • i ___. x: ,;,. . '� a ar rr u., __ - , tib t . u i k.of •u r i< ., m °2.}1 ,. qtr TYPE OF DRILLING RIG: GwPmbe - - Tetra.Tech,Inc. METHOD OF ADVANCING BORING: Direct Push Technology O METHOD OF SOIL SAMPLING: DualTube I� METHOD OF ROCK CORING: NA- ,L GROUNDWATER LEVELS: OTHER OBSERVATIONS: I BORING NO.: U PAGE: OF Tetra Tech Inc � • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • `x0000000000000 • 000000000 A�f '10 A f to p flof # imp ox �f :00049 , 00 ',P10000 �00000 xy BORING LOG FOR: S PA P P� alem MA OJECT NO.: =121471220LOT-a' T, BORING NO.: LOGGED BY: M.Rortokt.i-. , START DATE: •TRA'NSCRIBEOBY N:DATE: L;: DRILLgq.By(Compmy,unllery Crawlord Odinno sdNicids COMPLETIO MON.WELL No.: GRID.SURFACE ELEVATION: 0 ELEVATION FROM;,' CHECKED BY: P A 7 SAMPLING " 'SOfL;' fW FIELD ,PENSITW ink 6�9 �re ditt CONSIS .lff�EET) - - m ,M, SCREENING SA -HOCK o *gfold4ical Of, DATA" C,- ,PERT" SA H ROCK CK 6laolfi6ation; ARD. LEN METHOD PID TZ ERIAL: BFIKN weathering;etc.) CLASSIFICATION [(PPM)) L't 1-41-T(w- -77-77 t z 77� 17 Ao� -u MP NO QAIQG�S(TATUS 4, v g, tit TYPE OF DRILLING RIG: GwPmlbs METHOD OF ADVANCING BORING: Direct Push choology T&tm Tech,Inc. O METHOD OF SOIL SAMPLING: Dual Tube rh, : METHOD OF ROCK CORING: NA GROUNDWATER LEVELS: OTHER OBSERVATIONS: PAGE: I OF Tetra Tech Inc BORING LOG FOR: Footprint Polder Plant,Salem MA BORING NO.: PROJECT NO.: 127.62117.12002 - START DATE: LOGGED BY: M.Horton -- TRANSCRIBED BY: COMPLETION:DATE -//' DRILLED BY(Company/Driller): Crawford Drillina Services "' MON.WELL NO.: !i} GRD.SURFACE ELEVATION: ELEVATION FROM: CHECKED BY: SAMP SAMPLING DEPTH —SOIL-'-- ^` - REMARKS FIELD DEPTH RED. TIME MAT'L DENSITY/ USCS (moisture condition; SCREENING (FEET) / & CHGJ CONSIS. or odors;geological DATA SAMP SAMPLE NO. WELL or ROCK. ROCK cleseitication;rock METHOD=PID LENG (QAIQC STATUS) PROPL HARD. MATERIAL BRKN weathering;etc.) ((PPM)) S . . CLASSIFICATION . NAt>:u6 (M-C sh`(, inU Wi"ph 600n verCJ fOL+ M sc-wrct4f-d CaRF-Drt� 17 FOCYR l9FCov 7 lY 5 1q v v a 1 ENo OF $brat36- TYPE OF DRILLING RIG: GeoProbb Tetra Tech,Inc. METHOD OF ADVANCING BORING: Direct Push Technology O METHOD OF SOIL SAMPLING: Dual Tube METHOD OF ROCK CORING: NA GROUNDWATER LEVELS: OTHER OBSERVATIONS: BORING NO.: 1310 PAGE: OF Tetra Tech Inc BORING LOG FOR: Footprint Po Plant,Salem MA PROJECT NO.: 127-62117-12002 'BORING NO.: LOGGED BY: START DATE: DRILLED BY(Corn.pany/oriller); M.Horton TRANSCRIBED BY: 5! Crawford Drilling Services COMPLETION:DATE: —q-71-7-71-X� GRID.SURFACE ELEVATION: ELEVATION I VATION FROM: MON.WELL No.: —iUA� CHECKED BY: SAMP SAM SOIL DEPTH DFLING DEPTH REC. TIME MAIL DENSITY/ REM=A`RK=S== FIELD (FEET) I & CHGJ CONSIS. uscs (Moisture condition; SCREENING SAMP SAMPLE NO. WELL or ROCK or Odom;geological DATA LENG. (OA/QC STATUS) PROFL HARD. MATERIAL ROCK classification;rock METHOD=PID 7 -- - CLASSIFICATION BRKN weathering;etc.) I(PPM))�1; F .5cfvt lt;t;Z tA61tA59 Low ReaveRy Qy G SAA 75re -a—0 4biwnpllf M4.AC +v 06f*;,1 buIt reevve 6,1 xc holl, e4emir1• LAXd U•6 40 pwor ,e",-,erj H6, 0. fj —V6 IY P-lue iNf, �,A (r- s4w) 97WD oF TYPE OF DRILLING RIG: GeoProbe METHOD OF ADVANCING BORING: Direct Push Technology Tatra Tech,Inc. METHOD OF SOIL SAMPLING: DualTube METHOD OF ROCK CORING: NA GROUNDWATER LEVELS: OTHER OBSERVATIONS: N PAGE: OF Tans Tech inc BORING LOG FOR: Footprint Power Plant,Salem MA BORING NO.; PROJECTNO.: 127-62117.12002 - - START DATE: LOGGED BY: M.Horton - TRANSCRIBED BY: COMPLETION:DATE: 9•17•iA DRILLED BY(Company/Driller): _.Crawford Drilling Servides MON.WELL NO.: {V GRD:SURFACE ELEVATION: ELEVATION FROM: CHECKED BY: SAMP SAMPLING DEPTH SOIL - - " qE' RKS FIELD DEPTH REO. TIME MATL DENSITY/ - FFK (moisture condigon; SCREENING (FEET) / 6 CHGJ CONSIS. WELL or ROCK odors;geological DATA SAMP SAMPLE NO. classification;rock METHOD=PID LENG. (DA/OC STATUS) PROFL HARD. MATERIAL weathering;etc.) ((PPM) CLASSIFICATION >3I13 55 p- ;) Frll C> � 5c 1 w� 5c'imc,or Awl v �tJ Ir5'' - J fjrY,u '1 C9R�-d,o Dq17dv1� IrY N o 1150 c.1hJi SCffArO"I �.� d9 l7avf2 5 6 Salw� +tet 5:1 ► sw Sluek Grey coR�-0,6 t49' A f Lr 5 �� ND 6F�Gt'CtNCs TYPE OF DRILLING RIG: GeoProbe - - Tetra Tech,Inc. METHOD OF ADVANCING BORING: Direct Push Technology - O METHOD OF SOIL SAMPLING: Duel Tube ' - METHOD OF ROCK CORING: NA GROUNDWATER LEVELS: OTHER OBSERVATIONS: BORING NO.: 903 PAGE: OF Tetra Tech Inc � � � � � � � � � � � � � 1 • � l � 0000000000000000 ,0000000000 BORING LOG FOR: Footprint Power Plant;Salem MA - BORING NO:: �))S PROJECT NO.: 127.82117.12002 - START DATE: LOGGED BY: M.Horton TRANSCRIBED BY: COMPLETION:DATE; `Y•/9-/,� DRILLED F CE ELEVATION: ler): _Crawford Drilling Services - MON.WELL NO.: N GRD.SURFACE ELEVATION: .ELEVATION FROM: CHECKED BY: SAMP SAMPLING DEPTH SOILREMARKS FIELD DEPTH REC. TIME MAT'L DENSITY/ CHGJ CONSIS. USCL (moisture condition; SCREENING (FEET) / - or odors;geological DATA - $ WELL or ROCK or SAMPLE NO. ROCK classification;rock METHOD-PID LENG. (OA/OC STATUS) PROPL HARD. MATERIAL BRKN weathering;etc.) ((PPM)) CLASSIFICATION _ Tf�115'SS F:11 (j`i . r•M Si ++�..�S uZ111,30AL iJf4VC M o9liaor2 otfia Gp 5ro:.� DRY coerz•o.r, a 1 a,c, I Lr tl 51+� Sancl� w'�h some.5rr �r M 9 na3+ 9g.6, 5 7 K Titr;t c4uw 7; t w. a tvgl��Ol2 (�CF(,13AL 4T 7 • celD OF 60>Z1'NJC. t0 I TYPE OF DRILLING RIG: GeoProba - - Tara Tech, Inc. METHOD OF ADVANCING BORING: Direct flush Technology O METHOD OF SOIL SAMPLING: Duel Tube METHOD OF ROCK CORING: NA GROUNDWATER LEVELS: OTHER OBSERVATIONS: BORING NO.: 1 S PAGE: I OF Tetra Tech Inc � l000900is00004111400000000004000000000010000 * 00000 BORING LOG FOR: FootpdnI Power Plant,Salem MA PROJECT NO.: 127-62117.12002 - - — - BORING NO.: -,- t7 LOGGED BY: - - -- START DATE: -d j_ 2. 2 - -' M.Horton - TRANSCRIBED BY: COMPLETION:DATE: DRILLED BY(Company/Driller): _ Crawlord Drilling Services - -0• GRD.SURFACE ELEVATION: - - - - MON.WELL NO.: ;Nq ELEVATION FROM: _ CHECKED BY: - SAMP SAMPLING DEPTH SOIL - DEPTH REC. TIME MAT'L DENSITY/ • REMARKS FIELD (FEET) / g CHGJ CONSIS. USCS (moisture condition; SCREENING SAMP SAMPLE NO. WELL or ROCK or odors;geological DATA LENG: (OA/OC STATUS) PROPL HARD. aJjATERIAL ROCK clasaiBcation;rock METHOD a PID CLASSIFICATION SRKN weathering;etc.) [(PPM)) go -(p-C)5t sr rsl w%Nit1ornF�re Lei azo 6-0 ,LIZ a : 5u col lec4aA uZ V4C Or) 9/� v i OL H6- 811'7.55-(5.7) 35 a9ala�la 11309 3 3s""Tii� l AT 9' bqb° E-UrJ OF BoR:[N Ib TYPE OF DRILLING RIG: GeoProbe METHOD OF ADVANCING BORING: Direct Push Technology Tetra Tech,Inc. O METHOD OF SOIL SAMPLING: Dual Tube METHOD OF ROCK CORING: NA GROUNDWATER LEVELS: - -- IOTHER OBSERVATIONS: -- BORING NO.: PAGE: OF Tetra Tech Inc BORING LOG FOR: Footprint Power Plant,Salem MA BORING NO.: �4 PROJECT NO.: 127-62117.12002 START DATE: LOGGED BY: M.Cr Hortowford - START COMPLETION:DATE: -31 -/A DRILLED BY(Company/Driller): Crawford Drilling Services MON.WELL NO.: li GRD.SURFACE ELEVATION: ELEVATION FROM: CHECKED BY: - mx y.P SAMP SAMPLItJG - DEPFH R C TiIME txAT'I: DE�igSIT,Y/ , _ REMARKS - FIELD USGS (FEET) & coneigon: SCREENING Or Oct I 0 r E�+1U. I C STAY{(7 ) 7i � 6 'rte. s r i 'p4�A„`ER1A.L �...: 9R�K n' . �4Wlldalb! MJF METHOD=PID < r C ASSN-' SItIN ." � ' ' WBatheiitigteto,} ((PPkQ] 8119;5 f�33 3 6 4 �+ 5rf Znck u Vii 'lei QSa:I ala 4 4 1a a 2� tr3s., ; `:1, h wt-�x1o�^ ^ w"+• .t tar'Y RG 1 ., 6 6 !I Y u � t ? i G sat"&'ra',i s R ` I f 4�� n; era'`✓,{�.tL a% "� ..: 1. .;.. r... ... . f 1 f�. ,.. ...... ` kfi ,a.r L �r5 %ti. 7 r�vu-7err kvti sa w� TOWN a'Nr yl 6 r1u,� TYPE OF DRILLING RIG: GeoProbe Tetra Tech, Inc. METHOD OF ADVANCING BORING: Direct Push Technology METHOD OF SOIL SAMPLING: Dual Tube METHOD OF ROCK CORING: NA O. GROUNDWATER LEVELS: OTHER.OBSERVATIONS: BORING NO.: PAGE: OF Tetra Tech Inc W 4 WI* BORING LOG FOR: Footprint P—OMPant,Salem MA PROJECT NO.: 127-621 17.1200 BORING NO.: LOGGED BY: ML HortonSTART DATE: DRILLED BY(C TRANSCRIBED BY: GRD.SURFAC ompany/DTiller): Crawford Drilling Services TRANSCRIBEDCOMPLETION:DATE: E ELEVATION: ELEVATION FROM: MON.WELL NO.: JU6 . . . CHECKED BY: SAMP SAMPLING DEPTH SOIL DEPTH REMARKS REC. TIME MAT'L DENSITY/ FIELD (FEET) & CHGJ CONSIS. USCS (moisture condition; SCREENING SAMP SAMPLE NO. WELL or ROCK or Odom;geological DATA LENG. (QVQC STATUS) PROFT HARD. ROCK classification;mck METHOD=PID MATERIAL weathering;etc.) CLASSIFICATION BRKN ((PPM)) TO:02:! Ira�64r,1 ri ij-S, FOR-F- 0�cl Q�(v ) dilsif 9,01 Oo U:A � 5 Fook suwmq (F-M)_4�b 6cvicl A-,A)Wtvtl,Scc—C C—> AACtf C041LI lD 5- - <FA 10' 4,IL 16 TYPE OF DRILLING RIG: GeoProbe METHOD OF ADVANCING BORING: Direct Push Technology Tetra Tech,Inc. METHOD OF SOIL SAMPLING: Duel Tube METHOD OF ROCK CORING: NA GROUNDWATER LEVELS: OTHER OBSERVATIONS: § BORING NO.: 9) 0 OF I Tale Tech Inc BORING LOG FOR: Footprint Power Plant Salem MA NO.: j�l PROJECT NO.: 127-62117-12002 BORING BORINGSTART ATE: LOGGED BY: M.Horton TRANSCRIBED BY: COMPLETION:DATE: -a •! DRILLED (Company/Driller): Crawlord Drilling Services - _., MON.WELL NO.: GRD.SURFACE ELEVATION: - ELEVATION,FROM: CHECKED BY: SAMP SAMPLING DEPTH SOIL - REMARKS FIELD DEPTH REC. TIME 'MAIL DENSITY/ (FEET) / g CHG./ CONSIS. (moisture moisture condition; SCREENING SAMP SAMPLE NO. WELL or ROCK or odors;geological DATA LENG. (OA/OC STATUS) PROF'L HARD. MATERIAL ROCK classification;rock METHOD=PID _ CIASSIERIALON BRKN weathedng;etc.) [(PPM)) o9atlsUsian �'Cc-c� s;llysa w';11iSom-t-g,AW1aA bReK SAA Q,o ,y CORE oey p r F _&fIdq )I l�5 3' lo3ro U M Srot� WID75'/ 2.3 gm-el f oya-- S DRY y 5unA Co,' :56*wy( vel up ho /. SM COQE-o, e Hb':C7.o 1'7 o4aia�lz nrn;st S POOR fz0CCvFR\ 10t p $ [e`i` Scnulws' +r�ce 'l✓ Gnat $oml_ v.,�j jI/J 1 3 RG-F-MAL .47- 13' b he gMnrfG 1. N� or TYPE OF DRILLING RIG: GsoProbe - Tela Tech,Inc. METHOD OF ADVANCING BORING: Direct Push Technology METHOD OF SOIL SAMPLING: Dual Tuba - O METHOD OF ROCK CORING; NA . GROUNDWATER LEVELS: OTHER OBSERVATIONS: I BORING PAGE: ( OF 1 Tetra Tech Inc 0 0 BORING LOG FOR: F In" Plant,511'emm�MA PROJECT NO.: 127-62117.12002 MA 2�7-61 7-017�02 BORING NO.: 912*9 LOGGED BY. M.Horton TRANSCRIBED BY: START DATE: Crawford Drilling Services COMPLETION:DATE: DRILLED BY(Conqmripunfier); I-E �? MON.WELL No.: 1. GRD.SURFACE ELEVATION FROM: Aj' CHECKED BY: "O'N' RSC. m- REfu>aRS TIyG 5: FIELD DEPTH TE ffW- 77 COW& uscs SCREENING SAMP WELL (r NO; or ROCK or ...... odor:; DATALENG. (0 STATUS). 'PROPL HARD. MATERIAL ROCKjpj METROD,. PiD QUa N SRKNeat I(FPM)l.. $6�co- T�'-(FC-) Tf .,$4ndwfPA0,411 --------- VKY 3 7S- '7v 1,52 MR il� AA GREY7EZ$�jr-- o C4&Lel /1.7 1-0- -A 77' n. NO 77777 -1 , , TYPE OF DRILLING RIG: GeoProbe METHOD OF ADVANCING BORING: Direct Push Technology Tetra Tech, Inc, METHOD OF SOIL SAMPLING: Dual Tube METHOD OF ROCK CORING: NA GROUNDWATER LEVELS: OTHER OBSERVATIONS: 11113ORiNGNO.: at; PAGE: OF Tetra tech Inc BORING LOG FOR: FOOtprinI Power Plant Salem MA BORING NO.; ) PROJECT NO.: 127-82117-12012 - _ ` LOGGED BY: M.Horton - START DATE: J--/- DRILLED BY(Company/Driller): Crawford Drilling Services _ - TRANSCRIBED BY: COMPLETION:DATE: -V/-r GRD.SURFACE ELEVATION: - MON.WELL NO.: N ELEVATION FROM: CHECKED BY: SAMP SAMPLING DEPTH SOIL - REMARKS FIELD DEPTH REC. TIME MAIL DENSITY/ (FEET) & CHGJ CONSIS. USCS (moleturs condition; SCREENING / SAMP SAMPLE NO. WELL or ROCK or odors;geological DATA LENG. (OA/QC STATUS) PROPL HARD. ROCK classification;rock METHOD.PID MATERIAL.. BRKN weathering;etc.) ((PPM)) CLASSIFICATION FI( UACa ;o- �)5%'(y .Sp w4+ so 5reve 69-;toa�la � � I¢cc (e" d4nnJt vAc-On 2 v N504%k ger S)I+JL Glatt frwcz�F 5urr� NS-o-v 35 tsla3-ss•c6-��- o9.al av(2 � 5 ro � END OF 8C71CZN la fb TYPE OF DRILLING RIG: GeoProba - Terra Tech, Inc. METHOD OF ADVANCING BORING: _Direct Push Technology METHOD OF SOIL SAMPLING: Dual Tube METHOD OF ROCK CORING: NA GROUNDWATER LEVELS: OTHER OBSERVATIONS: BORINGNO.: I - PAGE: OF Tetra Tech Inc 0 Of ff # ff pffopf ff 10, PPf f 1p"91"M BORING LOG FOR: Footprint PoPlant,Salem MA PROJECT NO.: 127-621 IT-1 220LE BORING NO.; LOGGED BY: START DATE: DRILLED BY(Company/Driller): Dnfnq—Seryles ler): M.Horton� TRANSCRIBED BY: COMPLETION:DATE: ORD.SURFACE ELEVATION: - ELEVATION I FROM: MON,WELL No.: 151'0,14 CHECKED BY: SAMP SAMPLING DEPTH SOIL I DEPTH REC. TIME MAIL DENSITY/ REMARKS �—FIELD (FEET) & CHOI CONSIS.-4 LISCS (Moisture conclition; SCREENING SAMP SAMPLE NO. WELL or ROCKor Odom;geological DATA ROCK classification;rock 6 LENG. (QA/CC STATUS) PROPL HARD MATERIAL BRKN weathering;etc.) METHOD.PID CLASSIFICATION ((PPM)) 6 o -Asp C, a 0 �z 1040 Or-JA 5, >vw W-rvl -V grttIA-t r&601 1 0-t- 3 CF-A BOO,) ,�5ovtA i6tcmy- 0 f-orA ttttt coat�se mm ':sF e -0•a .46 %.j 14! 6 105o 70 :(F-C�D- Sit 'L\ 13t OW/1Tarc - •—00 G7Nb Or&-QLN(r TYPE OF DRILLING RIG: Geoprobe METHOD OF ADVANCING BORING: Direct Push Technology Tetra Tech,inc. METHOD OF SOIL SAMPLING: Duel Tuba - O. METHOD OF ROCK CORING: NA GROUNDWATER LEVELS: OTHER OBSERVATIONS: —TBORINGNO.: 21:2111 PAGE: OF Tetra Tech Inc BORING LOG FOR: Footprint Power Plant,Salem MA - - BORING NO.: PROJECT NO.: 127-62117.12002 - - START DATE: LOGGED BY: M.Horton - TRANSCRIBED BY: COMPLETION:DATE: 10 AOl DRILLED BY(Company/DrIliery _Crawford Drilling Services - MON.WELL NO.: GRD.SURFACE ELEVATION: ELEVATION FROM:. CHECKED BY: v SA�Ml1tiS� N...SAMPLIh1G rx'" ETNo-9� .'rys "" - �ry �.Pa��"5 FIELD DEPTH R,EC 1rTIME.,. !.. AM„ATp s > a1' as xxy`�y '" . "re5.ra USCG '"". mo _ ;t ( Isttlr9 Conrilaon; SCREENING ,(FEES or oAtlrs;9eoiggical DATA "'sAMP SAMPLE NOWELL ' °f SICK' $ , ROCK classification,tock METHOD=PID Q LENG (QA7(iC-STATi9,S. PRpF'G� N D.- v MA 7ERIAL - 69KN: weathenng;:etcJ r+ CLASSIFJCATJON ro ,o loa4�ef2 i11d r SY /HyS f ' 9� rrs v.+ up k> pAlp 6FL �, RY 3 "S r.. c Fv s� / Oil a z . zS P S i 3 i :.s x� ;z.. 4� {{ ( k Y ^! rt *F " r 77 77= Tn r A w [ h r i�iiaa d 55�� 7 v TYPE OF DRILLING RIG: GeoProb'e Tetra Tech,Inc. METHOD OF ADVANCING BORING: - Direct Push Technology O METHOD OF SOIL SAMPLING: Dual Tube t METHOD OF ROCK CORING: NA ' GROUNDWATER LEVELS: - OTHER OBSERVATIONS: BORING NO.: gJaS PAGE: I OF Tetra Tech Inc ow,164411,11 op oo * ,nr q opo op p o s9 tcc�go f oo o 0 0 Poo go BORING LOG FOR; Footprint Power plant,Saigm MA 'PROJECT N? 127-62117-12002 BORING NO.: Y 'LOGGED B . M.Hortonervices START DATE: DRILLED By(Companyforiller): TRANSCRIBED BY: COMPLETION:DATE: GRID,SURFACE ELEVATION: MON.WELL NO.: ELEVATION FROM; CHECKED BY: DEPTH SAMP SAMPLING SOIL I �REMARKS —FIELD REC. TIME MATL DENSITY/ (FEET) & CHGJ CONSIS. USCS (moisture condition; SCREENING SAMP SAMPLE NO. WELL or ROCK or Odom;geological DATA 0 LENG. (OA/QC STATUS) PROPL HARD. MATERIAL ROCK classification;rock METHOD.PID -- CLASSIFICATION SRKN weathering;ate.) ((PPM)) 91124--455-0-.2-T.1-1—— $1741 54OW rj;A 16JS A4 SA G,5/gamCos C�- 3 ' - - 14b - 51 in!to 6A-\ 6lq4k rorty- V& (A) -c) 2,;t 44 54,T) t,.+;W, jp 7-CAI LrLi2aegy b 10 (M-0 5t -%vid wizxlmf"y� l AA FCT?76 -a,0 H5 1.6 Rot? j?ecourgy jq No, TYPE OF DRILLING RIG: GeoProbe METHOD OF ADVANCING BORING: Direct Push Technology Tatra Tech,Inc, METHOD OF SOIL SAMPLING: Dual Tube METHOD OF ROCK CORING: NA GROUNDWATER LEVELS: OTHER OBSERVATIONS: 80RfNG NO.: PAGE: OF Tom Tech Inc BORING LOG FOR: _Footpefnt Power PlantSalem MA BORING NO.: $/07 PROJECT NO.: 7 27-621 7 7 ln2002 - _, START DATE: !6 St4 40/R LOGGED BY: M.Horton TRANSCRIBED BY: COMPLETION:DATE: /nla4 p0/a DRILLED F CE ELEVATION:): Crawford Drilling Services MON.WELL NO.: N 4- GRD.SURFACE ELEVATION: ELEVATION FROM: CHECKED BY: SAMP SAMPLING DEPTH SOIL - S FIELD DEPTH REC. TIME MAIL DENSITY/ USCS (moiREMARKREMARKdition; SCREENING (FEET) / g CHGJ CONSIS. SAMP SAMPLE NO. WELL or ROCK or odors;geological DATA LENG. PROFL HARD. ROCK classification;rock METHOD-PID �! (OA/OC STATUS) CLMATERIAL BRKN weathering;etc.) [(ppM)] C7A1 COA 7 a•q 6�: 5 Cl F.II o-rcyel &M 41"� y N45^vc 61 6CrA, w sornt> !a cl Fo Is 5M [ Mukr�cl c.taye s+l+- M� c7�o� 1 5 6167-SS b3 I5) C _0. ivayao(a t s•o,( 15 000 6w7-6s-05•,7 51 10949019 C gr COKF U,O 17 S 03 q0 low +:e& R6-o•3 5 Odor ]9 elcay GL TYPE OF DRILLING RIG: GeoPmbe Tetra Tech,InC. METHOD OF ADVANCING BORING: Direct Push Technology METHOD OF SOIL SAMPLING: Dual Tube _ O METHOD OF ROCK CORING: NA GROUNDWATER LEVELS: OTHER OBSERVATIONS: - BORING NO.: jZlo7 PAGE: ( OF f Tetra Tech Inc BORING LOG FOR: Foot2rin!P0 Plant,Salem MA PROJECT No.: 52117-1-702 BORING NO,; LOGGED BY: M.Horton START DATE, a- DRILLED BY(Company/Driller): Crawford D—q Services dilln TRANSCRIBED BY. COMPLETION':DATE: GRID.SURFACE ELEVATION: ELEVATION FROM: MON.WELL No.: CHECKED BY: DEPTH AMPjtINq EC A 'TIME FIELD (FEET) ff ­ON 4 jj$qs.�­ 1(m — -n; C SIB OROS 60010 'A W We,R4 call,940log-loal SCREENING 6F sAtPLEJ�b- V�6rio or odors DATA LEtG (OA/OC STATUS); 11ORL ARO. AL ROCK 61aa��rook METHOD=PID BRKN weathering;etc.) [(PPM)] 01MIRCATION j r< ;i P14;VIP j ont no Ff "-e r y L,4yFR :f f TYPE OF DRILLING RIG; Gftpmbe METHOD OF ADVANCING BORING: Direct Push Technology Tatra Tech, Inc. METHOD OF SOIL SAMPLING: Dual Tube METHOD OF ROCK CORING: NA GROUNDWATER LEVELS: OTHER OBSERVATIONS: N I BORN PAGE: I OF I Tetra Tech Inc BORING LOG FOR: Footprint Power Plant Salem MA PROJECT NO.: _ .. . _ BORING W,:M. Horton START DATE: �( LOGGED BY: M.HoRon � . �'� " - DRILLED BY(Company/Driller): Crawlorcl OrAlina Services .. .TRANSCRIBED BY: COMPLETION:DATE: O 61 GRD.SURFACE ELEVATION: - - MON.WELL NO.: ELEVATION FROM: CHECKED BY: SAMP SAMPLING DEPTH SOIL DEPTH REC. - TIME MATL DENSITY/ REMARKS FIELD (FEET) / g CHG./ CONSIS. USCS (moisture condidon; SCREENING SAMP SAMPLE NO. WELL or ROCK or odors;geological DATA LENG. (OAIOC STATUS) PROPL HARD. - MATERIAL ROCK classification;rock METHOD=PID . CLASSIFICATION BRKN weathering;etc.) ((PPM)J gao6 ss co a oo IF a �3 oS >fs Yin � .0,0 �ctF v? a I.a '1&4 5 c L A + r 6r- VAYSAA01 sP Ire S Yj' Ct C1 t0 rraD mF 3cfc ra IG TYPE OF DRILLING RIG: GeoPmbe Tetra Tech,Inc. METHOD OF ADVANCING BORING: Direct Push Technology METHOD OF SOIL SAMPLING: Dual Tube O METHOD OF BOCK CORING: NA. - GROUNDWATERLEVELS: OTHER OBSERVATIONS: BORING NO.: ggO(p PAGE: I OF Tetra Tech Inc BORING LOG FOR: Fo Plant Salam 8a[em MA BORING No.: Power PROJECT NO.: 7--M200-5 LOGGED BY. M.Horton START DATE: DRILLED BY(Company/Driller): .Crawford Drillino Services TRANSCRIBED By: 101.vi 0 /a COMPLETION;DATE: fvg6�1'01A GRD.SURFACE ELEVATION: ELEVATION FROM: MON.WELL NO,: CHECKED BY: SAMP SAMPLING DEPTH "SDIL`a� DEPTH REC. TIME MAIL DENSITY/ �REMARKS -FIELD (FEET) & CHGJ CONSIS. USCS (moisture conciltion: SCREENING SAMP SAMPLE NO. WELL or ROCK or Odom;geological DATA LENG. (QA/QC STATUS) PROFL HARD. MATERIAL ROCK clawificalloni rock METHOD=PID CLASSIFICATION BRKN weathering;etc.) [(PPM)] t 06 JI't, Aga v U SAS I — 0. 0 6;W 30,vd Ity, PoorrAAW -M &A Ls-f� I an Sand SPI&AI Ntk c1 AA VA 44; 6,70� g(*VeT-64 15 L'i's C'z END OF SCMN&- TYPE OF DRILLING RIG: GeoProbe METHOD OF ADVANCING BORING; Direct PushTschnoloav Tatra Tech,Inc. METHOD OF SOIL SAMPLING: Dual Tube METHOD OF ROCK CORING: NA — O GROUNDWATER LEVELS; OTHER OBSERVATIONS: I BORING9 Tetra Tech Inc BORING LOG FOR: Footprint Power Plant Salem MA - BORING NO.: Q$ PROJECT NO.: 127.62117-12002 - LOGGED BY: START DATE: M.Horton TRANSCRIBED BY: DRILLED BY(Campany/Ddller): Crawford DrilOCOMPLETION:DATE: na Services � � - GRD.SURFACE ELEVATION: - - - MON.WELL NO.: ELEVATION FROM: CHECKED BY: SAMP SAMPLING DEPTH SOIL _ .- .. - .. DEPTH REC. TIME MATL DENSITY/ - REMARKS FIELD (FEET) / g CHGJ CONSIS. USCS (moisture condition; SCREENING SAMP SAMPLE NO. WELL or ROCK or odors;geological DATA D LENG. (CA/OC STATUS) PROPL HARD. MATERIAL ROCK classification;tock METHOD=PID CLASSIFICATION BRKN weathering;etc.) ((PPM)) Co WAL B1GG4( coRE- 0.0 146- 0.2 2 3y 6 4 b COAL &Ar-( CORP_ -O.O HS'6.2 a� 5 l U Fr 11 - hP 1-a f frM 1 gaog-ss- rn•ra � ,, g taR6 O•o 10.0'4aaa pcNue ,u a S,IF V 14 _ 0.1 M4.Ftnld IQ 41.3 04Rv - rlej / TYPE OF DRILLING RIG: GeoProbe - TBrle Tech, Inc. OF ADVANCING BORING: Direct Push Technology - METHOD OF SOIL SAMPLING: Dual Tube METHOD OF ROCK CORING: NA GROUNDWATER LEVELS: OTHER OBSERVATIONS: - BORINGNO.: e'iU PAGE: ) OF Tetra Tech Inc 0000-0900000 . 00000000000000000 * 0 * 00 • BORING LOG FOR: Footpnn!Po Plant,Salem MA BORING NO,: PROJECT NO.: 127-62117112 � LOGGED BY: 02-664 M;Horton START DATE: J61,941T DRILLED BY(C6mpany/Dd1Ie,): .Crawford TRANSCRIBED BY; COMPLETION-DATE: GRID.SURFACE ELEVATION: ELEVATION FROM: CHECKED MON.WELL N. By: PTH DEPTH SAMP SAMPLING DOMM"� SOIL;' REC. TIME MAT'L DENSITY/ FIELD (FEET) & CHGJ CONSIS. USCS (moisture condition; SCREENING. SAMP SAMPLE NO. WELL or ROCK or 0410m;geological DATA LENG, ROCK classification;rock METHOD=PID 0 (QA/QC STATUS) PROPL HARD, MATERIAL BRKN weathering;etc.) [(Ppm)) IF — CLASSIFICATION E�ge—�0 &1 W"01 60AR— 6*0 SMPar K SO" %Soo <It4 4WA WAm k4C_f ro 6 6AA Ito KEZ25M< / .4 - WA sm rcA,4k 7 Ib -&-'Ad , MA;4fNFed :5 L4 0_ ),L _�5 5 L4 Va a /M L FtWR RRF2CuVZY I v rG 01sip DIP 5ATIN-361 TYPE OF DRILLING RIG: GeoPmbe METHOD OF ADVANCING BORING: Direct Push Technology Tatra Tech, Inc. METHOD OF SOIL SAMPLING: Dual Tube METHOD OF ROCK CORING: NA GROUNDWATER LEVELS: OTHER OBSERVATIONS: 1I3ORIN=GNO.:-2Md PAGE: f OF I Tatra Tech Inc BORING LOG FOR: Footprint Power Plant;Salem MA G NO.: PROJECT NO.: 127-62117-12002 - BORING START DATE: LOGGED BY: M.Horton - TRANSCRIBED BY: .. COMPLETION:DATE: .DRILLED BY(Company/Driller): Crawford Grilling Services MON.WELL NO.: GRD.SURFACE ELEVATION: ELEVATION FROM: CHECKED BY: DEPTH' SOLL - - REMARKS FIELD SAMP SAMPLING MATL DENSITY/ DEPTH REC. TIME USCS (moisture condition; SCREENING (FEET) / g '.;:CHGJ CONSIS. or odors;geological DATA SAMP SAMPLENO. WELL or ROCK ROCK classification;rock METHOD.PID p LENG. (QA/QC STATUS) PROF'L - HARD. _ _ MATERIAL BRKN weathering;etc.) 1(PPM)1 CLASSIFICATION gaw-ss (o a 5P grw"1 CORE- o,y F0aNaola t=( I v a -s.3 ��^ 5;1 SAav{ W+ Sbat , tl to poog RECO U - 4 v 6tlo-SS CS S)- b tva4gvf2 WFn+C( noML 014Ck GKd cow 0'.o v` 13y0 2 g 7 jd4e VET'/ fuOR Ru-cou:gy v .�cck 1 h1G � 614- ve,- 0G o 'lknrlAP.'Al pooh RECOv)-=rz / 5 )Y FlJD a k.. rb TYPE OF DRILLING RIG: GeoPmbe - - Tetra Tech,Inc. METHOD OF ADVANCING BORING: Direct Push Technology METHOD OF SOIL SAMPLING: Dual Tube METHOD OF ROCK CORING: NA - - - GROUNDWATER LEVELS: - OTHER OBSERVATIONS: - BORING NO.: `Rf0 PAGE: ( OF Tetra Tech Inc P' Pff �r `1 - 0,1 0 ; BORING LOG FOR: Fo Power o"�Plant,Salam MA �� I BORING NO PROJECT NO,: ±27]62:1�17-12O ...: ' 9-5 1 LOGGED BY: M.Horton START DATE bld> DRILLED By(Company/Driller): Crawford.Drilling Services TRANSCRIBED BY: COMPLETION:DATE- GRO.SURFACE ELEVATION: ELEVATION FROM: MON.WELL NO.: CHECKED BY: SAMP SAMPLING DEPTH 'OIL IL REC. TIME TH =0 P $ DEPTH 7L DENSITY/ REMARKS C."S'S FIELD (FEET) & G.1 S. USCS (moisture condition; SCREENING SAMP SAMPLE NO. WELL or ROCK or Odom;geological DATA C) LENG. (QA/QC STATUS) PROPL HARD. MATERIAL ROCK damilicagon;rock METHOD_PID CLASSIFICATION BRKN Weathering;etc.) ((PPM)) 0-0--K- F),44Ad -uo -- - - &-Iz-I�- f4s'ej ta 1:0�- � 2 -I -66e .9 4 i.;y r3f4i;k All *f-t&-6F- 1023201 A 600 10 -0.0 SA SAMPLING R EEE MP S MPL C TIME SAMP SAM E No M PL LENG (GA/OC STATUS) -(q_g 3;014 6 5 � ireA W;PA 6JAe, 0+- AIVJ +-M toe smlel up o6 Slow) 16 6U3 W3 5` r SP -C) -54 p0ory J 11! 1 10 644- 6p, NTCDOE u fiY PE OF DRILLING LLNG RIG: GeoPmba METHOD OF ADVANCING ANCING BORING: Direct Push Technology Tetra Tach,Inc. METHOD OF SG)IMSAMPLING: Dual Tube S METHOD 0 0 C C ETHOD OF ROCK CORING: NA GROUNDWATER LEVELS: OTHER OBSERVATIONS: ---------- BORING LOG FOR: Footprint Power Plant,Salem MA PROJECT NO.: _ 127-62117-12002 .. BORING NO.; '-s LOGGED BY: M.Horton START DATE: ., d —Oj DRILLED BY.(Company/Driller): Crawford Drglhlg Services _ 'TRANSCRIBED'BY: COMPLETION:DATE: GRD.SURFACE ELEVATION: MON.WELL NO.: WELEVATION FROM: CHECKED BY: - SAMP SAMPLING DEPTH SOIL _ - REMARKS FIELD DEPTH REC. TIME MAIL DENSITY/ _ (FEET) & CHGJ CONSIS. USCS (molamre condition; SCREENING / SAMP SAMPLE NO. WELL or ROCK or odos:geobglcDATA LENG. PROF'L HARD. ROCK classification;rock METHOD=PID _ (OA/OC STATUS) MATERIAL BRKN weathering;etc.) ((ppM)) CLASSIFICATION f'11 0 0.8 (f•M) Sum w ?h SD�t yluvel . PoaJt yrreta( sP gro.�h CORE -e-d ,bl v• 1,8 Cdu w. J0,CC c) sAA aide HS O j g s 1 SS s l.8- 3.1 (;A-r-) Wy -)oz3aol� II ya6rAS 7r�f7A3'd.e-, 44- P P 6F $7 q- �J g y 1.4 d•8 M SA r p �j 9'Cd* S p ENS o f GCRT nG'_ TYPE OF DRILLING RIG: GeoProce - Tetra Tech,Inc. METHOD OF ADVANCING BORING: Direct Push Technology METHOD OF SOIL SAMPLING: Dual Tube O METHOD OF ROCK CORING: NA GROUNDWATER LEVELS: OTHER OBSERVATIONS: BORING NO.: 'S-.? PAGE: OF Tetra Tech Inc � � � � � • 1 � � � � � • • 06100900000 • 0000 * 00090000000000 f 1 10 f A IV 1P 11q�p ff 4 10 �ff 4"1 19 *,* BORING LOG FOR: Footprint "'Plant,Salem MA PROJECTNO.: F12002 BORING NO.: LOGGED BY: M.Horton TRANSCRIBED BYSTART DATE: DRILLED BY(Company/Driller): : COMPLETION:DATE: ORD.SURFACE ELEVATION: ELEVATION FROM: MON.WELL NO.: N4 CHECKED Or: SAMP SAMPLING DEPTH SOIL (FEET) =Z=����REMARKS FIELD DEPTH REC. TIME MAT'L DENSITY/ a CHGJ CONSiS. uscs (moisture condition; SCREENING SAMP SAMPLE NO. WELL or ROCK or Odom;geological DATA O LENG. (OA/QC STATUS) PROF'L HARD. MATERIAL ROCK classification;rook METHOD w PID CLASSIFICATION 8RKN weathering:etc:) ((PPM)) F,'I Wrµ 4 0 WLz- 'grAvel 1'P 10 1 ip&nN 'y 0.7- 1.T. Coal,5anc1.9h+ fl It yv .1A .64 WA 60ftL $tave pcot "Tm 6P nA Wow Alk bed Pkf:ndA4-7 4-3-w $t-awl pcDt �po �A S&IYA 'izizl;�70-dl� jo, pcx�r-j) aro` 1 Iq 16 LVND Or 501ZV44- TYPE OF DRILLING RIG: METHOD OF ADVANCING BORING: Direct Push TeChnoloov Tatra Tech,Inc. METHOD OF SOIL SAMPLING: Dual Tube METHOD OF ROCK CORING: NA GROUNDWATER LEVELS: OTHER OBSERVATIONS: N Bost NO.: PAGE. I OF Tetra Tech ft BORING LOG FOR: _ Footprint Power Plats,Salem MA BORING NO.: PROJECTNO.: 127-62117-12002 - "- START DATE: LOGGED BY: M.Horton - JU-23•.�lo't - START COMPLETION:DATE: DRILLED F (ComCE ELEVATION: Crawford Drilling Services MON.WELL NO.: �,1a9 GRD.SURFACE ELEVATION: ELEVATION FROM: CHECKED BY: SAMP SAMPLING DEPTH SOIL - - - DEPTH REC. TIME MAIL DENSrrY/ REMARKS FIELD (FEET) I g CHGJ CONSIS. USCS (moisture condidon; SCREENING WELL or ROCK or odors;geological DATA SAMP SAMPLE NO. ROCK classification;rock METHOD.PID LEND. (QA/OC STATUS) PROF'L HARD. ' MATERIAL BRKN CLASSIFICATION weathedng;etc.) [(PPM)] Sunil u5�p^ SOW,9ravcl • poorly 91a SP C;pRE-cv E'6.4-�•. 3'S - !#� 1oa��v(z 4 w3S r� Ake,- T.0 A� Sawl cone- gas -o•d ro �+ cJ 5cr1� FmA sP 4-duraW lU v Dib of 8 16 TYPE OF DRILLING RIG: GeoProbe - - Tetra Tech,Ina METHOD OF ADVANCING BORING: Direct Push Technology s O METHOD OF SOIL SAMPLING: Duel Tuba METHOD OF ROCK CORING: NA GROUNDWATER LEVELS: OTHER OBSERVATIONS: BORING NO.: •y'- PAGE: OF Tetra Tech Inc *:p* -9 11- �77 p BORING LOG FOR: Footprint Power o'va Plank Salem MA PROJECT NO.: 127-6211 F—120OL2 BORING NO,: LOGGED BY: M: Horton --START DATE: DRILLED BY(Company/Drilter): Crawford Drilling Services TRANSCRIBED DATE: GRD.SURFACE ELEVATION: ELEVATION FROM: MON.WELL NO.: CHECKED BY: SAmp SAMPLING DEPTHSOIL �REMARKS DEPTH REC. TIME MAIL DENSITY/ FIELD (FEET) I & CHGJ CONSIS. Uscs (moisture ooridifion; SCREENING SAMP SAMPLE NO. WELL or ROCK or Odom;geological DATA LENG, (OA/OC STATUS) PROPL HARD. MATERIAL ROCK classification;rock METHOD-PID CLASSIFICATION 8PKN weathering;etc.) I(PPM)l CIF SP �fbt'71 Mc Wo 4 A pRy eA 04-e—) g,Mg sp 91461 0930 0910 poo H t-n CA 67 ro (F-0 $" poor-4j'froaUek rzolrf.- -o--cp ra a3 fy 101 TYPE OF:DRILLING RIG: GeoProbe METHOD OF ADVANCING BORING: Direct Push Technology Tatra Tech,Inc. METHOD OF SOILSAMPLING: Duel Tube O. METHOD OF ROCK CORING: NA GROUNDWATER LEVELS: OTHER OBSERVATIONS: BORING NO.: PAGE: I OF I Tetra Tech Inc I BORING LOG FOR: Footprint Power Plant,Salem MA BORING NO.: PROJECT NO.: 127.62117-12002 _.. START DATE: LOGGED BY: M.Horton TRANSCRIBED BY: COMPLETION:DATE: �y -/o DRILLED BY(Compi ny/Driller): Crawford Drilling Services MON.WELL NO.: /U/ GRD.SURFACE ELEVATION: ELEVATION FROM: CHECKED BY: SAMP SAMPLING DEPTH- - SOIL - REMARKS FIELD DEPTH REC. TIME MAT'L DENSITY/ USCS (moisture condition; SCREENING (FEET) / g, CHGJ CONSIS. of odorrr,geological DATA SAMP SAMPLE NO. WELL or ROCK ROCK classification;rock METHOD-=PID O LENG. (OA/OC STATUS) PROFL HARD. MATERIAL BRKN weathering;etc.) ((PPIv1)J CLASSIFICATION �t01� 5-4' -4:>'S F-AA Son ,% +rrce b It - yo ao_ r4 el oaoYaolz Fill up �„ n.�., 9 SLJ DRY, dRowo tcyae-un G9fb 0,5.1,7` F•MNS 0.4 h<f f °" Sane yra u pons%b`y S1.i GRCY RXR R=C VCRY 4 ' G1h k {O t>ttt: IAC-h Q+Urt-O MH �:k KCAct L (Y71. R1LGl rNb pooR SA�1pLC VUE PooREccwER\/ . 0 o REtav t �Rv 10 0.6 F-AA S)f+rSGncl; 1016 o 6tAvi11 a.p to / " (sM BROWN, ORIF -o,o s a J H5 o'a 1a la•6 Te «Sad iy FN9 pF BoRtt.�G TYPE OF DRILLING RIG: GeoPmUe DPT Rig _ Tetra Tech,Inc. METHOD OF ADVANCING BORING: nuzD( l'lGPush Technology- O METHOD OF SOIL SAMPLING: bG METHOD OF ROCK CORING: NA GROUNDWATER LEVELS: 52T ALt6?rt r1l " C r ' T OTHER OBSERVATIONS: I BORING NO.: 17701 PAGE: 1 OF 1 Tetra Tech Inc • • • • ! • • • . . • • • ! • • • 0 BORING LOG FOR: Footprint Power Plant,Salem MA BORING NO.: I' PROJECT NO.: 127-62117-12002 'DATE: START LOGGED BY: M.Horton DRILLED BY(Company/Droler): Crawford Ddlf�g Services TRANSCRIBED BY� COMPLETION:DATE, V,-Aa? GRD. MON.WELL i RD.SURFACE ELEVATION: ELEVATION FROM: CHECKED BY: SAMP SAMPLING DEPTH SOIL DEPTH REC. TIME MAIL DENSITY/ REMARKS FIELD (FEET) & CHGJ CONSIS. USCS (FEET) cokfiftlon; SCREENING or odors;geological DATA SAMP SAMPLE NO. WELL or ROCK ROCK classification;rock METHOD.PID LEND. (QA/OC STATUS) PROPL HARD, MATERIAL BRKN weathering;etc.) UPPMA CLASSIFICATION P 0-0-If jmw( �j w;A-50Av- eAj x SerURnTsrJ C-09 J5 -U.0 NS - Old p00% R 5e-c>vr,-,? ca at &P ^ 4"t- Sail 10 Same a6 e6dL-e, HS - 6.0 12 1�5 TYPE OF DRILLING RIG: GeoProba DPT Rig Tatra Tech, Inc. METHOD OF ADVANCING BORING: Direct Push Technology O. METHOD OF SOIL SAMPLING: M41 V,-IAb& METHOD OF ROCK CORING: IlJA GROUNDWATER LEVELS: Wbuo-rov, 0,4- hwoC04*7- OTHER OBSERVATIONS: TiE�j BORING-NO.: 0 PAGE: I OF I Telm Tech Inc BORING LOG FOR: Footprint Power Plant Salem MA - BORING NO.; "f{U4- PROJECT NO.: 127-62117-12002 - START DATE: Q riot/ LOGGED BY: M: yOnen - .. TRANSCRIBED BY: COMPLETION:DATE: -i0..,,2 GRILLED F CE(Company/Driller):ller): Crawford Omitna SeNices - MON.WELL NO,: -rZQel GRD.SURFACE ELEVATION: _ ELEVATION FROM: CHECKED BY: - iTp _ "DEPTH',' REG , TIME r F. ,axyMA7a .Di any i'" F s` a L:P ,. Fe' Cr3'xi'i y.%;k?,e'r f �' F.r x x ..rhe t s 1444x rTIE tlltionSAMPLE NO J WF,yL.`,n :off{#OAK 'k'E r'"+':c r^` of 9 o,Q4ra,8kolsp(Cal� { RPCK: oipeai(ICetlomckMETHOD (Oa GSTAT 3j, ' ''" * fy7IS7 lAl ' SRKN weatheun9;.etOJ - ((PPM)) 7'TK7H S'S O 3.: CLASSI l@ATI N F• I( F? c�y. ht SppSo,-I o41ua x - r ' ue)' u uc) c Itu vel Src�•� 0.C' 131uck/Gry M5- 0.0 $ i i3� # r v ;fir y1) Suw1 w't�san� ravcl u�jv r � a � rt Ste.cry ." "lY !TE N IY f L ,t.�4TY iJ£4 r )• 1 T •t C4S' (7 O 71( I S`�.� �' /unTtRtnt 13 r•y ctr<ycP 3,IFli, 'l�i rrdcc�XS�a �9 C�RrUda:z I 1.4 F w H1, 04n IIYS . o l.au?, "RCRY;; 4 *t } n K r , j . 1 3� , h yam.. .. fM C (r F . ly TYPE OF DRILLING RIG: GwProbe - Tetra Tech,Inc. - METHOD OF ADVANCING BORING: Direct Push Technology O METHOD OF SOIL SAMPLING: DualTuba - METHOD OF ROCK CORING: NA GROUNDWATER LEVELS: OTHER OBSERVATIONS: ' t1 pal -*f9 VLedr BORING NO.: 'i / PAGE: I OF Tetra Tech Inc Popofff * Of lfof* 1IWO # If010 � � pl � � � � 00a00l � � l � 00 �.-, tx,� <+Y tis' <•. .. ...,. .. �. �. ..,. ..r/ �,✓ .�� .._ .. v >x,a -ter ^ ✓ .., .,., BORING LOG FOR: Footprint Power Plant,Salem MA .BORING NO.: ?710.3 PROJECT NO.; 127.62117.12002 - STARS DATE: 4-y-/ LOGGED BY: M:Horton - TRANSCRIBED BY: - COMPLETION:.DATE: •y-/11 DRILLED BY(CompenylDriller): Crawford Dnllino Serykes - MON.WELL NO.: rrIO3 GRD.SURFACE ELEVATION: - ELEVATION FROM:... CHECKED BY: SAMP SAMPLING DEPTH SOIL -- REMARKS FIELD DEPTH REC. TIME MAT'L DENSITY/ - USCS (moisture conditbn; SCREENING (FEET) / g DOC. or odors;geological DATA SAMP SAMPLE NO. WELL HGJ oor r ROCK - ROCK classlitcation;rock 'METHOD=PID (7 LENG. (QA/QC STATUS) PROPL HARD. MATERIAL BRKN weathadng;etc.) ((PPM)) TTI63-65•0-3• o- o• v ALsp , CLASSIFICATION �`.� &IaGK , Dry �oRF• a.a 0904AoI� a.4• !,a .-C) Sand u"'pk .trace Silt ..11 146- 0,6 I, V-C sanol w. +fact s a,c( soma mul (Alz Gs" $rocs 1 1.9 Poon RECnvERy & tiS N4V 64neA w I-mee si 14- fW. t0 G 'Q.O fo Cluy/ SwTu1$4TSD Hs d. a Sa^� (iQown v=-s VERY PwR R E R RfiD i0 lo` +0,5F•M S4ryi wi c•#-m4c a S (rl'jE�' COR6.O.O CFM •w s ITurtgr�o ras-n a TY)Q3.55.f�- R•� +3• o4048b+,? vw 12 -- ER - Attur IY 1125 I;N1olo�,t ch4n� H, - �rJp or gORrN&- TYPE OF DRILLING RIG: GwProbe DPT Rig - Tetra Tech,Inc. METHOD OF ADVANCING BORING: Direct Push Technology - O METHOD OF SOILORNJG: CI OIwG� 26/1.1Q„ METHOD OF ROCK CORING: GROUNDWATER LEVELS: 3 P;;;,7611% ' b44 e5el - OTHEROBSERVATIONS: BMING NO.: PAGE: 1 OF 1 Teue Tech Inc BORING LOG FOR: Footprint Power Plant,Salem MA BORING NO.: 77—/OS PROJECT NO.: 127.62117-12002 - START DATE: LOGGED BY: M.Horton TRANSCRIBEDBY: COMPLETION:DATE: •4.67 DRILLED BY(Company/Driller): Crawford Drilling Services MON.WELL NO.: TT/ GRD.SURFACE ELEVATION: ELEVATION FROM: CHECKED BY: SAMP SAMPLING DEPTH SOIL - REMARKS - FIELD DEPTH REC. TIME MATL DENSITY/ USCS (molsture condition; SCREENING (FEET) / g CHGJ CONSIS. or odors;geological DATA SAMP SAMPLE NO. WELL or ROCK ROCK classification;rock METHOD.PID O LENG. (OA/OC STATUS) PROPI. HARD. 'MATERIAL BRKN weathering;etc.) ((PPM)I CLASSIFICATION u5G4aold o.:3.. `FII o,r�3 F.M SI Serol w h�Somesrw l� 0.O t a 1,430 (A%l446p) 1,3. 2.6 F-e 5;1{y_San wiNA So a1¢-4eaft0- an i C m Deco i HS 13 coo ��6s taw RtcouERY LI Na4Nt2 dke.. wt 1:Kce t )54na1 f•ICEY GoRE.-ua �wyJ 64-VRA Ng - d-O ►rgs � avR gadavcRy TT 105- SS-:7- to v9ayaolz D INVU e-)6 rwA w Sowte.:6/N•"An C, 4 y G L 6-KIFY Hs -.o. 0 la lF-M)sp SW 1t povR f?G:e,0VGUf ill 16 -1t1 SM HSC-0,0 TYPE OF DRILLING RIG: GwPmbe DPT Rig - Tetra Tech,Inc. METHOD OF ADVSOIL SAMNG PLING:BORING: Dlred Push Technol O METHOD OF SOIL SAMPLING: . METHOD OF ROCK CORING: GROUNDWATER LEVELS: to G r - OTHER OBSERVATIONS: BORING NO.: 105- PAGE: i OF Tetra Tech Inc • � � � i � � � � � i � � � � � � 900000000000000000 000900 • 0 0 oo a 0 "goo 0 0 0 to to vo to po 0 oo of f 1,7 0 0 BORING LOG FOR: Footprint Power Plant,Salem MA PROJECTNO.: 127-62117-12002 BORING No.: LOGGED BY: - START DATE-- M.Horton TRANSCRIBED BY: COMPLETION:DATE: DRILLED BY(Company/Driller): Crawford Drilling Services MON.WELL NO.: GIRD.SURFACE ELEVATION: ELEVATION FROM: CHECKED BY: SAMP SAMPLING DEPTH SOIL DEPTH REC. TIME MAT'L DENSITY/ REMARKS FIELDUSCS (moisture conciftlon; SCREENING (FEET) & CHGJ CONSIS. or SAMP SAMPLE NO. WELL or ROCK Odom;geological DATA ROCK classification;rock METHOD.PID 1(4 LENG.. (OA/QC STATUS) PROFL HARD. MATERIAL BRKN weathering;etc.) [(PPM)) e CLASSIFICATION - Psi T-Me't(F)sh'A &L 4w cc) TYPE OF DRILLING RIG: GeoProbb DPT Rig METHOD OF ADVANCING BORING: Direct Push Technology Tetra Tech,Inc. METHOD OF SOIL SAMPLING: xi;ie METHOD OF ROCK CORING: GROUNDWATER LEVELS: OTHER OBSERVATIONS: BORING NO.: PAGE: Q OF Tetra Tech Inc BORING LOG FOR: Footprint Power Plant,Salem MA BORING NO.: 'T'YIOC PROJECT NO.: 127-62117-12002 START DATE: q-�/•l2 LOGGED BY: M.Horton TRANSCRIBED BY: COMPLETION:DATE S -4- 7.2 DRILLED BY(Company/Driller): Crawford.Drillino Services - - - - MON.WELL NO.: Tr_"JG 6 ,.GRD.SURFACE ELEVATION: ELEVATION FROM: CHECKED BY: SAMP SAMPLING DEPTH SOIL REMARKS FIELD DEPTH REC. TIME MAIL DENSITY/ USCS (moisture condition; SCREENING (FEET) / & CHGJ CONSIS. or odors;geological DATA SAMP SAMPLE NO. WELL - or ROCK ROCK classification;rock METHOD=PID LEND. (OA(OC STATUS) PROPL HARD. MATERIAL BRKN- weathering;etc.) /(PPM)) CLASSIFICATION �Y o 2 b I; M s.a nd w. 1 Fa 5�1 BfcrlS, PaM�(eurh H-9s--3 ` t • l.a (F-�t•1} S rol_W�K'ls�ma. ma /%KcaAlo� a )3ao poo ' -l v •• ,a-- V AW D -5 440 JO a rr. TO s )',as FOR ,UOSLrVocu.gfrvc>C'� CpLLEcrED alCoM a-3- H �actt -pefrs;/earJ ANcHu< - ' (� r,'l�odo- 6 G5S�'I`l Srr�a� ` s,-rurzkrCD CNs - 9 rrlpG'S5- �•8' C la� w%N1 Oome.s�'l f O u Ovata0la 8 1330 aw 4ir_covER IQ D-o,� cry w; so.+eals•'rf GH Grey coni=-0.a CN 15'. Cl WA r-rpcg— r><Z (c,.TS'•) 4nd HS -' O. o la 6 II 'mgl�i G slrarR:tr� ahs cow R6Co r-�� f 5 EINp OF g0RuQC /G TYPE OF DRILLING RIG: GsoPmbwDPT Rig - Tetra Tech,Inc. METHOD OF ADVANCING BORING: Direct Posh Technology SO METHOD OF SOILIL SAMPLING: 1X741'f1,17¢ - METHOD OF ROCK CORING: Ali! GROUNDWATER LEVELS: ,O tri meAflw A I OTHER OBSERVATIONS: BORING NO.: PAGE: 1 OF 1 - Tetra Tech Inc 11 -1.� -11, i0- *- 0- 0- 000 BORING LOG FOR: Footprint Plam,Sale,"�MA . PROJECT NO.: �12�7-6211 7-01"20'�02 BORING NO.: LOGGED BY: M.Notion START DATE: DRILLED BY Crawford Driffing Services TRANSCRIBED BY: COMPLETION:DATE: GRID.SURFACE ELEVATION: ELEVATION FROM: MON.WELL NO.: CHECKED BY: DEPTH SAMP SAMPLING SOIL REC. TIME MAIL DENSITY/ REMARKS FIELD (FEET) I & CHGJ 'ONSIS. USCS :moisture condition; SCREENING SAMP SAMPLE NO WELL or ROCK or odomaeologleal LENG. (OA/OC STATUS) PROF-L HARD. ROCK 0185sificalkn , DATA 0 MATERIAL ;rock METHOD=PID -r/o>r -3- FT4,L 0-0-7 (F)?A i 1 1; 2��'. [(PPM)] T CLASSIFICATION BAKN weathering;etc,) ':4A 44 (F- Broom, mo�b� I:TLx- C % ct'61f,�w �74YV'26 rA A - _G Sana , i OI TT"io7- D 'tg� ev'cov:�a o9loll , $�PZA :14��y 4A 6F--Al)-w+A )Stick rob�Avll SAA 10 uxlfartfil) S5LJ Tr5; l4 S fnio TYPE OF DRILLING RI GwProbe METHOD OF ADVANCING BORING: Direct Push Technology Tetra Tech, Inc. METHOD OF SOIL SAMPLING: Dust Tube METHOD OF ROCK CORING: Na GROUNDWATER LEVELS: OTHER OBSERVATIONS: BORING NO �,f0 PAGE: OF Tetra Tech Im BORING LOG FOR: Footprint Power Ptant Salem MA - - - - PROJECT NO.: 12762117-12002 - - - BORING NO.: 'j'y')U 'LOGGED BY: Crawford ' START DATE: r Horton. - :TRANSCRIBED BY: � . � : ATE: DRILLED BY(Compeny/Drgler); _Cawford Ddlllna.3ervices� 'v � COMPLETIONDqt/U-lad. - •�^ GRD.SURFACE ELEVATION: MON.WELL NO.: cY ELEVATION,FROM: CHECKED BY: - DEPTH._. .. SOIL _ .. .. .. SAMP SAMPLING - DEPTH REG TIME MAIL DENSITY/ REMA *. FIELD (FEET) / g CHGJ CONSIS. USCS (molature'eondWdn; SCREENING SAMP SAMPLE NO. . WELL or ROCK - or odors;geolbBical DATA - LENG. QAtt3C STATUS PROPL HARD. ROCK classiBcadon;rock METHOD=PIC ( ) MATERIAL BRKN weathering etc.) ((PPM)) sf OI' j$-Q-3 CLASSIFICATION.- a-15.Z1�� _ I AK/L' CORc o,o 'd� I H35 o a - 1,'i G� ofx2 BfcYS Lf O '0'Ll- Coal aho{3rcX V 8iack 146 - o v q TTivB'SS 57- /1 ";\".. p• -D, - (F-C-)6,1}t,, 'n w;; 09 L i' la `11 rI'C'CA 16 —5 CO Ia r'r� ND aF 3o�T�G- TYPE OF DRILLING RIG: Geoprooe - METHOD OF ADVANCING BORING: Direct Push Technolggy { Tetra Tech,Inc, METHOD OF SOIL SAMPLING: Dual.Tube O METHOD OF ROCK CORING: NA GROUNDWATER LEVELS: OTHER OBSERVATIONS: - - - BORING:N U PAGE: OF / Tetra Tech Inc W I k 3 BORING LOG FOR: • i Footprint Power Plant,Salem MA fHhO�jINO NO OSS PROJECT NO 127.62117.120:02 � �. .� � LOGGED BY M:Horton r START DATE: TRANSCRIBED BY: COMPLETION:DATE: -ll •I .ORD.SURFACE ELEVATION-)• Crawford Drilling Services - MON.WELL NO.: Rlp� DRILLED BY(Cgnpany/Drips .ELEVATION FROM: CHECKED BY: ..a.v owt SAMP SAMPLING- DEPTH SOIL. - . - _., - RK DEPTH REC. TIME =' MAT'L DENSITY/ REMARKS FIELD (FEET) / g CHGJ CONSIS - USCS (moisture condition: SCREENING SAMP SAMPLE NO. WELL or ROCK- or ROCK classification;geological METHOD D LENG. (OA/OC STATUS) PROFL ROCK HARD. - 'MATERIAL weathering:etc.) (HOD= CLASSIFICATION [OAt GOAL 6��.DRy N 4 5 � N A• 5 610,6 i9 11-I r-1• t7 �' `C"�C oA L- 0511 aod2 , It 1, M 10-, 16A4 t't&A,41 3,� ir3 - a &014(EM..�unct SW DRY a a,a..-04 )�ju,dw song rml� ttcl�E I If (b v bee-ti >,+ Pam TYPE OF DRILLING RIO: GepProbe TBfraTBCh,Inc. METHOD OF ADVANCING BORING: Direct Push Technology - METHOD OF SOILDual Tube LORI - O METHOD OF ROCK CORING: NA GROUNDWATER LEVELS: -OTHER OBSERVATIONS: BORING NO w'Ip PAGE:. :1 OF Tetra Tech Inc BORING LOG FOR: .: Footpdnt=.Po4rPlant,�Salem MA BORING NO.: PROJECT NO.: ;. 127.62t ,712002 0 -4 " '& START DATE: LOGGED ., 0 GED t w BY: �.,.,. . � 3, . r Horton. ,. .._ . TRANSCRIBED BY COMPLETION:DATE: Q-11 •t'.vI DRILLED,By(Company/Driller): Crawlord Ddllina Services w"r%"" 'MON.WELL NO,: N GRD SURFACE ELEVATION: ELEVATION FROM CHECKED BY: Y x a @A�t I $t�MPLING J set.g .r< f ✓t tfc rn.. r ; _DE REQ .TIME M� ,r ,` DENS�V/ f y,w',�a z.J n, ` fyzF .•t rt�. �� - -USCS (molstute cq Aitlon: SCREENINGFIE . SAMP SQMPtE NO 'WELL �:`, or HOCK'' �L' , 9r 0, 9-Plogicel - PROF(. HARD. - ROGK-: c14ss10-e1Xon,,,Wk NIETFIOD=PID - ,4 (Oq/QC STATiJ$) 'r MATERIAL 2BRKN ;weathenn9: [(PP.M)] CLASSIFK;AFION - 6f,59 5S a 4;< i•S= cn cc;.c 64`I1a6a r s x? �}; ., Ell is N� 7� '. 4u 7,7 I9r I Ste . grf = y s % nom' 1 I ' 1 i/1 t rn kyr a ,r si14 f_ M. ., .' .. -777 77 4. TYPE OF DRILLING RIG: GwPmbe " Tetra Tech,Ing. METHOD OF ADVANCING BORING: . Direct Push Technology METHOD OF SOIL SAMPLING: Dual Tube METHOD OF ROCK CORING: NA GROUNDWATER LEVELS: - OTHER OBSERVATIONS: BORING NO.:` 1 PAGE: I OF Tetm Tech Inc ewe 0,0 0 0 4 0,1p 4pp ov m) 0 0 BORING LOG FOR: Footprint Power Plaint,Salem,MA BORING NO.: PROJECT NO.: 127-62117-12002 START DATE., LOGGED BY: M.Horton TRANSCRIBED BY: COMPLETION:DATE: C11-1/-PZI DRILLED BY(Compariy/Driller): Crawford Drilling Services MON.WELL NO.: GIRD.SURFACE ELEVATION: ELEVATION FROM: CHECKED BY: SAMP SAMPLING DEPTH SOIL ARKS FIELD DEPTH REC. TIME MAIL DENSITY/ USCS (moisture condition; SCREENING (FEET) & CHGJ CONSIS. or Odom;geological DATA SAMP SAMPLE NO. WELL or ROCK ROCK classification;rock METHOD=PID 1,5 LENG. (OA/OC STATUS) PROFL HARD. MATERIAL BRKN weathering;etc.) PPMA CLASSIFICATION 0.4Trv,r (AA-6) 6N�yAod 1IfNoryta- ve�� rxlrdO T7 MATEU4Z _'&+UrCj4e-d 6ORC 1L Awd]l up -ex o 17 FOCR -RISCOMR-1 CND OF $6R V-J(r F4- TYPE OF DRILLING RIG: GeoProbs Tetra Tech,Inc. METHOD OF ADVANCING BORING: Direct PU$h Technology METHOD OF SOIL SAMPLING: Dual Tube METHOD OF ROCK CORING: NA GROUNDWATER LEVELS: OTHER OBSERVATIONS: BORING NO.: I)") PAGE -IV OF I Tatra Tech Inc BORING LOG FOR: _Footprint Power Plant Salem MA PROJECT NO.: 127.6211172002 BORING NO.: LOGGED BY: M.Horton START DATE: DRILLED BY Com TRANSCRIBED BY: COMPLETION:DATE: ( ELEVATION: Crawford Dtllling SeNices MON.WELL NO.: GRD.SURFACE ELEVATION: ELEVATION FROM: CHECKED BY: DEPTH)r R�'P SAMPLING fy SOIL SAM C ,. TIME REMfr[1Ky" FIELQ g CONS�IS'i USCS, (Tv's YrO Wndktont : SCREENING SAKtP SAMPLE NO. or ROOK` or , ' odorq:geologlcat DATA. ((LVOC STATIIS)�. PROF HARD• MAT ' ROCK, classification;rock 'METHOD.=PID BRKN 'weathedn9 etc) ((PPM CLASSIFfCAATION )1 rrid 5r, A9ll 2u lz 6 arch lu G u Q dot , ,ar.r � t "w' L X I ..J „Tlfr �Ilxl` 7717"1 7-7777V w(J IM,1 � '1'` G `� Aie�t$rP fU I ' e yY krs>' h ({J') �r" o9itatxkz t kt 3N b �3 5 5a n �iG s14c ., . cfet t gl r M n 1 r /Z�r VFL � i YrJt 4 }i�+ ♦ � �;y1 � ,k r' I. r i TYPE OF DRILLING RIG: GeoPmbe METHOD OF ADVANCING BORING: _Direct Push Technology 7 Tetra Tech,Inc. METHOD OF SOIL SAMPLING: DualTube O METHOD OF ROCK CORING: NA - GROUNDWATER LEVELS: OTHER OBSERVATIONS: BORING NO.:'TT D - PAGE: OF • • • • • • • • • i • • • • • • • • • i • • � • • • • • • � • • • • • • � •Te0Tlrx• • i • k01**0 oos woo 0,004 0 ,0 ov 0 0 '8� 0 * 000vo � BORING LOG FOR: Footprint Power Plant,Salem MA PROJECT No.: 127-62117-12002 BORING NO.; LOGGED BY: M.Horton START DATE: DRILLED L TRANSCRIBED BY: COMPLETION:FJN:UA I t: RILLED BY(Company/Driller): Crawford Drilling Services GRD.SURFACE ELEVATION: MON.WELL NO.: 7-r-/f(5 ELEVATION FROM: CHECKED 13y: DEPTH TOI�L DEPTH SAMP SAMPLING REMARKS FIELD EPTH FIEC. MAT'L DENSITY/ T) TIME Uscs (MOWLIM Condiflon; SCREENING (FEET) & CHGJ CONSIS. or odors;geological SAMP SAMPLE NO, WELL or ROCK DATA LENG. (QA/OC STATUS) PROPL HARD. MATERIAL ROCK classification;rock METHOD.PID BRKN weathering;etc.) CLASSIFICATION I(PpM)I -30 — 0911.961'7 15, CO�F- - 0�-<5 eplz- .4 COCIL t 1410 mve GM If 4 &A tT— V/\ C-L j6t(:,JA -c0KF—; 1 4-u ctA .f-rc Low EC UsZY Ls SA4 RG A OL e rCAO _I r\ TYPE OF DRILLING RIG: -GeoProbe Tetra Tech,lnC. METHOD OF ADVANCING BORING: Direct Push Technology METHOD OF SOIL SAMPLING: ODualTubs METHOD OF ROCK CORING: NA GROUNDWATER LEVELS: OTHER OBSERVATIONS: BORING NO.:—TT11,) PAGE: OF Tetra Tech Inc BORING LOG FOR: FootprintPower Plant,Salem MA PROJECT NO.: 7 .. BORING NO.: LOGGED BY: M.Horton - -- - START DATE: qly-�,? - DRILLED BY(Companytoriller): __Crawford Drilling.Servicea- TRANSCRIBED BY: COMPLETION:DATE: -91o-/7-12 I GRD.SURFACE ELEVATION: - ELEVATION FROM: MON.WELL NO.: �It l -- - --- -- CHECKED BY: - SAMPSAMPLING DEPTH SOi ' REC. T - DEPTH REO, TIME MATL DENSITY/ � � REMARKSFIELD (FEET) / •:g CHGJ CONSIS. USCS (moisture condition; SCREENING SAMP SAMPLE NO. WELL or ROCK - or Odom;geological DATA 0 LENG. (OA/OC STATUS) PROF'L HARD. - MATERIAL ROCK classification;rock METHOD=PID CLASSIFICATION .�BRKN weathering;etc.) ((PPM)l T7111-65 (i,'3)• pl, 0-0• (F-Al S:I+y-<CA +v' . d�^ttyr...rt uP l 6Y 09r7;?0Q I 0.y-0.9 C-Mue, 1 mCGDE �,Z onte (M Stiu��1�r�rvj lis c?D a I r� r3.4-).7 (r-c� 5t1 .SGnfJt sot,K sf C tee( tp to 1" yN 7 LOL,> RGCOvEiRy Y cv F- 77!/! SS (F lo)• 'Z C 5;1+� $an u 5omt �rwt.e K$- too fhb v91720IR 5 IPOOR FCovEfz "� tJteF;ut- Pe�wleum It N¢ ro c>dD� CicuJ w th +,ace s!It C L Blv C01te - o,o Ia 1,6 iaw�RsttxJER s r 16 FIvD OF"tN36, TYPE OF DRILLING RIG: GaoPmbe. sMETHOD OF ADVANCING BORING: Direct Push Technoloay Tetra Tach,Inc. METHOD OF SOIL SAMPLING: Duel Tube- O METHOD OF ROCK CORING: NA GROUNDWATER LEVELS: OTHER OBSERVATIONS: bmil --i BORING NO.: I PAGE: ! OF Tetra Tech Inc c �.w « v lT +s.6V FS.I °tis -.p n ✓ 4q s s..j✓ n•J Sr T � ;A r s� Sg4 BORING LOG FOR: Footprint Power Plant,Salem MA - PROJECT NO.: 127-62717.12002 !`. .... . - BORING NO.: /aZ LOGGED BY: M:Horton _ STARTDATE: / DRILLED BY(COM M: - TRANSCRIBED BY: COMPLETION:DATE: •/ / _ Crawford Ddgln9 Services -��� - GIRD.SURFACE ELEVATION: MON.WELL NO.: -- ELEVATION FROM: CHECKED BY: DEPTH SAMP SAMPLING (FEET) REG. TIME MAT'L DENSITY/ REMARKS FIELD g CHGJ CONSIS. USCS (moisture condition; SCREENING SAMP SAMPLE NO. WELL or ROCK - or odors;geological DATA LENG. (QA/QC STATUS) PRO HARD. - MATERIAL ROCK classification;rock METHOD=PID CLASSIFICATION SRKN weathering;etc.) RPPwI 0 -111 c -C l y crit w. yG�te y �e ,� o9f��o'2 Gku�llltti¢, Colic /3 i 7 4 0 rT1i2 SS"lo-la 0 �•( f•� ) I� 0917xv1 c•�.S c� ;l F- �t�lrq CHS -UU . 0r -Ir,I • Coal I taLR.- trnc�. L S 16 EE wExr E TYPE OF DRILLING RIG: GeoProbe - - METHOD OF ADVANCING BORING: Direct Push Technology Tetra Tech,Inc, METHOD OF SOIL SAMPLING: Dual Tu€ie METHOD OF.ROCK CORING: NA GROUNDWATER LEVELS: OTHER OBSERVATIONS: 30 n - BORING NO.: PAGE: I OF - Tetra Tech Inc BORING LOG FOR: Footprint Power Plant,Salem NIA PROJECT NO.: 127-62117-12002 .._ BORING NO.: LOGGED BY: M.Hotton START DATE: t _DRILLED BY(Companpunuer): Crawford Drilling Semicea- TRANSCRIBED BY: COMPLETION:DATE: GRD.SURFACE ELEVATION: - MON.WELL NO.: Mfg ELEVATION FROM: CHECKED BY: SAMP SAMPLING DEPTH SOIL REMARKS FIELD DEPTH REC. TIME MAIL DENSITY/ (FEET) / & CHGJ CONSIS. USCS (moisture condition; SCREENING SAMP SAMPLE NO. WELL or ROCK or odors;geological DATA LENG. OA/OC STATUS PROFL HARD. ROCK dassiffcadon;rock METHOD=PID Is ( ) MATERIAL A G kw �[ BRKN weathering;ete.1CLASSIEKATION e [(PPM)) Silt Fl� e � xlu�rtrd anrt�-o.a y EN'J' O'f OiCTtJ Cy F4 TYPE OF DRILLING RIG: GeoPmbo - METHOD OF ADVANCING BORING: Diced Push Technology Tetra Tech,Inc. METHOD OF SOIL SAMPLING: Dual Tuba - - METHOD OF ROCK CORING: NA GROUNDWATER LEVELS: . OTHER OBSERVATIONS: BORING-NO.:TT I IV PAGE: OF 12 Tetra Tech Inc 0 * 9000 Q 0 ,90P 0 ,0 p Opp # ,f P, �P :v 0:0 0 foo BORING LOG FOR: Footprint Power OwPlant,Salem MA 127.62117421)02 PROJECT NO.: BORING No.: 7-r/1 LOGGED BY: M;Horton START DATE: DRILLED BY(Company/Driller): ces TRANSCRIBED SNCOMPLETION:DATE: 31 GRD.SURFACE ELEVATION: MON.WELL NO.: ELEVATION FROM: CHECKED BY: SAMP SAMPLING DEPTH i SOIL' DEPTH `cccz==`c=`c REC. TIME MAT'L DENSITY/ REMm=AJ=4K=Sz=z=�FIELD (FEET) & CHGj CONSIS. USCS (moisture condition; SCREENING SAMP SAMPLE NO, WELL or ROCK or Odom;geological DATA LEND. (CA/CC STATUS) PROFL HARD. MATERIAL ROCK classification;rock METHOD=PID BRKN T-170/ $5, CLASSIFICATION weathering;ate.) f(PPM)1 0-0. F-Ai Sil! 60"Le- zz�lzi- 12,G0,4 0,4 1 Coed wl Dr-8 5ervA w A ti`ffl.y..erZP-I.,,-V, ks,115 %4oleurn odor- 1c, CPRE rr14 14,$ '1-0 to L/ 5- 7 4 /5 6M C-L Lok.)"manual?y v TYPE OF DRILLING RIG: GwPmtle METHOD OF ADVANCING BORING: Direct Posh Technology Tetra Tech, Inc. METHOD OF SOIL SAMPLING: DualTube METHOD OF ROCK CORING: NA GROUNDWATER LEVELS: OTHER OBSERVATIONS: I BORING NO.: r-Ily PAGE: I OF Tetra Tech Inc BORING LOG FOR: FOOtprint Power Plant,Salem MA - .BORING NO.: TTJIJr PROJECT NO.: 127-62117-12002 - START DATE: LOGGED BY: M:Horton TRANSCRIBED'BY:- DRILLED BY(Company/Driller): Crawford DriMng Services COMPLETION:DATE: 9-r 1 GRD.SURFACE ELEVATION: " - MON.WELL NO.: TTII`�i ELEVATION FROM: - CHECKED BY: SAMP SAMPLING DEPTH SOIL' - - - DEPTH REC. TIME MAT'L DENSITY/ REMARKS FIELD (FEET) / g CHGJ CONSIS. USCS (moisture condition; SCREENING SAMP WELL or ROCK or Odom;geological DATA SAMPLE NO. ROCK classification;rock METHOD.PID LENG. (QA/QC STATUS) PROPL HARD. MATERIAL BRKN weathering;etc.) I(PPMp CLASSIFICATION 7T'u5 55'd 3D.o y F!( Cper-o- O9r7Igo la I. -M) 3^! 1`q I4 Y2 LR 6s- of �P 1 5 towgccw"gy n (, NatnR 7 �rg1_ - Ssmq� �tllCtl 64 GM G+e�&OW'1 eozF -O U NO DEEPSAMPtQ !t5'U,O J CuLtEeTC0 OUB Oo 'NoxRE000r-1'LY 5 ? FCOV 10 c sz t gree u(�Fo I '` lac S - -0.v V-5 0.0 is nry FT: )K 16 TYPE OF DRILLING RIG: GeoProtie'. Tette Tach,1nC. METHOD OF ADVANCING BORING: Dkect Pugh Technology METHOD OF SOIL SAMPLING: Dual Tube - O METHOD OF ROCK CORING: NA GROUNDWATER LEVELS: OTHER OBSERVATIONS: - BORING NO.: / PAGE: 1 OF Tatra Tech Inc 0009000000000000000000000000000000000000 * 000 pffillpfpff BORING LOG FOR: Footprint Power Plant,Salem MA BORING NO.: PROJECT NO.: 12T— ' 6211 .12002 LOGGED BY: M.Horton START DATE: 1:7 DRILLED BY(Company/Driflar): Crawford Drilling;ServicesTRANSCRIBED BY: COMPLETION:DATE: 7-91 GRD.SURFACE ELEVATION: ELEVATION FROM: MON.WELL NO.: CHECKED BY: SAMP SAMPLING DEPTH SOIL DEPTH REQ TIME MATL DENSITY/ 'REMARKS FIELD (FEET) & CHGJ CONSIS. uscs (moisture condition; SCREENING SAMP SAMPLE NO. WELL or ROCK or Odom;geologim) DATA PROF'L ROCK classification;rock METHOD.PID LENG. (QA/CC STATUS) HARD. MATERIAL CLASSIFICATION BAKN W88thaft;etc.) ((PPM)) VAC- c,,j 9 a (F-C) s;jkj s4reL 05PA 60 *ej NA/ C11A 35 o9alavia 8p o-1.2 -p(fA -A) A 1. - "0., -L) c(I do `if.c. - C.14 6rr, ICVL 8;6f ;0 c Q 8!�y TYPE OF DRILLING RIG: GeoProoa METHOD OF ADVANCING BORING: Direct Push Technology Tetra Tech,im METHOD OF SOIL SAMPLING: DualTuba METHOD OF ROCK CORING: NA GROUNDWATER LEVELS: OTHER OBSERVATIONS: 3�-/37 Fc-5 BORINGNO.; 7ril' PAGE: I OF Tetra Tech Inc BORING LOG FOR: Footprint Power Plant,Salenr.MA PROJECT NO.: 127-62117-12002 BORING NO.: LOGGED BY: M.Horton - START DATE ../� DRILLED BY(Company/Driller): _ Cf%vAord Onllimn Services TRANSCRIBED BY. COMPLETION:DATE: 9-/'7-/7 GRD.SURFACE ELEVATION: MON.WELL NC.: p ELEVATION FROM: CHECKED BY: SAMP SAMPLING DEPTH SOIL DEPTH REC. TIME MAIL DENSITY/ REMARKS FIELD (FEET) / g CHGJ CONSIS. - USCS (moisture condition; SCREENING SAMP SAMPLE NO. WELL or ROCK or odors;geological DATA 6 LENG. (OA/OC STATUS) PROPL HARD. MATERIAL ROCK classification;rock METHOD.PID T711Q-jS-(v'r CLASSIFICATION BRKN weathering;etc.) ((PPM)] }-i 11 b'0.4 CO:Yr`ef a g]4C,�-$Fit)n� GP F*4-6cwn 1,61- CvRE 3S �,4 0�3v I,]•1,$ (F) S" 5;1f -.44A 501,L- CicAj t , HS Ic ,s•a.l F•.a MLb- 5 ; a,q s;Iy u4 �:YhlnAe (f)sayc� UL' �^� Sukuu�ccl 4 0- b@ .SAME AS ABOVE OL 60r - 0,8 77119.55 CS•8)'' HD• 141 2S 091'>ao12 SW -try 10 SAA sW CGRE-1, HS- 1t.5 12 I,g 3 IY FND OF$ORTN X - REFUSAL AT 13' 16 TYPE OF DRILLING RIG: GeoProbe METHOD OF ADVANCING BORING: _Direct Push Technology - Tena Tech,/no. METHOD OF SOIL SAMPLING: Dual Tube O METHOD OF ROCK CORING; NA GROUNDWATER LEVELS OTHER OBSERVATIONS: {- I 5 BORING NO.: TT I I PAGE: OF Tetra Tech Inc BORING LOG FOR: nt Power.PIapjj-' Footpa Salem MA PROJECT NO.: 127-62117-12002 BORING NO.;; LOGGED BY. M.Horton START DATE: DRILLED BY(Company/Driller): Cralmdord Drilling Be— TRANSCRIBED BY: COMPLETION:DATE: Vfla`0 GRD.SURFACE ELEVATION:IUN: MON.WELL No.: T-rV ELEVATION FROM: CHECKED BY: SAMP SAMPLING DEPTH SOIL DEPTH REC. TIME MAIL DENSITY/ REMARKS & CHGJ FIELD (FEET) CONSIS. uscs (moisture condition; SCREENING SAMP SAMPLE NO. WELL or ROCK or Odom;geological DATA LEND. (QA/OC STATUS) PROFL HARD. ROCK classification;rock METHOD=PID MATERIAL weathering;etc.) CLASSIFICATION BRKN ((PPM)) 7T/2v-.5.5-0.3 Fail d g.3 Soo) d6ra�-O � 59b adl&i 6,0 I'D &P, 4YC'4 PRY — 7w`wv Ld;,kl 0 U,II IV-.4l) 4 1 r-LA)6L V COCI;I'd I An gy�S4 05� a .$' TT Q0-s5-6 ulyll 0A Some 514A Snn -Kcd TFW --06 ors TYPE OF DRILLING RIG: GeoProbe METHOD OF ADVANCING BORING: Direct Push Technology Tetra TectL Inc. METHOD OF SOli.SAMPLING: Dual Tube METHOD OF ROCK CORING: GROUNDWATER LEVELS: OTHER OBSERVATIONS. PAGE: OF Tatra Tech Inc BORING LOG FOR: Footprint Pottier Pid'nt,Saiem'MA PROJECT NO.: 127-6211 112002 - BORING NO.: X113 LOGGED BY: M.Horton START DATE: DRILLED BY(Company/Driller): _ Crawford Drilling Services TRANSCRIBED BY: COMPLETION:DATE: Q- 17- GRD,SURFACE ELEVATION: MON.WELL NO•: W A ELEVATION FROM: CHECKED BY: DEPTH ... . _... _ SAMP SAMPLING SOIL .. .. DEPTH REC. TIME MAT'L DENSITY/ REMARKS FIELD (FEET) / g CHGJ CONSIS. USCS (moisture condition; SCREENING SAMP SAMPLE N0. WELL or ROCK - or odors;OeolQDi* DATA LENG. (OA/OC STATUS) PROFL HARD. MATERIAL ROCK classification;rock METHOD=PID CLASSIFICATION BRKN weathering;etc.) ((PPM)) 'TTIr3-SS•10 3�- FyI d-0.2LF—M) $tillyS4 w Jr�nut.c(Uplc l " o91�a0r� b 1-t.6 F•e) rl th lrHk 9mvei SAt growl JRu.I CORE-0,0 m,kecl w;N1 coal Ns o.a 5 -L6w RE ZY 4 eND OF SoRriJ& REFU<4L .4-r g7 IU 12 IK IL• TYPE OF DRILLING RIG: GeoProbe METHOD OF ADVANCING BORING: _Dimot Push Technology Tetra Tech,Inc. METHOD OF SOIL SAMPLING: Duel Tube O 'METHOD OF ROCK CORING: NA GROUNDWATER LEVELS: OTHER OBSERVATIONS: NO Gf I'i'n t Jjb w I BORING NO.:rT//3 PAGE: / OF Tetra Tech Inc BORING LOG FOR: Footprint Power Plant,Salem MA PROJECT NO.: 127-62117-12002 BORING NO.; LOGGED,BY: M.Horton -7 START DATE: DRILLED,By(Company/Driller): Crawford Drilling Services TRANSCRIBED BY: COMPLETION:DATE: GIRD.SURFACE ELEVATION: ELEVATION FROM: MON.WELL No.: NA CHECKED BY: SAMP SAMPLING DEPTH I SOIL DEPTH REC. TIME MATL DENSITY/ REMARKS FIELD (FEET) & CHGJ CONSIS. uscs (moisture condition; SCREENING SAMP SAMPLE NO. WELL or ROCK or Odom;geological DATA LENG. (OA/OC STATUS) PROFL HARD. MATERIALROCK classification;rock METHOD=PID CLASSIFICATION BRKN Weathering;etc.) I(PPM)l -AA) 5 r-�-o-0 oov-�� / 4 m 5p 5" kS - gtAt4l C4, 0 oftuj if L AT &' IZ I F- TYPE OF DRILLING RIG: GeOProbe METHOD OF ADVANCING BORING: Push Technology T61ra Tech,InC. Tolle METHOD OF SOIL SAMPLING: Duel Tube METHOD OF ROCK CORING: NA GROUNDWATER LEVELS: OTHER OBSERVATIONS: NIS WRL TQ,4TA L L FE) ------- BORING LPALGOF Term Tech Inc BORING LOG FOR: Footprint Power Plant Salem MA BORING NO.: PROJECT NO.: 12Z 2117-12M START DATE: LOGGED BY: M.Horton - TRANSCRIBED BY: COMPLETION:DATE: DRILLED BY(Company/Driller): Crawford Drilling Services MON.WELL NO.: Nq GRD,SURFACE ELEVATION: ELEVATION FROM: CHECKED BY: - - SAMP SAMPLING DEPTH REMARKS FIELD DEPTH REC. TIME MAIL DENSITY/ CHGJUSCS (moisture condNon; SCREENING (FEET) / g WELL or ROC. or odors;geological DATA SAMP SAMPLE NO. WELL or ROCK ROCK classification;rock METHOD=PID O LENG. (OAQC STATUS) PROPL HARD. MATERIAL BRKN weathering;etc.) [(PPM)j CLASSIFICATION T'T)18 '5<,��•3) F l j 0 P� C�4alaola o-3- 1•�• cF•c SI - nd I o� � l a .�N FIRE_o.c 7 04C)0' OR kMVE1ZY arty 7 EF(l A Ar r„' - 5ec clHcmPFre. u544' uD or o . N ?l: 1 jb TYPE OF DRILLING RIG: GaoPmhe Tetra Tech,Inc. METHOD OF ADVANCING BORING: Direct Push Technolow METHOD OF SOIL SAMPLING: Deal.Tube O METHOD OF ROCK CORING: NA GROUNDWATER LEVELS;, OTHER OBSERVATIONS: (.L7P I AVVltQWfQ BORING NO.: 'r"T11$ PAGE: I OF Tetra Tech Inc BORING LOG FOR: I Power Plwt,Salem MA PROJECT NO.: 127-62117-12002 BORING NO.: LOGGED BY: I Horton START DATE: DRILLED BY(Company/Driller): TRANSCRIBED BY: GRID,SURFACE ELEVATION: rfillng Services COMPLETION;DATE: Crawford MON.WELL No.; ELEVATION FROM: CHECKED BY: SAMP SAMPLING M�DEPTH DEPTH TIME MAIL DENSITY/ REMARKS FIELD (FEET) & CHGJ CONSIS. USCS (moisture wnl SCREENING SAMP SAMPLE NO. WELL or ROCK or Odom;geological DATA LENG. (OA/OC STATUS) PROFT. HARD. MATERIAL ROCK classification;rock METHOD-PID CLASSIFICATION BRKN weathering;etc.) [(PPM)) --corT, &6k-, I llq IZ I'll! l I <1 7�-26 I SKI fx)t 1{S- 0,0 I If ie L6 L-,<1 FND 6F &l TYPE OF DRILLING RIG: GwProbe METHOD OF ADVANCING BORING: Direct Push—Technology Tetra Tech, Inc. ,METHOD OF SOIL SAMPLING: Dual Tube METHOD OF ROCK CORING: I GROUNDWATER LEVELS: OTHER OBSERVATIONS, t N !q—K D:FdNG N0:.1:IPAGE: OF t J Tetra Tech Inc BORING LOG FOR: Footprint Power Plant Salem MA BORING NO.: PROJECT NO.: 127-82117.12002 -- START DATE:LOGGED BY: M.Cr Horton - - TRANSCRIBED BY: COMPLETION:DATE: DRILLED F CE ELEVATION: Crawford DtlIMp Services MON.WELL NO.: GRD.SURFACE ELEVATION: - ELEVATION FROM: CHECKED BY: SAMP SAMPLINGDEPTH . DEPTH REC. TIME MATL DENSITY/ REMARKS FIELD (FEET) / g CHGJ CONSIST USCS (moisture condtion; SCREENING WELL or ROCK or Odom;geological DATA SAMP SAMPLE NO. LENG. (OA/OC STATUS) PROPL HARD. MATERIAL ROCK classification;rock METHOD=PID BRKN weatherin ;etc. CLASSIFICATION 9 ) IIPPM)J rra�a.sh•.1,r,-s)• �:tl v�;�. CF.c,) SG , pbu-i �.da w%hl'1 S°iti S Ory 3` c vel nc! Hace s IW P J� 2 a s a �M•c) Sand , somt gra xf , ! n+nce s//f SP " .2-3- 6 (F-M 6rll� 64,vk, Som- 9mve SM 5 7-7(� 1 �G TYPE OF DRILLING RIG: GeoProbe TBVe Tech,Inc. OF ADVANCING BORING: Direct Push Technology METHOD OF SOIL SAMPLING Duel Tube O . METHOD OF ROCK CORING: NA GROUNDWATER LEVELS: OTHER OBSERVATIONS: S the en `70 b BORING NO.: T-r. O PAGE: ! OF TetraTechInc 010000000000000000000000000000000000 BORING LOG FOR: Footprint:2Plaint,Salem MA I 1 po"�2 BORING NO.: PROJECT NO.: 7:62-17-12 LOGGED BY: M.HortonSTART DATE; i��: - I DRILLED By(Company/Driller); cmvwWdfd:::: 1111 Di I; TRANSCRIBED BY: COMPLETION:DATE: 1,911( GIRD.SURFACE ELEVATION: MON.WELL NO.: 0 hai ELEVATION FROM: CHECKED BY: SAMP SAMPLING DEPTH S 'L DEPTH REC. TIME MAT'L DENSITY/ - REMARKS -FIELD (FEET) & CHGJ CONSIS. USCS (moisture condition; SCREENING SAMP SAMPLE NO, WELL or ROCK or Odom,geological DATA 13 LENG. (QA/QC STATUS) PROPL HARD. WAJERIAL ROCK clawilicallon;rock METHOD=PID - SRKN weathering;etc.) gi,-65-(1-3 ri I r.1 [(PPM)] I)KY E.(9 � qRS 0 6 Sq CCRF - 0,9 Dar-KgMu-") (F-0 e A 5w -'<A4"1tk'4 c6crs,,- EI-)b OF 96RZW,-- REFU-SA, Al- to TYPE OF DRILLING RIG; GeoProbe METHOD OF ADVANCING BORING: Direct Push Technology Tetra Tech,Inc. METHOD OF SOIL SAMPLING: Dual Tube METHOD OF ROCK CORING: NA GROUNDWATER LEVELS: OBSERVATIONS:OTHER OBSERVATIONr-�f 7 -1b Irt&s I BORING NO.: PAGE: OF Tetra Tech Inc BORING LOG FOR: Footprint Power Plem,Salem MA BORING NO.: •r,�D6. PROJECT NO.: 127-62117.12002 - - - START DATE: LOGGED BY: M.Horton - TRANSCRIBED BY: COMPLETIONDATE: DRILLED BY(Company/Dritler): Crawford Dd : lllnp Services - '" - MON.WELL GRD.SURFACE ELEVATION: ELEVATION FROM: L :CHECKED L SAMP SAMPLING DEPTH SOIL -" - - DEPTH REC. TIME MAIL DENSITY/ REMARKS FIELD (FEET) / g CHGJ CONSIS. USCS (moisture condition; SCREENING SAMP SAMPLE NO. WELL or ROCK or odors:geological .DATA LENG. PROF'L HARD. ROCK classification;rock METHOD=PID O (QA/OC STATUS) - MATERIAL BRKN weathering;etc.) - [(PPM CLASSIFICATION )) rbo?4b1012 FII (¢•G 5;1+� 5a ,.w. �ral.el LAP f0 I.5" 5� gr�i NS•p;t a �� 1025 Poo? RffCOvE utY 5 z 4 40 (AA t)_<4rd CnokyMdel - SOAVG 6:1` �J r� oEEPS VERNI Dort RMOVErZY C0Lt.ecrr-D Oug $ *v tin (Le�bv 1v �it.1-c a.� 9noe - 5o•�c..d * Sp ra g,3 VERY PDoQl2¢cov�R`! 5 fy 16 Ey )D 6 F w-cNG• TYPE OF DRILLING RIG: GeOPmbe TBfla Tech,Inc. METHOD OF ADVANCING BORING: Dlrect Push Technology METHOD OF SOIL SAMPLING: Dual Tube METHOD OF ROCK CORING: NA GROUNDWATER LEVELS: YYY OTHER OBSERVATIONS: -I'f' b46 - BORING NO.: PAGE: OF Tetra Tech Inc 00000000Ole 000 * 0000000000000 • • • • • • i • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • U • a c • m CL CL • • • i • i • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • r .r T � 1 -F Fa r l �.f � t J •J ..i Appendix C HydroCAD Input/Output Data s, g W W`= Drainag Area 8 Draina Area 2 0;1 x Drainage Ar 7 Dr mage Area 9 �1 Coal Pile noff Pond • Drainage Area 1 4 Drainage Area 10 �,. Design Point 1 Design Point 2A a. s, •z Drainag Area 5 Drainage A 4 Dr ,nage Area 6 DrainagE Area 12 !¢ Drainage Area 3 7> Drainage Area 11 0) Design Point 2B Design Point 3 A - Routing Diagram for Existing Watershed ;. - Prepared by Tetra Tech, Printed 3/29/2013 •� FmyclroCAD&10.00 s/n 05923 ©2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC • • • Existing Watershed • Prepared by Tetra Tech Printed 3/29/2013 • HydroCAD®10.00 s/n 05923 02012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 2 • Area Listing (all nodes) • Area CN . Description • (acres) (subcatchment-numbers) • 0.614 39 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG A (2S, 3S, 4S, I OS) • 3.977 74 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG C (2S, 8S, 10S) • 1.362 80 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG D (2S, 10S) 17.208 98 Asphalt and Concrete (2S, 3S,4S, 5S, 6S, 7S, 8S, 9S, 10S, 11 S, 12S) • 5.184 98 Buildings (2S,3S,4S, 6S, 7S, 1OS, 11 S, 12S) • 4.877 98 Coal Pile (2S) • 1.088 98 Coal Pile Runoff Pond (2S) • 16.706 76 Gravel roads, HSG A (1 S,2S, 3S, 4S, 6S, 7S, 8S, 9S, 1 OS, 11 S, 12S) 5.232 89 Gravel roads, HSG C (5S, 6S, 1OS, 11 S, 12S) • 1.230 91 Gravel roads, HSG D (2S, 3S) • 0.561 98 Settling Basins (4S) • 2.810 98 Steel Plates (2S) 4.083 98 Storage Tanks (2S, 3S, 4S, 5S, 11 S) • 64.932 89 TOTAL AREA • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • Existing Watershed Prepared by Tetra Tech Printed 3/29/2013 HydroCAD®10.00 s/n 05923 ©2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 3 Soil Listing (all nodes) �s Area Soil Subcatchment (acres) Group Numbers 17.320 HSG A 1S, 2S; 3S,4S, 6S, 7S, 8S, 9S, 10S, 11 S, 12S 0.000 HSG B •' 9.209 HSG C 2S,5S, 6S, 8S, 10S, 11S, 12S 2.592 HSG D 2S, 3S, 10S 35.811 Other 2S, 3S,4S, 5S, 6S, 7S, 8S, 9S, 10S, 11 S, 12S 64.932 TOTAL AREA �y �i s �r •i' "j .y •s .i .;i .-:'d • • • Existing Watershed Type 11124-hr 2-YearRainfall=3.20" • Prepared by Tetra Tech Printed 3/29/2013 HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n 05923 ©2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Paae 4 • Time span=0.00-48.00 hrs, dt=0.01 hrs, 4801 points • Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS Reach routing by Stor-Ind+Trans method - Pond routing by Stor-Ind method • SubcatchmentlS: Drainage Area 1 Runoff Area=0.318 ac 0.00% Impervious Runoff Depth=1.15" • Tc=5.0 min CN=76 Runoff--0.43 cfs 0.031 of • Subcatchment2S: Drainage Area 2 Runoff Area=28.282 ac 58.24% Impervious Runoff Depth=2.08" • Flow Length=2,082' Tc=27.4 min CN=89 Runoff--40.49 cfs 4.906 of • Subcatchment3S: Drainage Area 3 Runoff Area=5.756 ac 26.67% Impervious Runoff Depth=1.61 • Tc=5.0 min CN=83 Runoff 11.24 cfs 0.772 of • Subcatchment4S: Drainage Area 4 Runoff Area=1.725 ac 94.49%, Impervious Runoff Depth=2.64" • Tc=5.0 min CN=95 Runoff=5.24 cfs 0.380 of Subcatchment5S: Drainage Area 5 Runoff Area=0.611 ac ,26.02% Impervious Runoff Depth=2.26" • Tc=5.0 min CN=91 Runoff=1.65 cfs 0.115 of • Subcatchment6S: Drainage Area 6 Runoff Area=4.861 ac 58.96%Impervious Runoff Depth=2.17" • Tc=5.0 min CN=90 Runoff--12.67 cfs 0.878 of • Subcatchment7S: Drainage Area 7 Runoff Area=1.340 ac 18.21% Impervious Runoff Depth=1.40" • Tc=5.0 min CN=80 Runoff=2.26 cfs 0.157 of • Subcatchment8S: Drainage Area 8 Runoff Area=0.895 ac 12.51% Impervious Runoff Depth=1.34" • Tc=5.0 min CN=79 Runoff--1.43 cfs 0.100 of • Subcatchment9S: Drainage Area 9 Runoff Area=2.060 ac 5.05% Impervious Runoff Depth=1.21" • Tc=5.0 min CN=77 Runoff=2.95 cfs 0.208 of • Subcatchment1 OS: Drainage Area 10 Runoff Area=8.262 ac 62.19% Impervious Runoff Depth=2.35" • Flow Length=1,627' Tc=9.6 min CN=92 Runoff=19.73 cfs 1.618 of • Subcatchment 11 S: Drainage Area 11 Runoff Area=7.375 ac 88.81% Impervious Runoff Depth=2.86" • Flow Length=1,508' Tc=8.9 min CN=97 Runoff=20.49 cfs 1.756 of • Subcatchment12S: Drainage Area 12 Runoff Area=3.447 ac 29.07% Impervious Runoff Depth=2.08" • Tc=5.0 min CN=89 Runoff=8.66 cfs 0.598 of • Reach 1: Design Point 1 Inflow=25.88 cfs 2.113 of • Outflow=25.88 cfs 2.113 of • Reach 2A: Design Point 2A Inflow=2.82 cfs 1.383 of • Outflow=2.82 cfs 1.383 of • Reach 2B: Design Point 2B Inflow=49.62 cfs 3.901 of • Outflow=49.62 cfs 3.901 of • Reach 3: Design.Point 3 Inflow=8.66 cfs 0.598 of • Outflow=8.66 cfs 0.598 of • • • • f •x Existing Watershed Type 11124-hr 2-YearRainfall=3.20" Prepared by Tetra Tech Printed 3/29/2013 HydroCAD®10.00 s/n 05923 @2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 5 Pond 1 P: Coal Pile Runoff Pond Peak Elev=9.45' Storage=3.736 of Inflow=40.49 cfs 4.906 of Outflow=2.82 cfs 1.383 of Total Runoff Area = 64.932 ac Runoff Volume = 11.518 of Average Runoff Depth = 2.13" • 44.85% Pervious = 29.121 ac 55.15% Impervious =35.811 ac ,i � i � e 3, 0-t �.v .p" ..i .a • • • Existing Watershed Type 11124-hr 2-YearRainfall=3.20" • Prepared by Tetra Tech Printed 3/29/2013 • HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n 05923 @2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 6 • Summary for Subcatchment 1S: Drainage Area 1 • Runoff = 0.43 cfs @ 12.08 hrs, Volume= 0.031 af, Depth= 1.15" • Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.0048.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Type III 24-hr 2-Year Rainfall=3.20" • Area (ac) CN Description • 0.318 76 Gravel roads, HSG A 0.318 100.00% Pervious Area • Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description • (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) • 5.0 Direct Entry, Direct Entry. , Summary for Subcatchment 2S: Drainage Area 2 • • Runoff = 40.49 cfs @ 12.39 hrs, Volume= 4.906 af, Depth= 2.08" • Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs • Type III 24-hr 2-Year Rainfall=3.20" • Area (ac) CN Description • * 0.285 98 Buildings • * 2.500 98 Storage Tanks • * 2.810 98 Steel Plates * 4.911 98 Asphalt and Concrete • * 1.088 98 Coal Pile Runoff Pond 6.911 76 Gravel roads, HSG A • 0.506 91 Gravel roads, HSG D • * 4.877 98 Coal Pile 0.249 39 >75% Grass cover, Good,HSG A • 3.515 74 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG C • 0.630 80 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG D 28.282 89 Weighted Average • 11.811 41.76% Pervious Area • 16.471 58.24% Impervious Area • • • • • • • • • • • • • Existing Watershed Type III 24-hr 2-YearRainfall=3.20" • ^ Prepared b Tetra Tech Printed 3/29/2013 HydroCAD@ 10.00 s/n 05923 @ 2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 7 Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description -(min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) �. 8.1 50 0.0080 0.10 Sheet Flow, Sheet Flow Grass: Short n=0.150 P2= 3.20" 1.0 38 0.0080 0.63 Shallow Concentrated Flow, Shallow Concentrated Flow Pai Short Grass Pasture Kv= 7.0 fps r 0.3 24 0.0417 1.43 Shallow Concentrated Flow, Shallow Concentrated Flow Pai Short Grass Pasture Kv= 7.0 fps 9.4 251 0.0040 0.44 Shallow Concentrated.Flow, Shallow Concentrated Flow Pai Short Grass Pasture Kv= 7.0 fps 2.0 112 0.0179 0.94 Shallow Concentrated Flow, Shallow Concentrated Flow Pai ' Short Grass Pasture Kv= 7.0 fps 0.2 42 0.0214 2.97 Shallow Concentrated Flow,Shallow Concentrated Flow Pai • Paved Kv= 20.3 fps �.' 1.9 229 0.0036 2.03 0.40 Pipe Channel,6" RCP 6.0" Round Area= 0.2 sf Perim= 1.6' r- 0.13' • n= 0.011 Concrete pipe, straight& clean �. 0.41 137 0.0105 5.49 4.31 Pipe Channel, 12" RCP 12:0" Round Area= 0.8 sf Perim= 3.1' r= 0.25' •' n=0.011 Concrete pipe, straight& clean 0.3 81 0.0053 3.90 3.07 Pipe Channel, 12" RCP 12.0" Round Area=0.8 sf Perim= 3.1' r- 0.25' n= 0.011 Concrete pipe, straight & clean 0.4 151 0.0110 5.62 4.42 Pipe Channel, 12" RCP 12.0" Round Area= 0.8 sf Perim=3.1' r- 0.25' n= 0.011 Concrete pipe, straight& clean ?> 0.4 95 0.0050 4.40 5.40 Pipe Channel, 15" RCP (Assumed) 15.0" Round Area= 1.2 sf Perim= 3.9' r- 0.31' n= 0.011 Concrete pipe, straight & clean 0.9 277 0.0050 4.97 8.78 Pipe Channel, 18" RCP (Assumed) 18.0" Round Area= 1.8 sf Perim=4.7' r- 0.38' n= 0.011 Concrete pipe, straight & clean 9.1 0.8 227 0.0050 4.97 8.78 Pipe Channel, 18" RCP (Assumed) 18.0" Round Area= 1.8 sf Perim= 4.T r= 0.38' n= 0.011 :Concrete pipe, straight& clean 1.1 315 0.0050 4.97 8.78 Pipe Channel, 18" RCP (Assumed) 18.0" Round Area= 1.8 sf Perim= 4.7' r- 0.38' n= 0.011 Concrete pipe, straight& clean � - 0.2 53 0.0050 4.97. 8.78 Pipe Channel, 18" RCP (Assumed) 18.0" Round Area= 1.8 sf Perim=4.7' r= 0.38' n= 0.011 Concrete pipe straight& clean 27.4 2,082 Total Ofy Summary for Subcatchment 3S: Drainage Area 3 Runoff = 11.24 cfs @ 12.08 hrs, Volume= 0.772 af, Depth= 1.61" �3 Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.0048.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Type III 24-hr 2-Year Rainfall=3.20" OG OU • • • Existing Watershed Type 11124-hr 2-YearRainfa11=3.20" Prepared by Tetra Tech Printed 3/29/2013 • HydroCAD®10.00 s/n 05923 @2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 8 • Area (ac) CN Description • * 0.028 98 Buildings * 1.501 98 Storage Tanks • * 0.006 98 Asphalt and Concrete • 3.384 76 Gravel roads, HSG.A 0.724 91 Gravel roads, HSG D • 0.113 39 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG A • 5.756 83 Weighted Average • 4.221 73.33% Pervious Area 1.535 26.67%Impervious Area • Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description • (min) (feet) (f/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) • 5.0 Direct Entry, Direct • Summary for Subcatchment 4S: Drainage Area 4 • Runoff 5.24 cfs @ 12.07 hrs, Volume= 0.380 af, Depth= 2.64" • • Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs,dt= 0.01 hrs • Type III 24-hr 2-Year-Rainfall=3.20" • Area (ac) CN Description:: • * 4:086- 98 Buildings • * 0.021 98 Storage Tanks . * 0.561 98 Settling Basins • * 0.962 98 Asphalt and Concrete • 0.004 76 Gravel roads, HSG A 0.091 39 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG A • 1.725 95 Weighted Average • 0.095 5.51% Pervious Area 1.630 94.49% Impervious Area • Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description • (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) • 5.0 Direct Entry, Direct • Summary for Subcatchment 5S: Drainage Area 5 • • Runoff = 1.65 cfs @ 12.07 hrs, Volume= 0.115 af, Depth= 2.26" • Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs • Type III 24-hr 2-Year Rainfall=3.20" • Area (ac) CN Description • * 0.058 98 Storage Tanks • * 0.101 98 Asphalt and Concrete 0.452 89 Gravel roads, HSG C • 0.611 91 Weighted Average • 0.452 73.98% Pervious Area • 0.159 26.02% Impervious Area • • • Existing Watershed Type 111 24-hr 2-YearRainfall=3.20" Prepared by Tetra Tech Printed 3/29/2013 \` HydroCAD®10.00 s/n 05923 @ 2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 9 Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (fUft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, Direct Summary for Subcatchment 6S: Drainage Area 6 Runoff = 12.67 cfs @ 12.07 hrs, Volume= 0.878 af, Depth= 2.17" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Type III 24-hr 2-Year Rainfall=3.20" Area (ac) CN Description 0.920 98 Buildings •' 1.946 98 Asphalt and Concrete 1.474 76 Gravel roads, HSG A 0.521 89 Gravel roads, HSG C • 4.861 90 Weighted Average 1.995 41.04% Pervious Area 2.866 58.96% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, Direct Summary for Subcatchment 7S: Drainage Area 7 • Runoff = 2.26 cfs @ 12.98 hrs, Volume= 0.157 af, Depth= 1.40" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Type III 24-hr 2-Year Rainfall=3.20" Area (ac) CN Description 0.109 98 Buildings 0.135 98 Asphalt and Concrete 1.096 76 Gravel roads, HSG A 1.340 80 Weighted Average 1.096 81.79% Pervious Area 0.244 18.21% Impervious Area Tc Length _ Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (fUft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, Direct Summary for Subcatchment 8S: Drainage Area 8 Runoff = 1.43 cfs @ 12.08 hrs, Volume= 0.100 af, Depth= 1.34" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs 0 Type III 24-hr 2-Year Rainfall=3.20" �r • • • Existing Watershed Type 11124-hr 2-YearRainfall=3.20" • Prepared by Tetra Tech Printed 3/29/2013 • HydroCAD®10.00 s/n 05923 @2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Paae 10 • Area (ac) CN Description • ' 0.112 98 Asphalt and Concrete • 0.757 76 Gravel roads, HSG A • 0.026 74 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG C 0.895 79 Weighted Average • 0.783 87.49% Pervious Area • 0.112 12.51% Impervious Area • Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description • (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) • 5.0 Direct Entry, Direct • Summary for Subcatchment 9S: Drainage Area S • Runoff = 2.95 cfs @ 12.08 hrs, Volume= 0.208 af, Depth= 1.21" • • Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span=0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs • Type III 24-hr 2-Year Rainfall=3.20" • Area (ac) CN Description • * 0.104 98 Asphalt and Concrete 1.956 76 Gravel roads, HSG A • 2.060 77 Weighted Average • 1.956 94.95% Pervious Area 0.104 5.05% Impervious Area • Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description • (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) • 5.0 Direct Entry, Direct • Summary for Subcatchment 1OS: Drainage Area 10 • • Runoff = 19.73 cfs @ 12.13 hrs, Volume= 1.618 af, Depth= 2.35" • Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs • Type III 24-hr 2-Year Rainfall=3.20" • Area (ac) CN Description • 0.179 98 Buildings • * 4.959 98 Asphalt and Concrete 0.006 76 Gravel roads, HSG A • 1.789 89 Gravel roads, HSG C • 0.161 39 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG A 0.436 74 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG C • 0.732 80 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG D • 8.262 92 Weighted Average • 3.124 37.81% Pervious Area 5.138 62.19% Impervious Area • • • L • • • 1 , Existing Watershed Type 11124-hr 2-Year Rainfall=3.20" Prepared by Tetra Tech Printed 3/29/2013 HydroCAD®10.00 s/n 05923 ©2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 11 Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 0.9 50 0.0100 0.91 Sheet Flow, Sheet Flow • ) Smooth surfaces n= 0.011 P2= 3.20" 3.5 418 0.0096 1.99 Shallow Concentrated Flow, Shallow Concentrated Flow Pai • Paved Kv= 20.3 fps 1.7 190 0.0084 1.86 Shallow Concentrated Flow, Shallow Concentrated Flow Pai Paved Kv= 20.3 fps 0.1 22 0.0025 2.95 2.32 Pipe Channel, 12" VT (Service Storm Sewer Plans 12-5-49) 12.0" Round Area= 0.8 sf Perim= 3.1' r- 0.25' n= 0.010 PVC,smooth interior 0.3 65 0.0025 3.42 4.20 Pipe Channel, 15" VT (Service Storm Sewer Plans 12-549) 15.0" Round Area= 1.2 sf Perim= 3.9' r- 0.31' n= 0.010 PVC, smooth interior } 0.2 46 0.0025 3.42 4.20 Pipe Channel, 15" VT(Service Storm Sewer Plans 12-549) 15.0" Round Area= 1.2 sf Perim= 3.9' r- 0.31' • n= 0.010 PVC, smooth interior 0.9 184 0.0025 3.42 4.20 Pipe Channel, 15" VT (Service Storm Sewer Plans 12-5-49) • ) ; . 15.0" Round Area= 1.2sf Perim= 3.9' r- 0.31' n=0.010 PVC, smooth interior 0.6,r 162.1 0.0040 4.89 8.64 Pipe Channel, 18" VT(Service Storm Sewer Pians 12-5-49) 18,.0" Round Area= 1.8 sf Perim=4.7' r- 0.38' i n= 0.010 PVC, smooth interior , 0.4 135 0.0040 5.42 13.03 Pipe Channel, 21" VT (Service Storm Sewer Plans 12-5-49) 21,0" Round Area= 2.4 sf Perim= 5.5' r- 0.44' n=0.010 PVC, smooth interior 0.3 112 0.0034 5.46 17.15 Pipe Channel, 24" VT (Service Storm Sewer Plans 12-5-49) 24.0" Round Area= 3.1 sf Perim= 6.3' r= 0.50' r n= 0.010 PVC, smooth interior 5 0.2 73 0.0034 5.46 17.15 Pipe Channel, 24" VT (Service Storm Sewer Plans 12-5-49) 24.0" Round Area= 3.1 sf Perim= 6.3' r= 0.50' n=0.010 PVC, smooth interior 0.2 49 0.0025 5.43 26.66 Pipe Channel, 30" VT(Service Storm Sewer Pians 12-5-49) 30.0" Round Area=4.9 sf Perim=7.9' r= 0.63' �•.) n= 0.010 PVC, smooth interior 0.3 85 0.0025 5.43 26.66 Pipe Channel, 30" VT(Service Storm Sewer Plans 12-5-49) 30:0 Round Area=4.9 sf Perim= 7.9' r- 0.63' n= 0.010 PVC, smooth interior OU 0.0 36 0.2014 48.75 239.30 Pipe Channel, 30" VT(Service Storm Sewer Plans 12-5-49) 30.0" Round Area=4.9 sf Perim= 7.9' r- 0.63' n= 0.010 PVC, smooth interior 9.6 1,627 Total Summary for Subcatchment 11 S: Drainage Area 11 �r • : Runoff = 20.49 cfs @ 12.12 hrs, Volume= 1.756 af, Depth= 2.86" O> Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span=0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Type III 24-hr 2-Year Rainfall=3.20" • • • Existing Watershed Type /// 24-hr 2-Year Rainfall=3.20" • Prepared by Tetra Tech Printed 3/29/2013 HydroCAD®10.00 s/n 05923 ©2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 12 • • Area (ac) CN Description • * 3.308 98 Buildings * 0.003 98 Storage Tanks • * 3.239 98 Asphalt and Concrete • 0.061 76 Gravel roads, HSG A 0.764 89 Gravel roads, HSG C • 7.375 97 Weighted Average • 0.825 11.19% Pervious Area • 6.550 88.81% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description • (min) (feet) (fUft) (ft/sec) (cfs) • 0.5 50 0.0380 1.55 Sheet Flow, Sheet Flow • Smooth surfaces n= 0.011 P2= 3.20" 0.8 105 0.0105 2.08 Shallow Concentrated Flow, Shallow Concentrated Flow I* Paved Kv= 20.3 fps is 0.2 39 0.0256 3.25 Shallow Concentrated Flow, Shallow Concentrated Flow P� Paved Kv= 20.3 fps 0.7 90 0.0111 2.14 Shallow Concentrated Flow, Shallow Concentrated Flow I* Paved Kv= 20.3 fps. 0.5 74 0.0135 2.36 Shallow Concentrated Flow, Shallow Concentrated Flow FO Paved Kv= 20.3 fps 1.0 90 0.0056 1.52 Shallow Concentrated Flow, Shallow Concentrated Flow P� Paved Kv= 20.3 fps 3.9 620 0.0050 2.63 0.52 Pipe Channel, 6" PVC (Assumed) • 6.0" Round Area= 0.2 sf Perim= 1.6' r- 0.13' • n=0.010 PVC, smooth interior 0.7 244 0.0050 5.51 13.24 Pipe Channel, 21" RCP (Assumed) • 21.0" Round Area= 2.4 sf Perim= 5.5' r= 0.44' • n= 0.011 Concrete pipe, straight& clean 0.6 196 0.0056 5.83 14.01 Pipe Channel, 21" RCP • 21.0" Round Area= 2.4 sf Perim= 5.5' r- 0.44' • n= 0.011 Concrete pipe, straight& clean 8.9 1,508 Total Summary for Subcatchment 12S: Drainage Area 12 • Runoff = 8.66 cfs @ 12.07 hrs, Volume= 0.598 af, Depth= 2.08" • Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs r Type III 24-hr 2-Year Rainfall=3.20" • Area (ac) CN Description • * 0.269 98 Buildings • * 0.733 98 Asphalt and Concrete • 0.739 76 Gravel roads, HSG A 1.706 89 Gravel roads, HSG C • 3.447 89 Weighted Average • 2.445 70.93% Pervious Area • 1.002 29.07% Impervious Area • • • • Existing Watershed Type 11124-hr 2-Year Rainfall=3.20" Prepared by Tetra Tech Printed 3/29/2013 HydroCAD@ 10.00 s/n 05923 @2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 13 Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) S 5.0 Direct Entry, Direct Summary for Reach 1: Design Point 1 [40] Hint: Not Described (Outflow=Inflow) Inflow Area = 12.875 ac, 43.48% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 1.97" for 2-Year event Inflow = 25.88 cfs @ 12.11 hrs, Volume= 2.113 of Outflow = 25.88 cfs @ 12.11 hrs, Volume= 2.113 af, ,Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min . Routing by Stor-Ind+Trans method, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs +' Summary for Reach 2A: Design Point 2A [40] Hint: Not Described (Outflow=Inflow) Inflow Area = 28.282 ac, 58.24% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 0.59" for 2-Year event i Inflow = 2.82 cfs @ 15.67 hrs, Volume= 1.383 of Outflow 2.82 cfs @ 15.67 hrs, Volume= 1.383 af, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min Routing by Stor-Ind+Trans method, Time Span=0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Summary for Reach 213: Design Point 2B [40] Hint: Not Described (Outflow=Inflow) -` Inflow Area = 20.328 ac, 62.67% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 2.30" for 2-Year event Inflow = 49.62 cfs @ 12.09 hrs, Volume= 3.901 of Outflow = 49.62 cfs @ 12.09 hrs, Volume= 3.901 af, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min Routing by Stor-Ind+Trans method, Time Span=0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Summary for Reach 3: Design Point 3 � • [40] Hint: Not Described (Outflow--Inflow) Inflow Area = 3.447 ac, 29.07% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 2.08" for 2-Year event Inflow = 8.66 cfs @ 12.07 hrs, Volume= 0.598 of Outflow = 8.66 cfs @ 12.07 hrs, Volume= 0.598 af, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min y Routing by Stor-Ind+Trans method, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Summary for Pond 1 P: Coal Pile Runoff Pond Inflow Area = 28.282 ac, 58.24% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 2.08" for 2-Year event Inflow = 40.49 cfs @ 12.39 hrs, Volume= 4.906 of Outflow = 2.82 cfs @ 15.67 hrs, Volume= 1.383 af, Atten= 93%, Lag= 197.0 min Primary = 2.82 cfs @ 15.67 hrs, Volume= 1.383 of • • • Existing Watershed Type 11124-hr 2-YearRainfall=3.20" • Prepared by Tetra Tech Printed 3/29/2013 HydroCAD@ 10.00 s/n 05923 02012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Paoe 14 • • Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs • Peak Elev= 9.45' @ 15.67 hrs Surf.Area= 1.204 ac Storage= 3.736 of • Plug-Flow detention time= 442.2 min calculated for 1.383 of(28% of inflow) • Center-of-Mass det. time= 303.0 min ( 1,133.9 - 830.9 ) • Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description • #1 6.00' 6.846 of Custom Stage Data,(Prismatic)Listed below (Recalc) • Elevation Surf.Area Inc.Store Cum.Store • (feet) (acres) (acre-feet) (acre-feet) • 6.00 0.971 0.000 0.000 . 7.00 1.030 1.001 1.001 8.00 1.098 1.064 2.064 r 9.00 1.178 1.138 3.203 • 9.67 1.217 0.802 4.005 10.00 16.000 2.841 6.846 • Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices • #1 Primary 9.27' 15.0' long x 10.0' breadth Broad-Crested Rectangular Weir • Head (feet) 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 1.20 1.40 1.60 • Coef. (English) 2.49 2.56 2.70 2.69 2.68 2.69 2.67 2.64 • rimary OutFlow Max=2.81 cfs @ 15.67 hrs HW=9.45' (Free Discharge) • 1=Broad-Crested Rectangular Weir(Weir Controls 2.81 cfs @ 1.05 fps) • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • Existing Watershed Type 11124-hr 10-YearRainfall=4.60" Prepared by Tetra Tech Printed 3/29/2013 HydroCAD®10.00 s/n 05923 ©2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 15 Time span=0.0048.00 hrs, dt=0.01 hrs, 4801 points i Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS "f Reach routing by Stor-Ind+Trans method - Pond routing by Stor-Ind method •" Subcatchment 1S: Drainage Areal Runoff Area=0.318 ac 0.00% Impervious Runoff Depth=2.21" Tc=5.0 min CN=76 Runoff=0.85 cfs 0.059 of !i Y Subcatchment2S: Drainage Area 2 Runoff Area=28.282 ac 58.24% Impervious Runoff Depth=3.39" Flow Length=2,082' Tc=27.4 min CN=89 Runoff--64.92 cfs 7.990 of • Subcatchment3S: Drainage Area 3 Runoff Area=5.756 ac 26.67% Impervious Runoff Depth=2.81" u Tc=5.0 min CN=83 Runoff=19.65 cfs 1.350 of •' Subcatchment4S: Drainage Area 4 Runoff Area=1.725 ac 94.49% Impervious Runoff Depth=4.02" �? Tc=5.0 min CN=95 Runoff--7.78 cfs 0.578 of •` Subcatchment5S: Drainage Area 5 Runoff Area=0.611 ac 26.02% Impervious Runoff Depth=3.59" Tc=5.0 min CN=91 Runoff=2.57 cfs 0.183 of Subcatchment6S: Drainage Area 6 Runoff Area=4.861 ac 58.96% Impervious Runoff Depth=3.49" - Tc=5.0 min CN=90 Runoff=20.00 cfs 1.414 of Subcatchment7S: Drainage Area 7 Runoff Area=1.340 ac 18.21% Impervious Runoff Depth=2.55" Tc=5.0 min CN=80 Runoff=4.15 cfs 0.284 of Subcatchment8S: Drainage Area 8 Runoff Area=0.895 ac 12.51% Impervious Runoff Depth=2.46" Tc=5.0 min CN=79 Runoff=2.68 cfs 0.184 of Subcatchment 9S: Drainage Area 9 Runoff Area=2.060 ac 5.05% Impervious Runoff Depth=2.29" Tc=5.0 min CN=77 Runoff=5.73 cfs 0.393 of Subcatchment 105: Drainage Area 10 Runoff Area=8.262 ac 62.19% Impervious Runoff Depth=3.70" Flow Length=1,627' Tc=9.6 min CN=92 Runoff=30.37 cfs 2.547 of Subcatchment 1IS: Drainage Area 11 Runoff Area=7.375 ac 88.81% Impervious Runoff Depth=425" Flow Length=1,508' Tc=8.9 min CN=97 Runoff=29.86 cfs 2.611 of Subcatchment 12S: Drainage Area 12 Runoff Area=3.447 ac 29.07% Impervious Runoff Depth=3.39" z= Tc=5.0 min CN=89 Runoff=13.86 cfs 0.974 of *I) Reach 1: Design Point 1 Inflow=42.01 cfs 3.467 of Outflow=42.01 cfs 3.467 of Reach 2A: Design Point 2A Inflow=15.12 cfs 4.467 of Outflow=15.12 cfs 4.467 of Reach 2B: Design Point 2B Inflow=77.24 cfs 6.137 of Outflow=77.24 cfs 6.137 of �r Reach 3: Design Point 3 Inflow=13.86 cfs 0.974 of Outflow=13.86 cfs 0.974 of !? a .. .i • • Existing Watershed Type 11124-hr 10-YearRainfall=4.60" i Prepared by Tetra Tech Printed 3/29/2013 HydrOCAD®10.00 s/n 05923 @2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 16 i • Pond 1 P: Coal Pile Runoff Pond Peak Elev=9.80' Storage=4.507 of Inflow=64.92 cfs 7.990 of OuMow=15.12 cfs 4.467 of i i Total Runoff Area =64.932 ac Runoff Volume = 18.568 of Average Runoff Depth =3.43" % • 44.85% Pervious = 29.121 ac 55.15Impervious =35.811 ac • i • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • IL • Existing Watershed Type 11124-hr 10-YearRainfall=4.60" Prepared by Tetra Tech Printed 3/29/2013 T.' HydroCAD®10.00 s/n 05923 @2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 17 Summary for Subcatchment 1S: Drainage Area 1 Runoff = 0.85 cfs @ 12.08 hrs, Volume= 0.059 af, Depth= 2.21" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs I Type III 24-hr 10-Year-Rainfall=4.60" Area (ac) CN Description 0.318 76 Gravel roads, HSG A 0.318 100.00% Pervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (fUft) (fUsec) (cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, Direct Entry Summary for Subcatchment 2S: Drainage Area 2 Runoff = 64.92 cfs @ 12.37 hrs, Volume= 7.990 af, Depth= 3.39" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Type 111:;24''=hr 10-Year Rainfall=4:60" 0Area (ac) CN Description * 0`.285 98 Buildings * 2.500 98 Storage Tanks 2.810 98 Steel Plates 4.911 98 Asphalt and Concrete 1.088 98 Coal Pile Runoff Pond 6.911 76 Gravel roads, HSG A * 0.506 91 Gravel roads, HSG D 4.877 98 Coal Pile 0.249 39 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG A 3.515 74 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG C 0.630 80 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG D 28.282 89 Weighted Average 11.811 41.76% Pervious Area 16.471 58.24% Impervious Area O:j f �t ;Y • • • Existing Watershed Type 11124-hr 10-YearRainfall=4.60" • Prepared by Tetra Tech Printed 3/29/2013 • HydroCAD@ 10.00 s/n 05923 @ 2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 18 • Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description • (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 8.1 50 0.0080 0.10 Sheet Flow, Sheet Flow • Grass: Short n= 0.150 P2= 3.20" - 1.0 38 0.0080 0.63 Shallow Concentrated Flow, Shallow Concentrated Flow P Short Grass Pasture Kv= 7.0 fps 4P 0.3 24 0.0417 1.43 Shallow Concentrated Flow, Shallow Concentrated Flow P• Short Grass Pasture Kv= 7.0 fps 9.4 251 0.0040 0.44 Shallow Concentrated Flow, Shallow Concentrated Flow P• Short Grass Pasture Kv= 7.0 fps 2.0 112 0.0179 0.94 Shallow Concentrated Flow, Shallow Concentrated Flow P Short Grass Pasture Kv= 7.0 fps 0.2 42 0.0214 2.97 Shallow Concentrated Flow, Shallow Concentrated Flow Po Paved Kv= 20.3 fps 1.9 .229 0.0036 2.03 0.40 Pipe Channel, 6" RCP 6.0" Round Area= 0.2 sf Perim= 1.6' r= 0.13' • n= 0.011 Concrete pipe, straight& clean 0.4 137 0.0105 5.49 4.31 Pipe Channel, 12" RCP • 12.0" Round Area= 0.8 sf Perim= 3.1' r= 0.25' • n= 0.011 Concrete pipe, straight & clean 0.3 81 0.0053 3.90 3.07 Pipe Channel, 12" RCP • 12.0" Round Area= 0.8 sf Perim= 3.1' r= 0.25' • n= 0.011 Concrete pipe, straight &clean 0.4 151 0.0110 5.62 4.42 Pipe Channel, 12" RCP • 12.0" Round Area=0.8 sf Perim= 3.1' r=0.25' • n= 0.011 Concrete pipe,.straight& clean 0.4 95 0.0050 4.40 5.40 Pipe Channel, 15" RCP (Assumed) • 15.0" Round Area= 1.2 sf Perim= 3.9' r- 0.31' • n= 0.011 Concrete pipe, straight & clean 0.9 277 0.0050 4.97 8.78 Pipe Channel, 18" RCP(Assumed) • 18.0" Round Area= 1.8 sf Perim=4.7' r= 0.38' • n= 0.011 Concrete pipe, straight& clean 0.8 227 0.0050 4.97 8.78 Pipe Channel, 18" RCP (Assumed) • 18.0" Round Area= 1.8 sf Perim=4.7' r= 0.38' • n= 0.011 Concrete pipe, straight & clean 1.1 315 0.0050 4.97 8.78 Pipe Channel, 18" RCP (Assumed) • 18.0" Round Area= 1.8 sf Perim=4.7' r- 0.38' • n= 0.011 Concrete pipe, straight& clean 0.2 53 0.0050 4.97 8.78 Pipe Channel, 18" RCP (Assumed) 18.0" Round Area= 1.8 sf Perim=4.7' r= 0.38' n= 0.011 Concrete pipe, straight& clean • 27.4 2,082 Total • Summary for Subcatchment 3S: Drainage Area 3 Runoff = 19.65 cis @ 12.07 hrs, Volume= 1.350 af, Depth= 2.81" • Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs • Type III 24-hr 10-Year Rainfall=4.60" • • • • • • Existing Watershed TypeIII 24-hr 10-YearRainfall=4.60" Prepared by Tetra Tech Printed 3/29/2013 HydroCADO 10.00 s/n 05923 ©2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 19 Area (ac) CN Description •4` * 0.028 98 Buildings 01 1.501 98 Storage Tanks * 0.006 98 Asphalt and Concrete 3.384 76 Gravel roads, HSG A 0.724 91 Gravel roads, HSG,D _ 0.113 39 >75% Grass cover. Good HSG A 5.756 83 Weighted Average 4.221 73.33% Pervious Area •' 1.535 26.67% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description •„; (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, Direct Summary for Subcatchment 4S: Drainage Area 4 Runoff = 7.78 cfs @ 12.07 hrs, Volume= 0.578 af, Depth= 4.02" • Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Type III 24-hr 10-Year Rainfall=4.60" �a • Area (ac) CN Description * 0.086 98 Buildings 0.021 98 Storage Tanks * 0.561 98 Settling,Basins * 0.962 98 Asphalt and Concrete 4' 0.004 76 Gravel roads, HSG A 0.091 39 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG A 1.725 95 Weighted Average •' 0.095 5.51% Pervious Area �.} 1.630 94.49% Impervious Area • Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) •'; 5.0 Direct Entry, Direct Summary for Subcatchment5S: Drainage Area 5 f Runoff = 2.57 cfs @ 12.07 hrs, Volume= 0.183 af,. Depth= 3.59" `g Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.0048.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs • Type III 24-hr 10-Year Rainfall=4.60" Area (ac) CN Description * 0.058 98 Storage Tanks * 0.101 98 Asphalt and Concrete 0.452 89 _ Gravel roads, HSG C x 0.611 91 Weighted Average 0.452 73.98% Pervious Area 0.159 26.02% Impervious Area • • • Existing Watershed Type 111 24-hr 10-Year Rainfall=4.60" • Prepared by Tetra Tech Printed 3/29/2013 HydroCAD®10.00 s/n 05923 @2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 20 • • Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description • (min) (feet) (ft/ff) (ft/sec) (Cfs) • 5.0 Direct Entry, Direct • Summary for Subcatchment 6S: Drainage Area 6 • • Runoff = 20.00 cfs @ 12.07 hrs, Volume= 1.414 af, Depth= 3.49" • Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs • Type III 24-hr 10-Year Rainfall=4.60" • Area (ac) CN Description * 0.920 98 Buildings • * 1.946 98 Asphalt and Concrete. 1.474 76 Gravel roads, HSG A • 0.521 89 Gravel roads, HSG C • 4.861 90 Weighted Average • 1.995 41.04% Pervious Area 2.866 58.96% Impervious Area • Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description • (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, Direct • Summary for Subcatchment 7S: Drainage Area 7 • Runoff = 4.15 cfs @ 12.07 hrs, Volume= 0.284 af, Depth= 2.55" • • Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs • Type III 24-hr 10-Year Rainfall=4.60" • Area (ac) CN. Description * 0.109 98 Buildings • * 0.135 98 Asphalt and Concrete 1.096 76 Gravel roads, HSG A • 1.340 80 Weighted Average • 1.096 81.79% Pervious Area 0.244 18.21% Impervious Area • Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description • min feet ft/ft ft/sec cfs • 5.0 Direct Entry, Direct Summary for Subcatchment 8S: Drainage Area 8 • Runoff = 2.68 cfs @ 12.08 hrs, Volume= 0.184 af, Depth= 2.46" • Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs • Type III 24-hr 10-Year Rainfall=4.60" • • • • Existing Watershed Type III 24-hr 10-Year Rainfall=4.60" Prepared by Tetra Tech Printed 3/29/2013 ydroCAD@ 10.00 s/n 05923 @2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 21 Area (ac) CN Description ' 0.112 98 Asphalt and Concrete 0.757 76 Gavel roads, HSG A or 0.026 74 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG C 0.895 79 Weighted Average 0.783 87.49%" Pervious Area 0.112 12.51% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, Direct Summary for Subcatchment 9S: Drainage Area 9 • Runoff = 5.73 cfs @ 12.08 hrs, Volume= 0.393 af, Depth= 2.29" • Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span=0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Type III 24-hr 10-Year Rainfall=4.60" Area (ac) CN Description •" 0.104 98 Asphalt and Concrete .) 1.956 76 Gravel roads, HSG A 2.060 77 Weighted Average 1.956 94.95%Pervious Area 0.104 5.05% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) s 5.0 Direct Entry, Direct Summary for Subcatchment 10S: Drainage Area 10 Runoff = 30.37 cfs @ 12.13 hrs, Volume= 2.547 af, Depth= 3.70" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Type III 24-hr 10-Year Rainfall=4.60" Area (ac) CN Description 0.179 98 Buildings 4.959 98 Asphalt and Concrete 0.006 76 Gravel roads, HSG A 1.789 89 Gravel roads, HSG C 0.161 39 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG A • 0.436 74 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG C 0.73_2 _ 80 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG D 8.262 92 Weighted Average 3.124 37.81% Pervious Area 5.138 62.19% Impervious Area • • • Existing Watershed Type 11124-hr 10-Year Rainfall=4.60" 0 Prepared by Tetra Tech Printed 3/29/2013 • HydroCADO 10.00 s/n 05923 ©2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 22 i Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description • (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 0.9 50 0.0100 0.91 Sheet Flow, Sheet Flow 0 Smooth surfaces n= 0.011 P2= 3.20" 3.5 418 0.0096 1.99 Shallow Concentrated Flow, Shallow Concentrated Flow P Paved Kv=20.3 fps 0 1.7 190 0.0084 1.86 Shallow Concentrated.Flow, Shallow Concentrated Flow P� Paved Kv=20.3 fps 0.1 22 0.0025 2.95 2.32 Pipe Channel, 12"VT (Service Storm Sewer Plans 12-5-49)0 12.0" Round Area=0.8 sf Perim=3.1' r 0.25' • n= 0.010 PVC, smooth interior 0.3 65 0.0025 3.42 4.20 Pipe Channel, 15"VT(Service Storm Sewer Plans 12-5-49)0 15.0" Round Area= 1.2 sf Perim= 3.9' r- 0.31' • n= 0.010 PVC, smooth interior 0.2 46 0.0025 3.42 4.20 Pipe Channel, 15" VT(Service Storm Sewer Plans 12-5-49)* 15.0" Round Area= 1.2 sf Perim= 3.9' r- 0.31' • n= 0.010 PVC, smooth interior 0.9 184 0.0025 3.42 4.20 Pipe Channel, 15"VT (Service Storm Sewer Plans 12-5-49)0 15.0" Round Area= 1.2 sf Perim= 3.9' r- 0.31' • n= 0.010 PVC, smooth interior 0.6 162 0.0040 4.89 8.64 Pipe Channel, 18"VT (Service Storm Sewer Plans 12-5-49)0 18.0" Round Area= 1.8 sf Perim=4.7' r-,0.38'- • n= 0.010 PVC, smooth interior 0.4 135 0.0040 5.42 13.03 Pipe Channel,.2l"VT(Service Storm Sewer.Plans 12-5-49)0 21.0" Round Area=2.4 sf.;Perim= 5.5' r- 0.44: • n= 0.010 PVC, smooth.interior 0.3 112 0.0034 5.46 17.15 Pipe Channel, 24' Vt,(Service Storm Sewer Plans 12-5-49)0 24.0" Round Area= 3.1 sf Perim= 6.3' r- 0.50' • n= 0:010 PVC, smooth interior 0.2 73 0.0034 5.46 17.15 Pipe Channel, 24"VT(Service.Storm Sewer Plans 12-5-49)0 24.0" Round Area=3.1 sf Perim= 6.3' r= 0.50' • n= 0.010 PVC, smooth interior 0.2 49 0.0025 5.43 26.66 Pipe Channel, 30"VT (Service Storm Sewer Plans 12-5-49)0 30.0" Round Area=4.9 sf Perim= 7.9' r- 0.63' • n= 0.010 PVC, smooth interior 0.3 85 0.0025 5.43 26.66 Pipe Channel, 30"VT (Service Storm Sewer Plans 12-5-49)0 30.0" Round Area=4.9 sf Perim= 7.9' r- 0.63' n= 0.010.PVC, smooth interior 0.0 36 0.2014 48.75 239.30 Pipe Channel, 30"VT (Service Storm Sewer Plans 12-5-49)0 30.0" Round Area=4.9 sf Perim= 7.9' r- 0.63' • n= 0.010 PVC, smooth interior 9.6 1,627 Total Summary for Subcatchment 11S: Drainage Area 11 0 • Runoff = 29.86 cfs @ 12.12 hrs, Volume= 2.611 af, Depth= 4.25" 0 Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.00-48.00,hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs 0 Type III 24-hr 10-Year Rainfall=4.60" 0 0 0 0 • 0 Existing Watershed Type 11124-hr 10-YearRainfall=4.60" Prepared by Tetra Tech Printed 3/29/2013 HydroCAD@ 10.00 s/n 05923 @2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 23 Area (ac) CN Description •_' 3.308 98 Buildings ;r 0.003 98 Storage Tanks 3.239 98 Asphalt and Concrete 0.061 76 Gravel roads, HSG A s 0.764 89 Gravel roads, HSG C 7.375 97 Weighted Average 0.825 11.19% Pervious Area 6.550 88.81% Impervious Area � s Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 0.5 50 0.0380 1.55 Sheet Flow, Sheet Flow Smooth surfaces n= 0.011 P2= 3.20" 0.8 105 0.0105 2.08 Shallow Concentrated Flow, Shallow Concentrated Flow Pai Paved Kv= 20.3 fps 0.2 39 0.0256 3.25 Shallow Concentrated Flow, Shallow Concentrated Flow Pai • Paved Kv= 20.3 fps l 0.7 90 0.0111 2.14 Shallow Concentrated Flow, Shallow Concentrated Flow Pai Paved Kv= 20.3 fps 0.5 74 0.0135 2.36 Shallow Concentrated Flow, Shallow Concentrated Flow Pai Paved Kv= 20.3 fps A 1.0 90 0.0056 1.52 Shallow Concentrated Flow, Shallow Concentrated Flow Pai Paved Kv= 20.3 fps rs 3.9 620 0.0050 2.63 0.52 Pipe Channel, 6" PVC (Assumed) 6.0 Round Area= 0.2 sf Perim= 1.6' r- 0.13' n= 0.010 PVC, smooth interior 0.7 244 0.0050 5.51 13.24 Pipe Channel, 21" RCP (Assumed) 21.0" Round Area= 2.4 sf Perim= 5.5' r= 0.44' n= 0.011 Concrete pipe, straight& clean 0.6 196 0.0056 5.83 14.01 Pipe Channel, 21" RCP 21.0" Round Area= 2.4 sf Perim= 5.5' r- 0.44' n= 0.011 Concrete pipe straight& clean 8.9 1,508 Total Summary for Subcatchment 12S: Drainage Area 12 �..x Runoff = 13.86 cfs @ 12.07 hrs, Volume= 0.974 af, Depth= 3.39" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs �j Type III 24-hr 10-Year Rainfall=4.60 0') Area (ac) CN Description C 7 0.269 98 Buildings 0.733 98 Asphalt and Concrete 0.739 76 Gravel roads, HSG A 1.706 89 Gravel roads, HSG C 3.447 89 Weighted Average 2.445 70.93% Pervious Area ' 1.002 29.07% Impervious Area �:k • • • Existing Watershed Type 111 24-hr 10-Year Rainfall=4.60" • Prepared by Tetra Tech Printed 3/29/2013 • HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n 05923 02012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 24 • Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description • (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, Direct • Summary for Reach 1: Design Point 1 [40] Hint: Not Described (Outflow=Inflow) • Inflow Area = 12.875 ac, 43.48%" Impervious, Inflow Depth = 3.23" for 10-Year event • Inflow = 42.01 cfs @ 12.11 hrs, Volume= 3.467 of • Outflow = 42.01 cfs @ 12.11 hrs, Volume= 3.467 af, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min • Routing by Stor-Ind+Trans method, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs • Summary for Reach 2A: Design Point 2A • [40] Hint: Not Described (Outflow=Inflow) • Inflow Area = 28.282 ac, 58.24% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 1.90" for 10-Year event • Inflow = 15.12 cfs @ 13.10 hrs, Volume= 4.467 of • Outflow = 15:12 cfs @ 13:10 hrs, Volume 4.467 af, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min • Routing by Stor-Ind+Trans method, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Summary for Reach 26: Design Point 2B • [40] Hint: Not Described (Outflow=Inflow) • Inflow Area = 20.328 ac, 62.67% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 3.62" for 10-Year event Inflow = 77.24 cfs @ 12.09 hrs, Volume= 6.137 of • Outflow = 77.24 cfs @ 12.09 hrs, Volume= 6.137 af, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min • Routing by Stor-Ind+Trans method, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs • Summary for Reach 3: Design Point 3 • [40] Hint: Not Described (Outflow=Inflow) Inflow Area = 3.447 ac, 29.07% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 3.39" for 10-Year event • Inflow = 13.86 cfs @ 12.07 hrs, Volume= 0.974 of, • Outflow = 13.86 cfs @ 12.07 hrs, Volume= 0.974 af, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0.min • Routing by Stor-Ind+Trans method, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Summary for Pond 1 P: Coal Pile Runoff Pond • • Inflow Area = 28.282 ac, 58.24% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 3.39" for 10-Year event • Inflow = 64.92 cfs @ 12.37 hrs, Volume= 7.990 of • Outflow = 15.12 cfs @ 13.10 hrs, Volume= 4.467 af, Atten= 77%, Lag= 44.1 min Primary = 15.12 cfs @ 13.10 hrs, Volume= 4.467 of • • • • Existing Watershed Typelll24-hr 10-YearRafnfall=4.60" Prepared by Tetra Tech Printed 3/29/2013 S' HydroCAD@ 10.00 s/n 05923 @2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 25 Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span=0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs 0 Peak Elev= 9.80' @ 13.10 hrs Surf.Area=6.820 ac Storage=4:507 of Plug-Flow detention time= 253.3 min calculated.for 4.467 of(56% of inflow) Center-of-Mass det. time= 145.2 min ( 962.4 -817.2 ) Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1 6.00' 6.846 of Custom Stage Data (Prismatic)Listed below (Recalc) �? Elevation Surf.Area Inc.Store Cum.Store a (feet) (acres) (acre-feet) (acre-feet) 6.00 0.971 0.000 0.000 7.00 1.030 1.001 1.001 .'' 8.00 1.098 1.064 2.064 9.00 1.178 1.138 3.203 9.67 1.217 0.802 4.005 ' 10.00 16.000 2.841 6.846 Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices ,l #1 Primary 9.27' 15.0' long x 10.0' breadth Broad-Crested Rectangular Weir Head (feet) 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 1.20 1.40 1.60 oil Coef. (English) 2.49 2.56 2.70 2.69 2.68 2.69 2.67 2.64 �a rimary OutFlow Max=15.11 cfs @ 13.10 hrs HW=9.80' (Free Discharge) 1=Broad-Crested Rectangular Weir(Weir Controls 15.11 cfs @ 1.92 fps) 6 5 �0�);,. Rs �4 �.a • • Existing Watershed Type 11l 24-hr 25-Year Rainfall=5.50" • Prepared by Tetra Tech Printed 3/29/2013 HydroCADO 10.00 s/n 05923 @2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 26 • Time span=0.00-48.00 hrs, dt=0.01 hrs, 4801 points • Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS • Reach routing by Stor-Ind+Trans method - Pond routing by Stor-Ind method • SubcatchmentlS: Drainage Area 1 Runoff Area=0.318 ac 0.00% Impervious Runoff Depth=2.95" • Tc=5.0 min CN=76 Runoff=1.14 cfs 0.078 of • Subcatchment2S: Drainage Area 2 Runoff Area=28.282 ac 58.24% Impervious Runoff Depth=4.25" • Flow Length=2,082' Tc=27.4 min CN=89 Runoff=80.68 cfs 10.022 of Subcatchment3S: Drainage Area 3 Runoff Area=5.756 ac 26.67% Impervious Runoff Depth=3.63" • Tc=5.0 min CN=B$ Runoff=25.19 cfs 1.741 of • Subcatchment4S: Drainage Area 4 Runoff Area=1.725 ac 94.49% Impervious Runoff Depth=4.92" • Tc=5.0 min CN=95 Runoff=9.40 cfs 0.707 of • Subcatchment5S: Drainage Area 5 Runoff Area=0.611 ac 26.02% Impervious Runoff Depth=4.47" • Tc=5.0 min CN=91 Runoff=3.16 cfs 0.228 of • Runoff Area=4.861 ac 58.96% Impervious th=4.36"Runoff De • Subcatchment6S: DrainageArea6 P P Tc=5.0 min CN=90 Runoff--24.68 cfs 1.766 of • Subcatchment7S: Drainage Area 7 Runoff Area=1.340 ac 18.21% Impervious Runoff Depth=3.33" • Tc=5:0 min CN=80 Runoff=5.42 cfs 0.372 of • Subcatchment8S: Drainage Area 8 Runoff Area=0.895 ac 12.51% Impervious Runoff'Depth=3.24" • Tc=5.0 min CN--79 Runoff=3.52 cfs 0241 of • Subcatchment9S: Drainage Area 9 Runoff Area=2.060 ac 5.05% Impervious Runoff Depth=3.05" • Tc=5.0 min CN=77 Runoff=7.63 cfs 0.523 of • Subcatchment10S: Drainage Area 10 Runoff Area=8.262 ac 62.19% Impervious Runoff Depth=4.58" • Flow Length=1,627' Tc=9.6 min CN=92 Runoff=37.15 cfs 3.152 of • Subcatchmentl1S: Drainage Area 11 Runoff Area=7.375 ac 88.81% Impervious Runoff Depth=5.15" • Flow Length=1,508' Tc=8.9 min CN=97 Runoff=35.86 cfs 3.162 of Subcatchmentl2S: Drainage Area 12 Runoff Area=3.447 ac 29.07% Impervious Runoff Depth=4.25" • Tc=5.0 min CN=89 Runoff=17.19 cfs 1.221 of • Reach 1: Design Point 1 Inflow=52.52 cfs 4.367 of • Outflow=52.52 cfs 4.367 of Reach 2A: Design Point 2A Inflow=20.18 cfs 6.499 of • Outflow=20.18 cfs 6.499 of • Reach 2113: Design Point 2B Inflow=95.07 cfs 7.604 of • Outflow=95.07 cfs 7.604 of • Reach 3: Design Point 3 Inflow=17.19 cfs 1.221 of • Outflow=17.19 cfs 1.221 of • • • • • M Existing Watershed Type 111 24-hr 25-YearRainfall=5.50" Prepared by Tetra Tech Printed 3/29/2013 • ' ydroCAD® 10.00 s/n 05923 @2012 HvdroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 27 Pond 1P: Coal Pile Runoff Pond Peak Elev=9.90' Storage=5.453 of Inflow=80.68 cfs 10.022 of Outflow=20.18 cfs 6.499 of Total Runoff Area = 64.932 ac Runoff Volume = 23.214 of Average Runoff Depth =4.29" 44.85% Pervious =29.121 ac 55.15%Impervious =35.811 ac s � F �,zC • i i �P �b �A �i ..j .y ..r .1 -5 �:j • • Existing Watershed Type 11124-hr 25-YearRainfall=5.50" • Prepared by Tetra Tech Printed 3/29/2013 • HydroCAD®10.00 s/n 05923 @2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 28 • Summary for Subcatchment 1S: Drainage Area 1 • Runoff = 1.14 cfs @ 12.08 hrs, Volume= 0.078 af, Depth= 2.95" • Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.0048.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Type III 24-hr 25-Year Rainfall=5.50" • Area (ac) CN Description • 0.318 76 Gravel roads, HSG A 0.318 100.00% Pervious Area • Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description • (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (f/sec) (cfs) • 5.0 Direct Entry, Direct Entry Summary for Subcatchment 2S: Drainage Area 2 • • Runoff = 80.68 cfs @ 12.36 hrs, Volume= 10.022 af, Depth= 4.25" • Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.0048.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs • Type III 24-hr 25-Year Rainfall=5.50" • Area (ac) CN Description • * 0.285 98 Buildings • * 2.500 98 Storage Tanks • * 2.810 98 Steel Plates * 4.911 98 Asphalt and Concrete * 1.088 98 Coal Pile Runoff Pond 6.911 76 Gravel roads, HSG A 0.506 91 Gravel roads, HSG D • * 4.877 98 Coal Pile 0.249 39 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG A • 3.515 74 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG C 0.630 80 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG D • 28.282 89 Weighted Average 11.811 41.76% Pervious Area • 16.471 58.24% Impervious Area • • • • • • • • • • • • • Existing WatershedType 11124-hr 25-Year Rainfall=5.50" Prepared by Tetra Tech Printed 3/29/2013 • `` ydroCAD® 10.00 s/n 05923 ©2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 29 Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (Cfs) f` 8.1 50 0.0080 0.10 Sheet Flow, Sheet Flow Grass: Short n= 0.150 P2= 3.20" 1.0 38 0.0080 0.63 Shallow Concentrated Flow, Shallow Concentrated Flow Pa Short Grass Pasture Kv= 7.0 fps 0.3 24 0.0417 1.43 Shallow Concentrated Flow, Shallow Concentrated Flow Pa Short Grass Pasture Kv= 7.0 fps 9.4 251 0.0040 0.44 Shallow Concentrated Flow, Shallow Concentrated Flow Pa Short Grass Pasture Kv= 7.0 fps 2.0 112 0.0179 0.94 Shallow Concentrated Flow, Shallow Concentrated Flow Pa Short Grass Pasture Kv=7.0 fps .e) 0.2 42 0.0214 2.97 Shallow Concentrated Flow, Shallow Concentrated Flow Pa Paved Kv= 20.3 fps 1.9 229 0.0036 2.03 0.40 Pipe Channel;6" RCP 6.0" Round Area= 0.2 sf Perim= 1.6' r- 0.13' n= 0.011 Concrete pipe,straight& clean 0.4 137 0.0105 5.49 4.31 Pipe Channel, 12" RCP 12.0" Round Area= 0.8 sf Perim= 3.1' r= 0.25' n= 0.011 Concrete pipe, straight&.clean 0.3 81 0.0053 3.90 3.07 Pipe Channel, 12" RCP 0") 12.0" Round Area= 0.8 sf Perim= 3.1' r- 0.25' n= 0.011 Concrete pipe, straight & clean 0.4 151 0.0110 5.62 4.42 Pipe Channel, 12" RCP 12.0" Round Area= 0.8 sf Perim= 3.1' r- 0.25' n= 0.011 Concrete pipe, straight & clean �v 0.4 95 0.0050 4.40 5.40 Pipe Channel, 15" RCP (Assumed) r 15.0" Round Area= 1.2 sf Perim=3.9' r= 0.31' n= 0.011 Concrete pipe, straight & clean ,s 0.9 277 0.0050 4.97 8.78 Pipe Channel, 18"RCP:(Assumed) t 18.0" Round Area= 1.8 sf Perim=4.7' r- 0.38' n= 0.011 Concrete pipe,straight & clean 0.8 227 0.0050 4.97 8.78 Pipe Channel, 18" RCP (Assumed) 18.0" Round Area= 1.8 sf Perim=4.7' r= 0.38' n= 0.011 Concrete pipe, straight & clean W) 1.1 315 0.0050 4.97 8.78 Pipe Channel, 18" RCP (Assumed) 18.0" Round Area= 1.8 sf Perim=4.7' r- 0.38' n= 0.011 Concrete pipe, straight & clean OJ 0.2 53 0.0050 4.97 8.78 Pipe Channel, 18" RCP (Assumed) " 18.0" Round Area= 1.8 sf Perim= 4.7' r- 0.38' n= 0.011 Concrete pipe straight& clean -�` 27.4 2,082 Total !) Summary for Subcatchment 3S: Drainage Area 3 Runoff = 25.19 cfs @ 12.07 hrs, Volume= 1.741 af, Depth= 3.63" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs �. Type III 24-hr 25-Year Rainfall=5.50" I `" • • • Existing Watershed Type 111 24-hr 25-YearRainfall=5.50" Prepared by Tetra Tech Printed 3/29/2013 • HydroCAD@ 10.00 s/n 05923 @2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 30 • Area (ac) CN Description • * 0.028 98 Buildings * 1.501 98 Storage Tanks * 0.006 98 Asphalt and Concrete • 3.384 76 Gravel roads, HSG A 0.724 91 Gravel roads, HSG D • 0.113 39 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG A • 5.756 83 Weighted Average ' 4.221 73.33% Pervious Area 1.535 26.67% Impervious Area • Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, Direct • Summary for Subcatchment 4S: Drainage Area 4 • • Runoff = 9.40 cfs @ 12.07 hrs, Volume= 0.707 af, Depth= 4.92" • Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Type III 24-hr 25-Year Rainfall=5.50" • Area (ac) CN 'Description_. • * 0:086 98 Buildings . * 0.021 98 Storage Tanks * 0.561 98, Settling Basins * 0.962 98 Asphalt and Concrete 0.004 76 Gravel roads, HSG A 0.091 39 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG A 1.725 95 Weighted Average • 0.095 5.51% Pervious Area • 1.630 94.49% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, Direct • Summary for Subcatchment 5S: Drainage Area 5 • Runoff = 3.16 cfs @ 12.07 hrs, Volume= 0.228 af, Depth= 4.47' Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Type III 24-hr 25-YearRainfall=5.50" Area (ac) CN Description * 0.058 98 Storage Tanks • * 0.101 98 Asphalt and Concrete • 0.452 89 Gravel roads, HSG C 0.611 91 Weighted Average 0.452 73.98% Pervious Area 0.159 26.02% Impervious Area • Existing Watershed Type 11124-hr 25-YearRainfall=5.50" Prepared by Tetra Tech Printed 3/29/2013 HydroCADO 10.00 s/n 05923 02012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 31 ` Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) ON) (fUsec) (cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, Direct *' Summary for Subcatchment 6S: Drainage Area 6 Runoff = 24.68 cfs @ 12.07 hrs, Volume= 1.766 af, Depth= 4.36" 4'r Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.0048.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Type III 24-hr 25-Year Rainfall=5.50" �? Area (ac) CN Description �Y 0.920 98 Buildings ' 1.946 98 Asphalt and Concrete ` 1.474 76 Gravel roads, HSG A 0.521 89 Gravel roads, HSG C 4.861 90 Weighted Average 1.995 41.04% Pervious Area 2.866 58.96% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (fUft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, Direct Summary for Subcatchment 7S: Drainage Area 7 n Runoff = 5.42 cfs @ 12.07 hrs, Volume= 0.372 af, Depth= 3.33" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.0048.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Type III 24-hr 25-Year Rainfall=5.50" Area (ac) CN Description 0.109 98 Buildings 0.135 98 Asphalt and Concrete 1.096 76 Gravel roads, HSG A �.F 1.340 80 Weighted Average 1.096 81.79% Pervious Area 0.244 18.21% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (fUft) (fUsec) (cfs) �y 5.0 Direct Entry,Direct Summary for Subcatchment 8S: Drainage Area 8 Ilk Runoff = 3.52 cfs @ 12.07 hrs, Volume= 0.241 af,' Depth= .3.24" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs 01, Type III 24-hr 25-Year Rainfall=5.50" • • • Existing Watershed Type 11124-hr 25-Year Rainfall=5.50" Prepared by Tetra Tech Printed 3/29/2013 • HydroCAD®10.00 s/n 05923 @2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 32 • Area (ac) CN Description • * 0.112 98 Asphalt and Concrete • 0.757 76 Gravel roads, HSG A • 0.026 74 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG C 0.895 79 Weighted Average 0.783 87.49% Pervious Area 0.112 12.51% Impervious Area . Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description • (min) (feet) (fUft) (ft/sec) (cfs) ' 5.0 Direct Entry, Direct • Summary for Subcatchment 9S: Drainage Area 9 Runoff = 7.63 cfs @ 12.07 hrs, Volume= 0.523 af, Depth= 3.05' • • Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Type III 24-hr 25-Year Rainfall=5.50" • Area (ac) CN Description • * 0.104 98 Asphalt and Concrete 1.956. ._ 76 Gravel roads, HSG A • 2.060 77 Weighted Average 1.956 94.95% Pervious Area • 0.104 5:05% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description • (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (fUsec) (cfs) • 5.0 Direct Entry, Direct • Summary for Subcatchment 10S: Drainage Area 10 • • Runoff = 37.15 cfs @ 12.13 hrs, Volume= 3.152 af, Depth= 4.58" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs • Type III 24-hr 25-Year Rainfall=5.50" • Area (ac) CN Description • * 0.179 98 Buildings * 4.959 98 Asphalt and Concrete • 0.006 76 Gravel roads, HSG A 1.789 89 Gravel roads, HSG C • 0.161 39 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG A • 0.436 74 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG C 0.732 80 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG D • 8.262 92 Weighted Average • 3.124 37.81% Pervious Area 5.138 62.19% Impervious Area • • • • r ` Existing Watershed Type 111 24-hr 25-Year Rainfall=5.50" .-, Prepared by Tetra Tech Printed 3/29/2013 HydroCAD®10.00 s/n 05923 @ 2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 33 Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description ' (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (f/sec) (cfs) 0.9 50 0.0100 0.91 Sheet Flow, Sheet Flow Smooth surfaces n= 0.011 P2= 3.20" 3.5 418 0.0096 1.99 Shallow Concentrated Flow, Shallow Concentrated Flow Pa Paved Kv= 20.3 fps 1.7 190 0.0084 1.86 Shallow Concentrated Flow,Shallow Concentrated Flow Pa Paved Kv= 20.3 fps 0.1 22 0.0025 2.95 2.32 Pipe Channel, 12"VT (Service Storm Sewer Plans 12-5-49) 12.0" Round Area= 0.8 sf Perim= 3.1' r- 0.25' n= 0.010 .PVC, smooth interior Ilk 0.3 65 0.0025 3.42 4.20 Pipe Channel, 15" VT(Service Storm Sewer Plans 12-5-49) i' 15.0" Round Area= 1.2 sf Perim= 3.9' r= 0.31` n= 0.010 PVC, smooth interior �} 0.2 46 0.0025 3.42 4.20 Pipe Channel, 15" VT (Service Storm Sewer Plans 12-5-49) 15.0" Round Area= 1.2 sf Perim= 3.9' r= 0.31' n= 0.010 PVC, smooth interior 0.9 184 0.0025 3.42 4.20 Pipe Channel, 15"VT (Service Storm Sewer Plans 12-5-49) 15.0" Round Area= 1.2 sf Perim= 3.9' r= 0.31' n= 0.010 PVC, smooth interior 0.6 162 0.0040 4.89 8.64 Pipe Channel, 18" VT (Service Storm Sewer.Plans 12-5-49) 18.0" Round Area= 1.8 sf Perim=4.7' r= 0.38' n= 0.010.PVC, smooth interior ' 0.4 135 0.0040 5.42 13.03 Pipe Channel, 21"VT (Service Storm Sewer Plans 12-5-49) 21.0" Round Area= 2.4 sf Perim= 5.5+ r- 0.44'. n= 0.010 PVC, smooth interior 0.3 112 0.0034 5.46 17.15 Pipe Channel, 24" VT (Service Storm Sewer Plans 12-5-49) a+ 24.0 Round Area= 3.1 sf Perim= 6.3' r- 0.50' n= 0.010 PVC, smooth interior 0.2 73 0.0034 5.46 17.15 Pipe Channel, 24" VT(Service Storm Sewer Plans 12-5-49) 24.0" Round Area= 3.1 sf Perim= 6.3' r- 0.50' n= 0.010 PVC, smooth interior �,. 0.2 49 0.0025 5.43 26.66 Pipe Channel, 30" VT (Service Storm Sewer Plans 12-5-49) 30.0" Round Area=4.9 sf Perim= 7.9' r- 0.63' •'" n= 0.010 PVC, smooth interior 0.3 85 0.0025 5.43 26.66 Pipe Channel, 30" VT (Service Storm Sewer Plans 12-5-49) 30.0" Round Area=4.9 sf Perim= 7.9' r= 0.63' •' n= 0.010 PVC, smooth interior . ' 0.0 36 0.2014 48.75 239.30 Pipe Channel, 30" VT(Service Storm Sewer Plans 12-5-49) y 30.0" Round Area=4.9 sf Perim= 7.9' r= 0.63' n= 0.010 PVC smooth interior 9.6 1,627 Total �s Summary for Subcatchment 11S: Drainage Area 11 Runoff = 35.86 cfs @ 12.12 hrs, Volume= 3.162 af, Depth= 5.15" • Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Type III 24-hr 25-Year Rainfall=5.50" �5 • • • Existing Watershed Type 11124-hr 25-YearRainfa11=5:50" • Prepared by Tetra Tech Printed 3/29/2013 • HydroCAD®10.00 s/n 05923 @ 2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 34 • Area (ac) CN Description 3.308 98 Buildings 0.003 98 Storage Tanks • 3.239 98 Asphalt and Concrete • 0.061 76 Gravel roads, HSG A 0.764 89 Gravel roads, HSG C • 7.375 97 Weighted Average • 0.825 11.19% Pervious Area • 6.550 88.81% Impervious Area • Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description , (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (fUsec) (cfs) 0.5 50 0.0380 1.55 Sheet Flow, Sheet Flow • Smooth surfaces n= 0.011 P2= 3.20" 0.8 105 0.0105 2.08 Shallow Concentrated Flow, Shallow Concentrated Flow Of Paved Kv= 20.3 fps • 0.2 39 0.0256 3.25 Shallow Concentrated Flow, Shallow Concentrated Flow P� Paved Kv= 20.3 fps 0.7 90 0.0111 2.14 Shallow Concentrated Flow, Shallow Concentrated Flow P• Paved Kv= 20.3 fps 0.5 74 0.0135 2.36 Shallow Concentrated Flow, Shallow Concentrated Flow Poo Paved Kv= 20.3 fps • 1.0 90 0.0056 1.52 Shallow Concentrated Flow, Shallow Concentrated Flow P� Paved Kv= 20.3 fps 3.9 - 620 0.0050 2.63 0.52 Pipe Channel, 6" PVC (Assumed) • 6.0" Round Area= 0.2 sf Perim= 1.6' r=10.13' • n=0.010. PVC, smooth interior 0.7 244 0.0050 5.51 13.24 Pipe Channel, 21" RCP (Assumed) 21.0" Round Area= 2.4 sf Perim= 5:5' r- 0.44' • n= 0.011 Concrete pipe,straight&clean 0.6 196 0.0056 5.83 14.01 Pipe Channel, 21" RCP • 21.0" Round Area= 2.4 sf Perim= 5.5' r-- 0.44' • n=0.011 Concrete pipe, straight& clean 8.9 1,508 Total • Summary for Subcatchment 12S: Drainage Area 12 • • Runoff = 17.19 cis @ 12.07 hrs, Volume= 1.221 af, Depth= 4.25" • Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs • Type III 24-hr 25-Year Rainfall=5.50" • Area (ac) CN Description • 0.269 98 Buildings • 0.733 98 Asphalt and Concrete • 0.739 76 Gravel roads, HSG A 1.706 89 Gravel roads, HSG C • 3.447 89 Weighted Average • 2.445 70.93% Pervious Area • 1.002 29.07% Impervious Area • • • Existing Watershed Type /// 24-hr 25-Year Rainfall=5.50" Prepared by Tetra Tech Printed 3/29/2013 HydroCAD®10.00 s/n 05923 02012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 35 • Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) E 5.0 Direct Entry, Direct Summary for Reach 1: Design Point 1 [40] Hint: Not Described (Outflow=Inflow) Inflow Area = 12.875 ac, 43.48% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 4.07" for 25-Year event Inflow = 52.52 cfs @ 12.11 hrs, Volume= 4.367 of .; Outflow = 52.52 cfs @ 12.11 hrs, Volume= 4.367 af, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min `l Routing by Stor-Ind+Trans method, Time Span=0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs •`'f Summary for Reach 2A: Design Point 2A [40] Hint: Not Described (Outflow=Inflow) - ' Inflow Area = 28.282 ac, 58.24% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 2.76" for 25-Year event Inflow = 20.18 cfs @ 13:05 hrs, Volume= 6.499 of Outflow _ 20.18 cfs @ 13.05 hrs, Volume 6.499 af, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min � 3 Routing by Stor-Ind+Trans method, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Summary for Reach 213: Design Point 2B 01 [40] Hint: Not Described (Outflow=Inflow) 0:>° Inflow Area = 20.328 ac, 62.67% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 4.49" for 25-Year event w Inflow = 95.07 cfs @ 12.08 hrs, Volume= 7.604 of Outflow = 95.07 cfs @ 12.08 hrs, Volume= 7.604 af, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min Routing by Stor-Ind+Trans method, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs 0) Summary for Reach 3: Design Point 3 3 [40] Hint: Not Described (Outflow=Inflow) Inflow Area = 3.447 ac, 29.07% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 4.25" for 25-Year event Inflow = 17.19 cfs @ 12.07 hrs, Volume= 1.221 of ob Outflow = 17.19 cfs @ 12.07 hrs, Volume= 1.221 af, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min Routing by Stor-Ind+Trans method, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs IRV Summary for Pond 1 P: Coal Pile Runoff Pond Inflow Area = 28.282 ac, 58.24% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 4.25" for 25-Year event Inflow 80.68 cfs @ 12.36 hrs, Volume= 10.022 of r' Outflow = 20.18 cfs @ 13.05 hrs, Volume= 6.499 af, Atten= 75%, Lag= 41.4 min Primary = 20.18 cfs @ 13.05 hrs, Volume= 6.499 of • • • Existing Watershed Type 11124-hr 25-Year Rainfall=5.50" • Prepared by Tetra Tech Printed 3/29/2013 • HydroCADO 10.00 s/n 05923 ©2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 36 • Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs • Peak Elev=9.90' @ 13.05 hrs Surf.Area= 11.454 ac Storage= 5.453 of • Plug-Flow detention time= 228.4 min calculated for 6.498 of(65% of inflow) Center-of-Mass det. time= 130.2 min ( 941.1 - 810.9 ) • Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description • #1 6.00' 6.846 of Custom Stage Data (Prismatic)Listed below (Recalc) • Elevation Surf.Area Inc.Store Cum.Store (feet) (acres) (acre-feet) (acre-feet) • 6.00 0.971 0.000 0.000 • 7.00 1.030 1.001 1.001 • 8.00 1.098 1.064 2.064 9.00 1.178 1.138 3.203 • 9.67 1.217 0.802 4.005 • 10.00 16.000 2.841 6.846 • Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices • #1 Primary 9.27' 15.0' long x 10.0' breadth Broad-Crested Rectangular Weir Head (feet) 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 1.20 1.40 1.60 Coef. (English) 2.49 2.56 2.70 2.69 2.68 2.69 2.67 2.64 • Primary OutFlow Max=20.17 cfs @ 13.05 hrs HW=9.90' (Free Discharge) • L1=Broad-Crested Rectangular Weir(Weir Controls 20.17 cfs @ 2.14 fps) • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • Existing Watershed Type U/24-hr 100-Year Rainfall=6.60" Prepared by Tetra Tech Printed 3/29/2013 HydroCAD®10.00 s/n 05923 @2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 37 � i Time span=0.00-48.00 hrs, dt=0.01 hrs, 4801 points ' Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS Reach routing by Stor-Ind+Trans method - Pond routing by Stor-Ind method w ` SubcatchmentlS: Drainage Area 1 Runoff Area=0.318 ac 0.00% Impervious Runoff Depth=3.90" `j Tc=5.0 min CN=76 Runoff=1.51 cfs 0.103 of • Subcatchment2S: Drainage Area 2 Runoff Area=28.282 ac 58.24% Impervious Runoff Depth=5.32" �j r Flow Length=2,082' Tc=27.4 min CN=89 Runoff=99.84 cfs 12.534 of Subcatchment3S: Drainage Area 3 Runoff Area=5.756 ac 26.67% Impervious Runoff Depth=4.65" Tc=5.0 min CN=83 Runoff=32.01 cfs 2.231 of 03 Subcatchment4S: DrainageArea4 Runoff Area=1.725 ac 94.49% Impervious Runoff Depth=6.01" �l Tc=5.0 min CN=95 Runoff=11.37 cfs 0.864 of Subcatchment5S: Drainage Area 5 Runoff Area=0.611 ac 26.02% Impervious Runoff Depth=5.55" Tc=5.0 min CN=91 Runoff=3.87 cfs 0.282 of ' Subcatchment6S: Drainage Area 6 Runoff Area=4.861 ac 58.96% Impervious Runoff Depth=5.43" Tc=5.0 min CN=90 Runoff=30.38 cfs 2.200 of �> Subcatchment7S: Drainage Area 7 Runoff Area=1.340 ac 18.21% Impervious Runoff Depth=4.33" Tc=5.0 min CN=80 Runoff=7.00 cfs 0.483 of Subcatchment8S: Drainage Area 8 Runoff Area=0.895 ac 12.51% Impervious Runoff Depth=4.22" Tc=5.0 min CN=79 Runoff=4.57 cfs 0.315 of Subcatchment9S: Drainage Area 9 Runoff Area=2.060 ac 5.05% Impervious Runoff Depth=4.01" Tc=5.0 min CN=77 Runoff=10.02 cfs 0.688 of 0 Subcatchment 1 OS: Drainage Area 10 Runoff Area=8.262 ac 62.19% Impervious .Runoff Depth=5.66" !;S Flow Length=1,627' Tc=9.6 min CN=92 Runoff=45.39 cfs 3.897 of Subcatchment11S: Drainage Area 11 Runoff Area=7.375 ac 88.81% Impervious Runoff Depth=6.24" �. Flow Length=1,508' Tc=8.9 min CN=97 Runoff=43.17 cfs 3.837 of Subcatchment 12S: Drainage Area 12 Runoff Area=3.447 ac 29.07% Impervious Runoff Depth=5.32" Tc=5.0 min CN=89 Runoff=21.24 cfs 1.528 of Reach 1: Design Point 1 Inflow=65.42 cfs 5.486 of Outflow=65.42 cfs 5.486 of Reach 2A: Design Point 2A Inflow=24.88 cfs 9.011 of Outflow--24.88 cfs 9.011 of R Reach 2B: Design Point 2B Inflow=116.82 cfs 9.414 of «• Outflow=116.82 cfs 9.414 of Reach 3: Design Point 3 Inflow=21.24 cfs 1.528 of Outflow=21.24 cfs 1.528 of �y • • • Existing Watershed Type 11124-hr 100-YearRainfa11=6.60" • Prepared by Tetra Tech Printed 3/29/2013 • HydroCAD®10.00 s/n 05923 @2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Paoe 38 • Pond 1P: Coal Pile Runoff Pond Peak Elev=9.99' Storage=6.746 of Inflow=99.84 cfs 12.534 of • Outflow=24.88 cfs 9.011 of • Total Runoff Area =64.932 ac Runoff Volume =28.962 of Average Runoff Depth = 5.35" • 44.85% Pervious = 29.121 ac 55.15% Impervious = 35.811 ac • • • • • • • i • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • it Existing Watershed Type 11124-hr 100-YearRainfall=6.60" Prepared by Tetra Tech Printed 3/29/2013 HydroCAD@ 10.00 s/n 05923 @2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 39 } Summary for Subcatchment 1S: Drainage Area 1 Runoff = 1.51 cfs @ 12.07 hrs, Volume= 0.103 af, Depth= 3.90" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.0048.00 hrs,dt= 0.01 hrs Type III 24-hr 100-Year Rainfall=6:60" Area (ac) CN Description 0.318 76 Gravel roads, HSG'A 0.318 100.00% Pervious Area • Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, Direct Entry Summary for Subcatchment 2S: Drainage Area 2 S ; Runoff = 99.84 cfs @ 12.36 hrs, Volume= 12.534 af, Depth= 5.32" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Type III 24-hr 100-Year Rainfall=6.60" Area (ac) CN Description �. 0.285 98 Buildings " 2.500 98 Storage Tanks 2.810 98 Steel Plates 4.911 98 Asphalt and Concrete 1.088 98 Coal Pile Runoff Pond 6.911 76 Gravel roads, HSG A 0.506 91 Gravel roads HSG D 4.877 98 CoalPile �y 0.249 39 5-75% Grass cover, Good, HSG A �r 3.515 74 >75%.Grass cover, Good, HSG C 0.630 80 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG D 28.282 89 Weighted Average 11.811 41.76% Pervious Area 16.471 58.24% Impervious Area A .P •y a • • i Existing Watershed Type 11124-hr 100-YearRainfall=6.60" • Prepared by Tetra Tech Printed 3/29/2013 i HydroCAD®10.00 s/n 05923 ©2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 40 i Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description i (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 8.1 50 0.0080 0.10 Sheet Flow, Sheet Flow Grass: Short n= 0.150 P2= 3.20" 1.0 38 0.0080 0.63 Shallow Concentrated Flow, Shallow Concentrated Flow Phi Short Grass Pasture Kv= 7.0 fps, e 0.3 24 0.0417 1.43 Shallow Concentrated Flow, Shallow Concentrated Flow P� Short Grass Pasture Kv= 7.0 fps 9.4 251 0.0040 0.44 Shallow Concentrated Flow, Shallow Concentrated Flow Pe Short Grass Pasture Kv= 7.0 fps 2.0 112 0.0179 0.94 Shallow Concentrated Flow, Shallow Concentrated Flow P Short Grass Pasture Kv=7.0 fps 0.2 42 0.0214 2.97 Shallow Concentrated'Flow, Shallow Concentrated Flow Pie Paved Kv= 20.3 fps 1.9 229 0.0036 2.03 0.40 Pipe Channel, 6" RCP 6.0" Round Area= 0.2 sf Perim= 1.6' r= 0.13' • n=0.011 Concrete pipe, straight& clean 0.4 137 0:0105 5.49 4.31 Pipe Channel, 12" RCP i 12.0" Round Area= 0.8 sf Perim 3.1' r 0.25' • n= 0.011 Concrete pipe, straight& clean 0.3 81 0.0053 3.90 3.07 Pipe Channel,12" RCP 12.0" Round Area=0.8 sf Perim= 3.1' r-0.25' • n= 0.011 Concrete pipe, straight & clean 0.4 151 0.0110 5.62 4.42 Pipe Channel, 12" RCP. 12.0" Round Area= 0.8 sf Perim= 3.1' r= 0.25' • n= 0.011 Concrete pipe, straight& clean 0.4 95 0.0050 4.40 5.40 Pipe Channel, 15" RCP.(Assumed) 15.0" Round Area= 1.2'sf Perim= 3.9' r- 0.31' n= 0.011 Concrete pipe, straight&clean 0.9 277 0.0050 4.97 8.78 Pipe Channel, 18"RCP(Assumed) • 18.0" Round Area= 1;8 sf Perim= 4.7' r- 0.38' i n= 0.011 Concrete pipe,,straight& clean 0.8 227 0.0050 4.97 8.78 Pipe Channel, 18" RCP(Assumed), • 18.0" Round Area= 1.8 sf.Perim=4.7' r--0.38' i n= 0.011 Concrete pipe, straight&clean 1.1 315 0.0050 4.97 8.78 Pipe Channel, 18" RCP (Assumed) • 18.0" Round Area=1.8'sf Perim=4.7' r- 0.38' • n= 0.011 Concrete pipe, straight& clean 0.2 53 0.0050 4.97 8.78 Pipe Channel, 18" RCP (Assumed) 18.0" Round Area= 1.8 sf Perim= 4.7' r 0.38' i n= 0.011 Concrete pipe, straight& clean 27.4 2,082 Total i Summary for Subcatchment 3S: Drainage Area 3 Runoff = 32.01 cfs @ 12.07 hrs, Volume= 2.231 af, Depth= 4.65" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs i Type III 24-hr 100-Year Rainfall=6.60" • • • '= Existing Watershed Type 11124-hr 100-YearRainfall=6.60" Prepared by Tetra Tech Printed 3/29/2013 •y` HydroCAD®10.00 s/n 05923 @2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 41 Area (ac) CN Description 0.028 98 Buildings ;> 1.501 98 Storage Tanks 0.006 98 Asphalt and Concrete •'" 3.384 76 Gravel roads, HSG A 0.724 91 Gravel roads, HSG D • 0.113 39 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG A 5.756 83 Weighted Average r" 4.221 73.33% Pervious Area t 1.535 26.67% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description •"y (min) (feet) (fUft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, Direct •'i Summary for Subcatchment 4S: Drainage Area 4 Runoff = 11.37 cfs @ 12.07 hrs, Volume= 0.864 af, Depth= 6.01" • Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Type III 24-hr 100-Year Rainfall=6.60" ,i y Area (ac) CN Description ` 0.086 98 Buildings 0.021 98 Storage Tanks 0.561 98 Settling Basins ' 0.962 98 Asphalt and Concrete 0.004 76 Gravel roads, HSG A 0.091 39 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG A 1.725 95 Weighted Average •'' 0.095 5.51% Pervious Area F 1.630 94.49% Impervious Area •$ Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (fUsec) (cfs) •' 5.0 Direct Entry, Direct p Summary for Subcatchment 5S: Drainage Area 5 �,r. Runoff = 3.87 cfs @ 12.07 hrs, Volume= 0.282 af, Depth= 5.55' > Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs �.s Type III 24-hr 100-Year Rainfall=6.60" .`` Area (ac) CN Description ' 0.058 98 Storage Tanks 0.101 98 Asphalt and Concrete 0.452 89 Gravel roads, HSG C .;" 0.611 91 Weighted Average 0.452 73.98% Pervious Area 0.159 26.02% Impervious Area • • • • Existing Watershed Type 11124-hr 100-YearRainfa11=6.60" • Prepared by Tetra Tech Printed 3/29/2013 • HydroCAD@ 10.00 s/n 05923 @2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 42 • Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description • (min) (feet) (fUft) (fUsec) (cfs) • 5.0 Direct Entry, Direct • Summary for Subcatchment 6S: Drainage Area 6 • • Runoff = 30.38 cfs @ 12.07 hrs, Volume= 2.200 af, Depth= 5.43" • Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs • Type III 24-hr 100-Year Rainfall=6.60" Area (ac) CN Description • * 0.920 98 Buildings • * 1.946 98 Asphalt and Concrete 1.474 76 Gravel roads, HSG A • 0.521 89 Gravel roads, HSG C • 4.861 90 Weighted Average • 1.995 41.04% Pervious Area 2.866 58.96% Impervious Area • Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description • (min) (feet) (fUft) (fUsec) (cfs) • 5.0 Direct Entry, Direct • Summary for Subcatchment 7S: Drainage Area 7 • • Runoff = 7.00 cfs @ 12.07 hrs, Volume= 0.483 af, Depth= 4.33" • Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs • Type III 24-hr 100-Year Rainfall=6.60" • Area (ac) CN Description • * 0.109 98 Buildings • * 0.135 98 Asphalt and Concrete 1.096 76 Gravel roads, HSG A • 1.340 80 Weighted Average • 1.096 81.79% Pervious Area 0.244 18.21% Impervious Area • Tc Length, Slope Velocity Capacity Description • (min) (feet) (fUft) (fUsec) (cfs) • 5.0 Direct Entry, Direct • Summary for Subcatchment 8S: Drainage Area 8 Runoff = 4.57 cfs @ 12.07 hrs, Volume= 0.315 af, Depth= 4.22" • Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs • Type III 24-hr 100-Year Rainfall=6.60" • • • Existing Watershed Type 11124-hr 100-YearRainfall=6.60" Prepared by Tetra Tech Printed 3/29/2013 HydroCADO 10.00 s/n 05923 ©2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 43 Area (ac) CN Description 0.112 98 Asphalt and Concrete 0.757 76 Gravel roads, HSG A y 0.026 74 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG C 0.895 79 Weighted Average 0.783 87.49% Pervious Area 0.112 12.51% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) Pit) (ft/sec) (cfs) -' - 5.0 Direct Entry, Direct Summary for Subcatchment 9S: Drainage Area 9 Runoff = 10.02 cfs @ 12.07 hrs, Volume= 0.688 af, Depth= 4.01" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Type III 24-hr 100-Year Rainfall=6.60" • Area(ac) CN- Description 0.104 98 Asphalt and Concrete 1.956 76 Gravel roads, HSG A 2.060 77 Weighted Average 1.956 94.95% Pervious Area 0.104 5.05% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (fUsec) (cfs) ., 5.0 Direct Entry, Direct ` Summary for Subcatchment 10S: Drainage Area 10 f-' Runoff 45.39 cfs @ 12.13 hrs, Volume 3.897 af, Depth= 5.66" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs • , Type III 24-hr 100-Year Rainfall=6.60" !.' Area (ac) CN Description 0.179 98 Buildings • 4.959 98 Asphalt and Concrete } 0.006 76 Gravel roads, HSG A 4 1.789 89 Gravel roads, HSG C 0.161 39 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG A +> 0.436 74 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG C 0.732 80 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG D 8.262 92Weighted Average 3.124 37.81% Pervious Area 5.138 62.19% Impervious Area OF • • • Existing Watershed Type 11124-hr 100-YearRainfall=6.60" • Prepared by Tetra Tech Printed 3/29/2013 HydroCAD@ 10.00 s/n 05923 @ 2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 44 • Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 0.9 50 0.0100 0.91 Sheet Flow,Sheet Flow • Smooth surfaces n= 0.011 P2= 3.20" ` 3.5 418 0.0096 1.99 Shallow Concentrated Flow, Shallow Concentrated Flow POP Paved Kv= 20.3 fps • 1.7 190 0.0084 1.86 Shallow Concentrated Flow, Shallow Concentrated Flow P� Paved Kv= 20.3 fps 0.1 22 0.0025 2.95 2.32 Pipe Channel, 12"VT (Service Storm Sewer Plans 12-5-49)0 12.0" Round Area= 0.8 sf Perim= 3.1' r=0.25' • n= 0.010 PVC, smooth interior 0.3 65 0.0025 3.42 4.20 Pipe Channel, 15"VT (Service Storm Sewer Plans 12-5-49)0 15.0" Round Area= 1.2 sf Perim= 3.9' r-0.31' • n i 0.010 PVC, smooth interior 0.2 46 0.0025 3.42 4.20 Pipe Channel, 15" VT (Service Storm Sewer Plans 12-5-49)0 15.0" Round Area= 1.2 sf Perim= 3.9' r= 0.31' • n= 0.010 PVC, smooth interior 0.9 184 0.0025 3.42 4.20 Pipe Channel, 15" VT (Service Storm Sewer Plans 12-5-49)0 15.0" Round Area= 1.2 sf Perim= 3.9' r- 0.31' • n= 0.010 PVC, smooth interior 0.6 162 0.0040 4.89 8.64 Pipe Channel, 18" VT (Service Storm Sewer Plans 12-5-490 18.0" Round Area= 1.8 sf Perim=4.7' r- 0.38' • n= 0.010 PVC, smooth interior 0.4 135 0.0040 5.42 13.03 Pipe Channel, 21"VT(Service Storm Sewer Plans_12-5-49)0 21.0" Round Area= 2.4 sf Perim= 5.5' r= 0.44' • n= 0.010 PVC, smooth interior 0.3 112 0.0034 5.46 17.15 Pipe Channel, 24" VT (Service Storm Sewer Plans 12-5-490 24.0" Round Area= 3.1 sf Perim= 6.3' r- 0.50' n= 0.010 PVC, smoothinterior. 0.2 73 0.0034 5.46 17.15 Pipe Channel, 24"VT (Service Storm Sewer Plans 12-5-49)0 24.0" Round Area= 3.1 sf Perim= 6.3' r- 0.50' • n= 0.010 PVC, smooth interior 0.2 49 0.0025 5.43 26.66 Pipe Channel, 30" VT,(Service Storm Sewer Plans 12-5-490 30.0 Round Area= 4.9 sf Perim= 7.9' r- 0.63' • n= 0.010 PVC, smooth interior . 0.3 85 0.0025 5.43 26.66 Pipe Channel, 30" VT(Service Storm Sewer Plans 12-5-49) 30.0" Round Area=4.9 sf Perim= 7.9' r= 0.63' • n= 0.010 PVC, smooth interior 0.0 36 0.2014 48.75 239.30 Pipe Channel, 30"VT (Service Storm Sewer Plans 12-5-490 30.0" Round Area= 4.9 sf Perim= 7.9' r= 0.63' • n= 0.010 PVC, smooth interior 9.6 1,627 Total • Summary for Subcatchment 11S: Drainage Area 11 Runoff = 43.17 cfs @ 12.12 hrs, Volume= 3.837 af, Depth= 6.24" • Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.0048.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs • Type III 24-hr 100-Year Rainfall=6.60" • • • • • • 1 Existing Watershed Type 11124-hr 100-YearRainfall=6.60" Prepared by Tetra Tech Printed 3/29/2013 ' HydroCAD@ 10.00 s/n 05923 @2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Paae 45 Area (ac) CN Description • 3.308 98 Buildings _' 0.003 98 Storage Tanks ' 3.239 98 Asphalt and Concrete 0.061 76 Gravel roads, HSG A 0.764 89 Gravel roads, HSG C 7.375 97 Weighted Average 0.825 11.19% Pervious Area 6.550 88.81% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description �. (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) . 0.5 50 0.0380 1.55 Sheet Flow, Sheet Flow Smooth surfaces n= 0.011 P2= 3.20" 0.8 105 0.0105 2.08 Shallow Concentrated Flow, Shallow Concentrated Flow Pai Paved Kv= 20.3 fps 0.2 39 0.0256 3.25 Shallow Concentrated Flow, Shallow Concentrated Flow Pai Paved Kv= 20.3 fps i 0.7 90 0.0111 2.14 Shallow Concentrated Flow, Shallow Concentrated Flow Pai • Paved Kv= 20.3 fps 0.5 74 0.0135 2.36 Shallow_ Concentrated Flow, Shallow Concentrated Flow Pai Paved Kv= 20.3 fps 1.0 90 0.0056 1.52 Shallow Concentrated Flow, Shallow Concentrated Flow Pai Paved Kv= 20.3 fps 3.9 620 0.0050 2.63 0.52 Pipe Channel, 6" PVC (Assumed) 6.0" Round Area= 0.2 sf Perim= 1.6' r- 0.13' n= 0.010 PVC, smooth interior 0.7 244 0.0050 5.51 13.24 Pipe Channel, 21" RCP (Assumed) 21.0" Round Area= 2.4 sf Perim= 5.5' r- 0.44' n= 0.011 Concrete pipe, straight&clean . 0.6 196 0.0056 5.83 14.01 Pipe Channel, 21" RCP 21.0" Round Area= 2.4 sf Perim= 5.5' r- 0.44' n= 0.011 Concrete pipe straight & clean 8.9 1,508 Total i Summary for Subcatchment 12S: Drainage Area 12 OJ Runoff = 21.24 cfs @ 12.07 hrs, Volume= 1.528 af, Depth= 5.32" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Type III 24-hr 100-Year Rainfall=6.60" Area (ac) CN Description 0.269 98 Buildings 0.733 98 Asphalt and Concrete •` 0.739 76 Gravel roads, HSG A 1.706 89 Gravel roads, HSG C 3.447 89 Weighted Average 2.445 70.93% Pervious Area 1.002 29.07% Impervious Area • • • Existing Watershed Type Ill 24-hr 100-Year Rainfall=6.60" • Prepared by Tetra Tech Printed 3/29/2013 • HydroCAD®10.00 s/n 05923 02012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Paoe 46 • Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description • (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, Direct • Summary for Reach 1: Design Point 1 [40] Hint: Not Described (Outflow=Inflow) • Inflow Area = 12.875 ac, 43.48% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 5.11" for 100-Year event • Inflow = 65.42 cfs @ 12.11 hrs, Volume= 5.486 of • Outflow = 65.42 cfs @ 12.11 hrs, Volume= 5.486 af, Atten=0%, Lag=0.0 min • Routing by Stor-Ind+Trans method, Time Span= 0.0048.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs • Summary for Reach 2A: Design Point 2A [40] Hint: Not Described (Outflow=Inflow) • Inflow Area = 28.282 ac, 58.24% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 3.82" for 100-Year event • Inflow = 24.88 cfs @ . 13.05 hrs, Volume 9.011 of • Outflow = 24.88 cfs @ 13.05 hrs, Volume= 9.011 af, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min • Routing by Stor-Ind+Trans method,Time Span= 0:00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs • Summary for Reach 26: Design Point 2B • • [40] Hint: Not Described (Outflow=Inflow) Inflow Area = 20.328 ac, 62.67% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 5.56" for 100-Year event • Inflow = 116.82 cfs @ 12.08 hrs, Volume= 9.414 of • Outflow = 116.82 cfs @ 12.08 hrs, Volume= 9.414 af, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min • Routing by Stor-Ind+Trans method, Time Span= 0.0048.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs • Summary for Reach 3: Design Point 3. • [40] Hint: Not Described (Outflow=Inflow) • Inflow Area = 3.447 ac, 29.07% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 5.32" for 100-Year event • Inflow = 21.24 cfs @ 12.07 hrs, Volume= 1.528 of • Outflow = 21.24 cfs @ 12.07 hrs, Volume= '1.528 af, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min. • Routing by Stor-Ind+Trans method, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs • Summary for Pond 1P: Coal Pile Runoff Pond • • Inflow Area = 28.282 ac, 58.24% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 5.32" for 100-Year event • Inflow = 99.84 cfs @ 12.36 hrs, Volume= 12.534 of • Outflow 24.88 cfs @ 13.05 hrs, Volume= 9.011 af, Atten= 75%, Lag= 41.2 min Primary = 24.88 cfs @ 13.05 hrs, Volume= 9.011 of • • • • Existing Watershed Type III 24-hr 100-YearRainfall=6.60" Prepared by Tetra Tech Printed 3/29/2013 HydroCADO 10.00 s/n 05923 ©2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 47 ' Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span=0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Peak Elev=9.99' @ 13.05 hrs Surf.Area= 15.718 ac Storage= 6.746 of Plug-Flow detention time= 219.2 min calculated for 9.011 of(72% of inflow) r Center-of-Mass det. time= 129.7 min ( 934.7-804.9 ) - Volume Invert Avail.St oracle Storage Description #1 6.00' 6.846 of Custom Stage Data (Prismatic)Listed below (Recalc) Elevation Surf.Area Inc.Store Cum.Store 'S (feet) (acres) (acre-feet) (acre-feet) 6.00 0.971 0.000 0.000 ,• 7.00 1.030 1.001 1.001 f 8.00 1.098 1.064 2.064 9.00 1.178 1.138 3.203 • 9.67 1.217 0.802 4.005 -` 10.00 16.000 2.841 6.846 Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 9.27' 15.0' long x 10.0' breadth Broad-Crested Rectangular Weir Head (feet) 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 1.20 1.40 1.60 Coef. (English) 2.49 2.56 2.70 2.69 2.68 2.69 2.67 2.64 �P Primary OutFlow Max=24.88 cfs @ 13.05 hrs HW=9.99' (Free Discharge) 't1=Broad-Crested Rectangular Weir(Weir Controls 24.88 cfs @ 2.29 fps) s:-Y OJ •+1 .M •'i Drainage A a 4 /Draage Area 5 Draina Area 2 r; Drainage Area 3 Drainage Area 6 Stonnwate Collection •1 Aea • Drainage Area 1 Discharge Point 1 Drainage Area 7 Discharge Point 2A �Y •'(; Drainag Area 10. Drainage Ar 8 - D mage Area 9 �J 3 Discharge Point 3 Discharge Point 4 jt y .j 41" y A Routing Diagram for Proposed Watershed " Prepared by Tetra Tech, Printed 3/29/2013 FHYdICAD@10.00 s/n 05923 ©2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC w Of • • • Proposed Watershed • Prepared by Tetra Tech Printed 3/29/2013 HydroCADO 10.00 s/n 05923 @2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 2 • • Area Listing (all nodes) • Area CN Description • (acres) (subcatchment-numbers) • 10.868 68 <50% Grass cover, Poor, HSG A (2S) • 4.705 86 <50% Grass cover, Poor, HSG C (2S) • 5.512 89 '<50% Grass cover, Poor, HSG D (2S) 6.184 39 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG A (3S) • 0.877 74 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG C (7S) • 0.808 80 >75%Grass cover, Good, HSG D (3S, 7S) • 11.882 98 Asphalt and Concrete (2S, 3S,4S, 5S, 6S, 7S, 9S, 10S) 2.562 98 Buildings (2S, 7S, 8S, 9S, 10S) • 4.254 76 Gravel roads, HSG A (1S,4S, 5S, 6S, 9S, 10S) • 5.131 89 Gravel roads, HSG C (7S, 9S, 10S) • 6.579 98 Power Plant Buildings and Asphalt (3S) 5.568 39 Power Plant Crushed Stone (3S) • 64.930 78 TOTAL AREA • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • f ' Proposed Watershed Prepared b Tetra Tech Printed 3/29/2013 HydroCADO 10.00 s/n 05923 ©2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 3 Soil Listing (all nodes) Area Soil Subcatchment (acres) Group Numbers 21.306 HSG A 1 S, 2S,3S,4S, 5S, 6S, 9S, 10S 0.000 HSG B •' 10.713 HSG C 2S, 7S, 9S, 10S 6.320 HSG D 2S, 3S, 7S 26.591 Other 2S, 3S, 4S, 5S, 6S, 7S, 8S,9S, 10S 64.930 TOTAL AREA ,i Seri' .i •.t ..z •�i • .r of �7 0:y •�Y • • • Proposed Watershed Type 11124-hr 2-YearRainfa11=3.20" Prepared by Tetra Tech Printed 3/29/2013 HydroCAD®10.00 s/n 05923 @2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 4 • Time span=0.00-48.00 hrs, dt=0.01 hrs, 4801 points • Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS • Reach routing by Stor-Ind+Trans method - Pond routing by Stor-Ind method • SubcatchmentIS: Drainage Area 1 Runoff Area=0.318 ac 0.00% Impervious Runoff Depth=1.15" • Tc=5.0 min CN=76 Runoff=0.43 cfs 0.031 of • Subcatchment2S: Drainage Area 2 Runoff Area=21.317 ac 1.09% Impervious Runoff Depth=127" • Flow Length=515' Slope=0.0050'f Tc=25.5 min CN=78 Runoff=18.88 cfs 2262 of • Subcatchment3S: Drainage Area 3 Runoff Area=19.340 ac 38.72% Impervious Runoff Depth=0.48" • Tc=5.0 min CN=62 Runoff=7.62 cfs 0.775 of • Subcatchment4S: Drainage Area 4 Runoff Area=2.690 ac 86.99% Impervious Runoff Depth=2.64" • Tc=5.0 min CN=95 Runoff=8.17 cfs 0.593 of • Subcatchment5S: Drainage Area 5 Runoff Area=0.895 ac 15.42% Impervious Runoff Depth=1.34" • Tc=5.0 min CN=79 Runoff=1.43 cfs 0.100 of • Subcatchment6S: Drainage Area 6 Runoff Area=2.060 ac 5.05% Impervious Runoff Depth=1.21" • Tc=5.0 min CN=77 Runoff=2.95 cfs 0.208 of • Subcatchment7S: Drainage Area 7 Runoff Area=7.611 ac 55.67% Impervious Runoff Depth=2.26" • Flow Length=1,580' Tc=7.4 min CN=91 Runoff=18.89 cfs 1.432 of Subcatchment8S: Drainage Area 8 Runoff Area=0.870 ac 100.00% Impervious Runoff Depth=2.97" • Tc=5.0 min CN=98 Runoff--2.80 cfs 0.215 of • Subcatchment9S: Drainage Area 9 Runoff Area=6.382 ac 72.27% Impervious Runoff Depth=2.64" • Tc=5.0 min CN=95 Runoff=19.39 cfs 1.407 of • Subcatchment1OS: Drainage Area 10 Runoff Area=3.447 ac 29.07% Impervious Runoff Depth=2.08" • Tc=5.0 min CN=89 Runoff=8.66 cfs 0.598 of • Reach 1: Discharge Point 1 Inflow=38.88 cfs 3.139 of • Outflow=38.88 cfs 3.139 of • Reach 2A: Discharge Point 2A Inflow=0.00 cfs 0.000 of • Outflow=0.00 cfs 0.000 of • Reach 3: Discharge Point 3 Inflow=8.66 cfs 0.598 of • Outflow=8.66 cfs 0.598 of • Reach 4: Discharge Point 4 Inflow=22.19 cfs 1.622 of • Outflow=22.19 cfs 1.622 of • Pond 1 P:Stormwater Collection Area Peak Elev=9.04' Storage=0.852 of Inflow=18.88 cfs 2.262 of • Discarded=3.96 cfs 2.262 of Primary=0.00 cfs 0.000 of Outflow=3.96 cfs 2.262 of • Total Runoff Area = 64.930 ac Runoff Volume =7.620 of Average Runoff Depth = 1.41" • 67.62% Pervious =43.907 ac 32.38% Impervious =21.023 ac • • • • Proposed Watershed Type Ill 24-hr 2-YearRainfall=3.20" Prepared b Tetra Tech Printed 3/29!2013 HydroCAD@ 10.00 s/n 05923 @2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Paae 5 Summary for Subcatchment 1 S: Drainage Area 1 Runoff. = 0.43 cfs @ 12.08 hrs, Volume= 0.031 af, Depth= 1.15" • Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Type III 24-hr 2-Year Rainfall=3.20" Area (ac) CN Description 0.318 76 Gravel roads HSG A 0.318 100.00% Pervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (fuft) (ft/sec) (cfs) rZ 5.0 Direct Entry, Direct Entry Summary for Subcatchment 2S: Drainage Area 2 Runoff = 18.88 cfs @ 12.38 hrs, Volume= 2.262 af, Depth= 1.27' OF) Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0:01 hrs �.l Type III 24-hr 2-Year Rainfall=3.20" Area (ac) CN Description 0.016 98 Buildings ' 0.216 98 Asphalt and Concrete 10.868 68 <50% Grass cover, Poor,HSG A 4.705 86 <50% Grass cover, Poor, HSG C `1' 5.512 89 <50% Grass cover, Poor HSG D 21.317 78 Weighted Average • 21.085 98.91% Pervious Area t 0,232 1.09% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (fUft) (fUsec) (cfs) 9.8 50 0.0050 0.09 Sheet Flow, . �. Grass: Short n= 0.150 P2= 3.20" 15.7 465 0.0050 0.49Shallow Concentrated Flow, Short Grass Pasture Kv= 7.0 fps 25.5 515 Total Summary for Subcatchment 3S: Drainage Area 3 Runoff = 7.62 cfs @ 12.10 hrs, Volume= 0.775 af, Depth= 0.48" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs �. Type III 24-hr 2-Year Rainfall=3.20" 00 • • • Proposed Watershed Type 11124-hr 2-YearRainfa11=3.20" • Prepared by Tetra Tech Printed 3/29/2013 HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n 05923 @2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 6 • • Area (ac) CN Description . * 6.579 98 Power Plant Buildings and Asphalt * 0.909 98 Asphalt and Concrete • * 5.568 39 Power Plant Crushed Stone • 0.444 39 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG A 5.740 39 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG A • 0.100 80 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG D • 19.340 62 Weighted Average 11.852 61.28% Pervious Area • 7.488 38.72% Impervious Area • Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description • (min) (feet) (fUft) (ftlsec) (cfs) • 5.0 Direct Entry, Summary for Subcatchment 4S: Drainage Area 4 • Runoff = 8.17 cfs @ 12.07 hrs, Volume= 0.593 af, Depth= 2.64" • • Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs • Type III 24-hr 2-Year Rainfall=3.20" • Area (ac) CN Description • *" `2.340 98 Asphalt and Concrete • 0.350 76 Gravel roads. HSG A 2.690 95 Weighted Average • 0.350 13.01% Pervious Area • 2.340 86.99% Impervious Area • Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description • (min) (feet) (fUft) (fUsec) (cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, Direct • Summary.for Subcatchment 5S: Drainage Area 5 Runoff = 1.43 cfs @ 12.08 hrs, Volume= 0.100 af, Depth= 1.34" • Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs • Type III 24-hr 2-Year Rainfall=3.20 • Area (ac) CN Description * 0.138 98 Asphalt and Concrete • 0.757 76 Gravel roads, HSG A • 0.895 79 Weighted Average • 0.757 84.58% Pervious Area 0.138 15.42% Impervious Area • • • • • • • 0.".'' Proposed Watershed Type /// 24-hr 2-Year Rainfall=3.20" Prepared by Tetra Tech Printed 3/29/2013 HydroCAD@ 10.00 s/n 05923 @2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 7 Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description min) (feet) (ft/ft) (f/sec) (cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, Direct Summary for Subcatchment 6S: Drainage Area 6 Runoff = 2.95 cfs @ 12.08 hrs, Volume= 0.208 af, Depth= 1.21" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.0048.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Type III 24-hr 2-Year Rainfall=3.20" °r Area (ac) CN Description `..` 0.104 98 Asphalt and Concrete 1.956 76 Gravel roads, HSG A 2.060 77 Weighted Average 1:956 94.95% Pervious Area 0.104 5.05% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, Direct �V Summary for Subcatchment 7S: Drainage Area 7 031 Runoff = 18.89 cfs @ 12.10 hrs, Volume= 1.432 af, Depth= 2.26" 09 Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Type III 24-hr 2-Year Rainfall=3.20" Area (ac) CN Description ' 0.179 98 Buildings 4.058 98 Asphalt and Concrete 1.789 89 Gravel roads,HSG C 0.877 74 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG C 0.708 80 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG D f-% 7.611 91 Weighted Average 3.374 44.33% Pervious Area •' 4.237 55.67% Impervious Area O 0 0) W z W • • Proposed Watershed Type 11124-hr 2-YearRainfall=3.20" • Prepared by Tetra Tech Printed 3/29/2013 • HydroCADO 10.00 s/n 05923 ©2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 8 • Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description • (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 0.9 50 0.0100 0.91 Sheet Flow, • Smooth surfaces n= 0.011 P2=3.20" • 4.3 520 0.0100 2.03 Shallow Concentrated Flow, Paved Kv= 20.3 fps • 0.2 71 0.0060 6.04 18.98 Pipe Channel, CO-51 • 24.0" Round Area= 3.1 sf Perim= 6.3' r- 0.50' n= 0.012 • 0.1 47 0.0110 10.72 75.78 Pipe Channel, CO-56 • 36.0" Round Area=7.1 sf Perim= 9.4' r- 0.75' n= 0.012 • 0.5 226 0.0050 7.23 51.09 Pipe Channel, CO-57 • 36.0" Round Area= 7.1 sf Perim= 9.4' r= 0.75' n= 0.012 • 0.1 64 0.0060 7.92 55.97 Pipe Channel, CO-58 • 36.0" Round Area= 7.1 sf Perim= 9.4' r- 0.75' n= 0.012 • 0.1 59 0.0050 7.23 51.09 Pipe Channel, CO-58A • 36.0" Round Area= 7.1 sf Perim= 9.4' r- 0.75' n= 0.012 • 0.4 191 0.0050 7.23 51.09 Pipe Channel, CO-59 • 36.0" Round Area= 7.1 sf Perim= 9.4' r= 0.75' n= 0.012 • 0.2 71 0.0050 7.23 51.09 Pipe Channel, CO-60 • 36.0" Round Area= 7.1 sf Perim= 9.4' r= 0.75' n= 0.012 • 0.5 225 0.0060 7.92 55.97 Pipe Channel, CO-61 • 36.0" Round Area= 7.1 sf Perim= 9.4' r= 0.75' n= 0.012 • 0.1 35 0.0060 9.59 120.54 Pipe Channel, CO-77 • 48.0" Round Area= 12.6 sf Perim= 12.6' r- 1.00' n= 0.012 • 0.0 21 0.0100 12.38 155.61 Pipe Channel, CO-78 • 48.0" Round Area= 12.6 sf Perim= 12.6' r- 1.00' n= 0.012 • 7.4 1,580 Total • Summary for Subcatchment 8S: Drainage Area 8 • Runoff = 2.80 cfs @ 12.07 hrs, Volume= 0.215 af, Depth= 2.97" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs • Type III 24-hr 2-Year Rainfall=3.20" • Area (ac) CN Description • 0.870 98 Buildings 0.870 100.00% Impervious Area • • • • • • Proposed Watershed Type 111 24-hr 2-Year Rainfall=3.20" Prepared by Tetra Tech Printed 3/29/2013 ` ydroCADO 10.00 s/n 05923 ©2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 9 Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) � ) 5.0 Direct Entry, Direct Summary for Subcatchment 9S: Drainage Area 9 Runoff = 19.39 cfs @ 12.07 hrs, Volume= 1.407 af, Depth= 2.64" •^' Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Type III 24-hr 2-Year Rainfall=3.20" Area (ac) CN Description # 1.228 98 Buildings 3.384 98 Asphalt and Concrete 0.134 76 Gravel roads, HSG A 1.636 89 Gravel roads, HSG C '.- 6.382 95 Weighted Average 1.770 27.73% Pervious Area �- 4.612 72.27% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description -' (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) �$ 5.0 Direct Entry, Direct Summary for Subcatchment 10S: Drainage Area 10 : Runoff = 8.66 cfs @ 12.07 hrs, Volume= 0.598 af, Depth= 2.08" �.y Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Type I][ 24-hr 2-Year Rainfall=3.20" Area (ac) CN Description J` 7 0.269 98 Buildings 0.733 98 Asphalt and Concrete •" 0.739 76 Gravel roads, HSG A 1.706 89 Gravel roads, HSG C 3.447 89 Weighted Average 2.445 70.93% Pervious Area 1.002 29.07% Impervious Area �a Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description x (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (f/sec) (cfs) �? 5.0 Direct Entry, Summary for Reach 1: Discharge Point 1 01 0_ [40] Hint: Not Described (Outflow=Inflow) 0 r 0+' 0, w • • Proposed Watershed Type 11124-hr 2-YearRainfa11=3.20" • Prepared by Tetra Tech Printed 3/29/2013 HydroCAD®10.00 s/n 05923 ©2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Paae 10 • • Inflow Area = 32.914 ac, 43.47% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 1.14" for 2-Year event . • Inflow = 38.88 cfs @ 12.09 hrs, Volume= 3.139 of Outflow = 38.88 cfs @ 12.09 hrs, Volume= 3.139 af, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min • Routing by Stor-Ind+Trans method, Time Span=0.0048.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs • • Summary for Reach 2A: Discharge Point 2A • [40] Hint: Not Described (Outflow=Inflow) Inflow Area = 21.317 ac, 1.09% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 0.00" for 2-Year event • Inflow = 0.00 cfs @ 0.00 hrs, Volume= 0.000 of • Outflow = 0.00 cfs @ 0.00 hrs, Volume= 0.000 af, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min • Routing by Stor-Ind+Trans method, Time Span= 0.0048.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs • • Summary for Reach 3: Discharge Point 3 • [40] Hint: Not Described (Outflow--Inflow) • Inflow Area = 3.447 ac, 29.07% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 2.08" for 2-Year event • Inflow = 8.66 cfs @ 12.07 hrs, Volume= 0.598 of • Outflow = 8.66 cfs @ 12.07 hrs,, Volume= . 0.598 af, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min • Routing by Stor-Ind+Trans method, Time Span= 0.0048.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs • Summary for Reach 4: Discharge Point 4 [40] Hint: Not Described (Outflow=Inflow) • Inflow Area = 7.252 ac, 75.59% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 2.68" for 2-Year event • Inflow = 22.19 cfs @ 12.07 hrs, Volume= 1.622 of • Outflow = 22.19 cfs @ 12.07 hrs, Volume= 1.622 af, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min • Routing by Stor-Ind+Trans method, Time Span= 0.0048.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs • Summary for Pond 1 P: Stormwater Collection Area • • Inflow Area = 21.317 ac, 1.09% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 1.27" for 2-Year event • Inflow = 18.88 cfs @ 12.38 hrs, Volume= 2.262 of • Outflow = 3.96 cfs @ 13.26 hrs, Volume= 2.262 af, Atten= 79%, Lag= 53.0 min Discarded = 3.96 cfs @ 13.26 hrs, Volume= 2.262 of • Primary = 0.00 cfs @ 0.00 hrs, Volume= 0.000 of • Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs • Peak Elev= 9.04' @ 13.26 hrs Surf.Area= 7.324 ac Storage= 0.852 of • Plug-Flow detention time= 145.3 min calculated for 2.262 of(100% of inflow) • Center-of-Mass det. time= 145.3 min ( 1,012.5- 867.3 ) • • • • • Proposed Watershed Type 111 24-hr 2-YearRainfall=3:20" Prepared by Tetra Tech Printed 3/29/2013 HydroCAD@ 10.00 s/n 05923 @ 2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 11 Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description •_' #1 8.50' 0.716 of 6" Crushed Stone (Prismatic)Listed below (Recalc) .' 1.790 of Overall x 40.0%Voids #2 9.00' 5.790 of Custom Stage Data (Prismatic)Listed below (Recalc) 6.506 of Total Available Storage Elevation Surf.Area InaStore Cum.Store (feet) (acres) (acre-feet) (acre-feet) -) 8.50 3.580 0.000 0.000 9.00 3.580 1.790 1.790 Elevation Surf:Area InaStore Cum.Store (feet) (acres) (acre-feet) (acre-feet) 9.00 3.580 0.000 0.000 10.00 8.000 5.790 5.790 Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices • #1 Primary 9.50' 15.0' long x 290.0' breadth Broad-Crested Rectangular Weir �. Head (feet) 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 1.20 1.40 1.60 Coef. (English) 2.68 2.70 2.70 2.64 2.63 2.64 2.64 2.63 #2 Discarded 8.50' 0.520 in/hr Exfiltration over Surface area Conductivity to Groundwater Elevation = 0.00' Qiscarded OutFlow Max=3:96 cfs @ 13.26 hrs HW=9.04' (Free Discharge) 2=Exfiltration ( Controls 3.96 cfs) �A Primary OutFlow, Max=0.00 cfs @ 0.00 hrs HW=8.50' (Free Discharge) t1=Broad-Crested Rectangular Weir( Controls 0.00 cfs) � 1 03 1 Y .:j �s Y . ok .F �s • • • Proposed Watershed Type 11124-hr 10-YearRainfall=4.60" • Prepared by Tetra Tech Printed 3/29/2013 • HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n 05923 @2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Paae 12 • Time span=0.0048.00 hrs, dt=0.01 hrs, 4801 points • Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS Reach routing by Stor-Ind+Trans method - Pond routing by Stor-Ind method • Subcatchment1S: Drainage Area 1 Runoff Area=0.318 ac 0.00% Impervious Runoff Depth=2.21" • Tc=5.0 min CN=76 Runoff=0.85 cis 0.059 of • Subcatchment2S: Drainage Area 2 Runoff Area=21.317 ac 1.09% Impervious Runoff Depth=2.38" • Flow Length=515' Slope=0.0050'P Tc=25.5 min CN=78` Runoff=35.98 cfs 4.220 of • Subcatchment3S: Drainage Area 3 Runoff Area=19.340 ac 38.72% Impervious Runoff Depth=1.20" • Tc=5.0 min CN=62 Runoff=25.27 cfs 1.931 of • Subcatchment4S: Drainage Area 4 Runoff Area=2.690 ac 86.99% Impervious Runoff Depth=4.02" Tc=5.0 min CN=95 Runoff=12.14 cfs 0.902 of Subcatchment5S: Drainage Area 5 Runoff Area=0.895 ac 15.42% Impervious Runoff Depth=2.46" • Tc=5.0 min'. CN=79 Runoff=2.68 cfs 0.184 of • Subcatchment6S: Drainage Area 6 Runoff Area=2.060 ac 5.05% Impervious Runoff Depth=2.29" • Tc=5.0 min CN=77 Runoff=5.73.cfs 0.393 of • Subcatchment7S: Drainage Area 7 Runoff Area=7.611 ac 55.67% Impervious Runoff Depth=3.59" Flow Length=1,580' Tc=7.4 min CN=91 Runoff--29.43 cfs 2.280 of • Subcatchment8S: Drainage Area 8 Runoff Area=0.870 ac 100.00% Impervious Runoff Depth=4.36" • Tc=5.0 min CN=98 Runoff=4.05 cfs 0.316 of • Subcatchment9S: Drainage Area 9 Runoff Area=6.382 ac 72.27% Impervious Runoff Depth=4.02" • Tc=5.0 min CN=95 Runoff=28.79 cfs 2.140 of Subcatchment 10S: Drainage Area 10 Runoff Area=3.447 ac 29.07% Impervious Runoff Depth=3.39" Tc=5.0 min CN=89 Runoff=13.86 cfs 0.974 of • Reach 1 Discharge Point 1 Inflow=75.23 cfs 5.748 of • Outflow=75.23 cfs 5.748 of • Reach 2A: Discharge Point 2A Inflow=0.00 cfs 0.000 of • OuMow=0.00 cfs 0.000 of • Reach 3: Discharge Point 3 Mow=13.86 cfs 0.974 of • Outflow=13.86 cfs 0.974 of • Reach 4: Discharge Point 4 Inflow=32.84 cfs 2.456 of • Outflow=32.84 cfs 2.456 of • Pond 1P: Stormwater Collection Area Peak Elev=9.28' Storage=1.909 of Inflow=35,98 cfs 4.220 of Discarded=4.65 cfs 4.220 of Primary=0.00 cfs 0.000 of Outflow=4.65 cfs 4.220 of • Total Runoff Area = 64.930 ac Runoff Volume = 13.398 of Average Runoff Depth = 2.48" • 67.62% Pervious =43.907 ac 32.38% Impervious =21.023 ac • • • • • Proposed Watershed Type 11124-hr 10-Year Rainfall=4.60" Prepared by Tetra Tech Printed 3/29/2013 HydroCAD010.00 s/n 05923 @2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 13 Summary for Subcatchment 1S: Drainage Area 1 ` Runoff = 0.85 cfs @ 12.08 hrs, Volume= 0.059 af, Depth= 2.21" �u Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Type III 24-hr 10-Year Rainfall=4.60" Area (ac) CN Description 0.318 76 Gravel roads, HSG A 0.318 100.00% Pervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (fUft) (f/sec) (cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, Direct Entry ` 'Summary for Subcatchment 2S: Drainage Area 2 Runoff = 35.98 cfs @ 12.36 hrs, Volume= 4.220 af, Depth= 2.38" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method,UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.0048.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Type III 24-hr 10-Year Rainfall=4.60" Area (ac) CN..--..Description 0.016 98 Buildings 0.216 98 Asphalt and Concrete 10.868 68 <50% Grass cover, Poor, HSG A 4.705 86 <50% Grass cover, Poor, HSG C 5.512 89 <50% Grass_cover, Poor HSG D 21.317 78 Weighted Average 21.085 98.91% Pervious Area 0.232 1.09% Impervious Area �) Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description z (min) (feet) (fUft) (f/sec) (cfs) 9.8 50 0.0050 0.09 Sheet Flow, Grass: Short n=0.150 P2= 3.20" 15.7 465 0.0050 0.49 Shallow Concentrated Flow, Short Grass Pasture Kv= 7.0 fps 25.5 515 Total Summary for Subcatchment 3S: Drainage Area 3 Runoff = 25.27 cfs @ 12.09 hrs, Volume= 1.931 af, Depth= 1.20" •' Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs �_' Type III 24-hr 10-Year Rainfall=4.60" • • • Proposed Watershed Type 11124-hr 10-Year Rainfall=4.60" Prepared by Tetra Tech Printed 3/29/2013 • HydroCADO 10.00 s/n 05923 ©2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 14 • Area (ac) CN Description • * 6.579 98 Power Plant Buildings and Asphalt * 0.909 98 Asphalt and Concrete • * 5.568 39 Power Plant Crushed Stone • 0.444 39 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG A 5.740 39 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG A • 0.100 80 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG D • 19.340 62 Weighted Average • 11.852 61.28% Pervious Area 7.488 38.72% Impervious Area • Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description • (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) • 5.0 Direct Entry, • Summary for Subcatchment 4S: Drainage Area 4 • • Runoff = 12.14 cfs @ 12.07 hrs, Volume= 0.902 af, Depth= 4.02" • Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs • Type III 24-hr 10-Year Rainfall=4.60" • Area (ac) CN Description • *' 2.340 98 Asphalt and Concrete • 0.350 76 Gravel roads, HSG A 2.690 95 Weighted Average • 0.350 13.01% Pervious Area • 2.340 86.99% Impervious Area • Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description • (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, Direct • • Summary for Subcatchment 5S: Drainage Area 5 • Runoff = 2.68 cfs @ 12.08 hrs, Volume= 0.184 af, Depth= 2.46" • Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.0048.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs • Type III 24-hr 10-Year Rainfall=4.60" • Area (ac) CN Description * 0.138 98 Asphalt and Concrete 0.757 76 Gravel roads, HSG A • 0.895 79 Weighted Average • 0.757 84.58% Pervious Area 0.138 15.42% Impervious Area • • • • • • A • Y i' Proposed Watershed Type 111 24-hr 10-Year Rainfall=4:60" Prepared by Tetra Tech Printed 3/29/2013 HydroCAD®10.00 s/n 05923 @ 2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 15 Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (It/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, Direct i' Summary for Subcatchment 6S: Drainage Area 6 Runoff = 5.73 cfs @ 12.08 hrs, Volume= 0.393 af, Depth= 2.29" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Type III 24-hr 10-YearRainfall=4.60" !" Area (ac) CN Description 9 0.104 98 Asphalt and Concrete 1.956 76 Gravel roads, HSG A 2.060 77 Weighted Average 1.956 94.95% Pervious Area 0.164 5.05%" Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description S ; (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (f/sec) (cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, Direct �~ Summary for Subcatchment 7S: Drainage Area 7 Runoff = 29.43 cfs @ 12.10 hrs, Volume= 2.280 af, Depth= 3.59" �f �s Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span=0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Type III 24-hr 10-Year Rainfall=4.60" � • Area (ac) CN Description " 0.179 98 Buildings 4.058 98 Asphalt and Concrete 1.789 89 Gravel roads, HSG C 0.877 74 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG C s 0.708 80 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG D -` 7.611 91 Weighted Average 3.374 44.33%.. Pervious Area • 4.237 55.671/6 Impervious Area �y •y ' •y x • • • Proposed Watershed Type 11124-hr 10-YearRainfall=4.60" • Prepared by Tetra Tech Printed 3/29/2013 • HydroCAD@ 10.00 s/n 05923 @ 2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 16 • Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description • (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 0.9 50 0.0100 0.91 Sheet Flow, • Smooth surfaces n= 0.011 P2= 3.20" • 4.3 520 0.0100 2.03 Shallow Concentrated Flow, Paved Kv= 20.3 fps • 0.2 71 0.0060 6.04 18.98 Pipe Channel, CO-51 • 24.0" Round Area= 3.1 sf Perim=6.3' r= 0.50' n= 0.012 • 0.1 47 0.0110 10.72 75.78 Pipe Channel, CO-56 • 36.0" Round Area= 7.1 sf Perim= 9.4' r= 0.75' n= 0.012 • 0.5 226 0.0050 7.23 51.09 Pipe Channel, CO-57 • 36.0" Round Area= 7.1 sf Perim= 9.4' r- 0.75' n= 0.012 • 0.1 64 0.0060 7.92 55.97 Pipe Channel, CO-58 • 36.0" Round Area= 7.1 sf Perim= 9.4' r= 0.75' n= 0.012 • 0.1 59 0.0050 7.23 51.09 Pipe Channel, CO-58A • 36.0" Round Area=7.1 sf Perim= 9.4' r- 0.75' n= 0.012 • 0.4 191 0.0050 7.23 51.09 Pipe Channel, CO-59 • 36.0" Round Area= 7.1 sf Perim= 9.4' r= 0.75' n= 0.012 . . • 0.2 71 0.0050 7.23 51.09 Pipe Channel, CO-60 • 36.0" Round Area= 7.1 sf Perim=.9.4' r= 0.75' n= 0.012 • 0.5 225 0.0060 7.92 55.97 Pipe Channel, CO-61 • 36.0" Round Area= 7.1 a Perim= 9.4' r- 0.75' n= 0.012 • 0.1 35 0.0060 9.59 120.54 Pipe Channel, CO-77 • 48.0" Round Area= 12.6 sf Perim= 12.6' r- 1.00' n= 0.012 • 0.0 21 0.0100 12.38 155.61 Pipe Channel,CO-78 • 48.0" Round Area= 12.6 sf Perim= 12.6' r= 1.00' n= 0.012 • 7.4 1,580 Total • Summary for Subcatchment 8S: Drainage Area 8 • • Runoff 4.05 cfs @ 12.07 hrs, Volume= 0.316 af, Depth= 4.36" • Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs • Type 111 24-hr 10-Year Rainfall=4.60" • Area (ac) CN Description • 0.870 98 Buildings • 0.870 100.00% Impervious Area • • • • • • "= Proposed Watershed Type 111 24-hr 10-Year Rainfall=4:60" Prepared by Tetra Tech Printed 3/29/2013 HydroCAD@ 10.00 s/n 05923 @2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Paae 17 Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) �. 5.0 Direct Entry, Direct f Summary for Subcatchment 9S: Drainage Area 9 Runoff = 28.79 cfs @ 12.07 hrs, Volume= 2.140 af, Depth= 4.02" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Type III 24-hr 10-Year Rainfall=4.60" Area (ac) CN Description 1.228 98Buildings 3.384 98 Asphalt and Concrete, • 0.134 76 Gravel roads, HSG A 1.636 89 Gravel roads, HSG C 6.382 95 Weighted Average 1.770 27.73% Pervious Area 4.612 72.27% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope ''Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) �.� 5.0 Direct Entry, Direct 931' Summary for Subcatchment 10S: Drainage Area 10 w Runoff = 13.86 cfs @ 12.07 hrs, Volume= 0.974 af, Depth= 3.39" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs �.I Type III 24-hr 10-Year Rainfall=4.60" ` Area (ac) CN Description 0:269 98 Buildings 0.733 98 Asphalt and Concrete 0.739 76 Gravel roads, HSG A �.% 1.706 89 Gravel roads, HSG C 3.447 89 Weighted Average 2.445 70.93% Pervious Area 1.002 29.07% Impervious Area r.v Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/fl) (ft/sec) (cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, Summary for Reach 1: Discharge Point 1 [40] Hint: Not Described (Outflow=Inflow) �r • • • Proposed Watershed Type 11124-hr 10-YearRainfall=4.60" Prepared by Tetra Tech Printed 3/29/2013 HydroCADO 10.00 s/n 05923 @ 2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 18 Inflow Area = 32.914 ac, 43.47% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 2.10" for 10-Year event • Inflow = 75.23 cfs @ 12.09 hrs, Volume= 5.748 of • Outflow = 75.23 cfs @ 12.09 hrs, Volume= 5.748 af, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min • Routing by Stor-Ind+Trans method, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs • • Summary for Reach 2A: Discharge Point 2A • [40] Hint: Not Described (Outflow=Inflow) • Inflow Area = 21.317 ac, 1.09% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 0.00" for 10-Year event • Inflow = 0.00 cfs @ 0.00 hrs, Volume= 0.000 of • Outflow = 0.00 cfs @ 0.00 hrs, Volume= 0.000 af, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min • Routing by Stor-Ind+Trans method, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs • • Summary for Reach 3: Discharge Point 3 • [40] Hint: Not Described (Outflow=Inflow) • Inflow Area = 3.447 ac, 29.07% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 3.39'.' for 10-Year event • Inflow = 13.86 cfs @ 12.07 hrs, Volume= 0.974 of • Outflow ' = 13.86 cfs @ 12.07 hrs, Volume= 0.974 af, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min • Routing by Stor-Ind+Trans method, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0..01 hrs • Summary for Reach 4: Discharge Point 4 • • [40] Hint: Not Described (Outflow=Inflow) • Inflow Area = 7.252 ac, 75.59% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 4.06" for 10-Year event • Inflow = 32.84 cfs @ 12.07 hrs, Volume= 2.456 of • Outflow = 32.84 cfs @ 12.07 hrs, Volume= 2.456 af, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min • Routing by Stor-Ind+Trans method, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs • Summary for Pond 1 P: Stormwater Collection Area • • Inflow Area = 21.317 ac, 1.09% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 2.38" for 10-Year event • Inflow = 35.98 cfs @ 12.36 hrs, Volume= 4.220 of • Outflow = 4.65 cfs @ 13.89 hrs, Volume= 4.220 af, Atten= 87%, Lag= 92.0 min Discarded = 4.65 cfs @ 13.89 hrs, Volume= 4.220 of • Primary = 0.00 cfs @ 0.00 hrs, Volume= 0.000 of • Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Peak Elev= 9.28' @ 13.89 hrs Surf.Area= 8.413 ac Storage= 1.909 of • Plug-Flow detention time= 207.3 min calculated for 4.220 of(100%of inflow) Center-of-Mass det. time= 207.3 min ( 1,056.3- 849.0 ) • • • • • • • Proposed Watershed Type 11124-hr 10-Year Rainfall=4.60" Prepared by Tetra Tech Printed 3/29/2013 HydroCAD010.00 s/n 05923 02012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 19 Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description •` #1 8.50' 0.716 of 6" Crushed Stone (Prismatic)Listed below (Recalc) 3 1.790 of Overall x 40.0% Voids #2 9.00' 5.790 of Custom Stage Data (Prismatic)Listed below (Recalc) 6.506 of Total Available Storage Elevation Surf.Area Inc.Store Cum.Store (feet) (acres) (acre-feet) (acre-feet) � 8.50 3.580 0.000 0.000 9.00 3.580 1.790 1.790 Elevation Surf.Area Inc.Store Cum.Store (feet) (acres) (acre-feet) (acre-feet) 9.00 3.580 0.000 0.000 •' 10.00 8.000 5.790 5.790 Device Routing , Invert .Outlet Devices • #1 Primary 9.50' 15.0' long x 290.0' breadth Broad-Crested Rectangular Weir Head (feet) 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 1.20 1.40 1.60 Coef. (English) 2.68 2.70 2.70 2.64 2.63 2.64 2.64 2.63 #2 Discarded 8.50' 0.520 in/hr Exfiltration over Surface area �> Conductivity to Groundwater Elevation = 0.00' �t Qiscarded OutF low Max=4.65 cfs @ 13.89 hrs HW=9.28' (Free Discharge) !-% 2=Exfiltration ( Controls 4.65 cfs) $ Primary OutFlow Max=0.00 cfs @ 0.00 hrs HW=8.50' (Free Discharge) ' t-1=Broad-Crested Rectangular Weir( Controls 0.00 cfs) s •.f �y •J� r �s i • • • Proposed Watershed Type 11124-hr 25-Year Rainfall=5.50" • Prepared by Tetra Tech Printed 3/29/2013 • HydroCAD®10.00 s/n 05923 @2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 20 • Time span=0.00-48.00 hrs, dt=0.01 hrs, 4801 points • Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS Reach routing by Stor-Ind+Trans method - Pond routing by Stor-Ind method • Subcatchment 1S: Drainage Area 1 Runoff Area=0.318 ac 0.00% Impervious Runoff Depth=2.95" • Tc=5.0 min CN=76 Runoff=1.14 cfs 0.078 of • Subcatchment2S: Drainage Area 2 Runoff Area=21.317 ac 1.09% Impervious Runoff Depth=3.14" • Flow Length=515' Slope=0.0050'r Tc=25.5 min CN=78 Runoff--47.69 cfs 5.580 of Subcatchment3S: Drainage Area 3 Runoff Area=19.340 ac 38.72% Impervious Runoff Depth=1.76" • Tc=5.0 min CN=62 Runoff=39.02 cfs 2.830 of • Subcatchment4S: Drainage Area 4 Runoff Area=2.690 ac 86.99% Impervious Runoff Depth=4.92" • Tc=5.0 min CN=95 Runoff=14.66 cfs 1.102 of Subcatchment 5S: Drainage Area 5 Runoff Area=0.895 ac 15.42% Impervious Runoff Depth=3.24" . Tc=5.0 min" CN=79 Runoff=3.52,cfs 0.241 of Subcatchment6S: Drainage Area 6 Runoff Area=2:060 ac 5.05% Impervious Runoff Depth=3.05" • TG--5.0 min CN=77 Runoff=7.63 cfs 0.523 of • Subcatchment7S: Drainage Area 7 Runoff Area=7.611 ac 55.67%Impervious Runoff Depth=4.47" • Flow Length=1,580' Tc=7.4 min CN=91 Runoff=36.16 cfs 2.834 of • Subcatchment8S: Drainage Area 8 Runoff Area=0.870 ac 100.00% Impervious Runoff Depth=5:26" • Tc=5.0 min CN=98 Runoff=4:85 cfs 0.382 of • Subcatchment9S: Drainage Area 9 Runoff Area=6.382 ac 72.27% Impervious Runoff Depth=4.92" • Tc=5.0 min CN=95 Runoff=34.78 cfs 2.614 of • Subcatchment 10S: Drainage Area 10 Runoff Area=3.447 ac 29.07% Impervious Runoff Depth=4.25" • Tc=5.0 min CN=89 Runoff=17.19 cfs 1.221 of Reach 1: Discharge Point 1 Inflow=101.00 cfs 7.609 of • Outflow=101.00 cfs 7.609 of • Reach 2A: Discharge Point 2A Inflow=0.00 cfs 0.000 of • Outflow=0.00 cfs 0.000 of • Reach 3: Discharge Point 3 Inflow=17.19 cfs 1.221 of • Outflow=17.19 cfs 1.221 of • Reach 4: Discharge Point 4 Inflow=39.64 cfs 2.996 of • Outflow=39.64 cfs 2.996 of • Pond 1 P: Stormwater Collection Area Peak Elev=9.44' Storage=2.743 of Inflow=47.69 cfs 5.580 of • Discarded=5.11 cfs 5.580 of Primary=0.00 cfs 0.000 of Outflow=5.11 cfs 5.580 of • Total Runoff Area = 64.930 ac Runoff Volume = 17.406 of Average Runoff Depth = 3.22" • 67.62% Pervious =43.907 ac 32.38% Impervious = 21.023 ac • • • • • f= rt. Proposed Watershed Type 11124-hr 25-YearRalnfall=5.50" Prepared by Tetra Tech Printed 3/29/2013 �." ydroCAD@ 10.00 s/n 05923 @2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 21 1 Summary for Subcatchment 1 S: Drainage Area 1 �. Runoff = 1.14 cfs @ 12.08 hrs, Volume= 0.078 af, Depth= 2.95" •' Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Type III 24-hr 25-Year Rainfall=5.50" 4 Area (ac) CN Description 0.318 76 Gravel roads HSG A 0.318 100.00% Pervious Area >` Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 1W; 5.0 Direct Entry, Direct Entry 0 Summary for Subcatchment 2S: Drainage Area 2 • . Runoff = 47.69 cfs @ 12.35 hrs, Volume= 5.580 af, Depth= 3.14" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs e Type III 24-hr 25-Year Rainfall=5.50" Area (ac) CN Description ' 0.016 98 Buildings 0.216 98 Asphalt and Concrete 10.868 68 <50% Grass cover, Poor, HSG A 4.705 86 <50% Grass cover, Poor, HSG C 5.512 89 <50% Grass cover, Poor, HSG D �y 21.317 78 Weighted Average �? 21.085 98.91% Pervious Area 0.232 1.09% Impervious Area i �} Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) !`y 9.8 50 0.0050 0.09 Sheet Flow, Grass: Short n= 0.150 P2= 3.20" 15.7 465 0.0050 0.49 Shallow Concentrated Flow, Short Grass Pasture Kv= 7.0 fps .25.5 515 Total Summary for Subcatchment 3S: Drainage Area 3 10 , Runoff 39.02 cfs @ 12.08 hrs, Volume= 2.830 af, Depth= 1.76" •'" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Type III 24-hr 25-Year Rainfall=5.50" �1 !s !i' • • • Proposed Watershed Type ///24-hr 25-Year Rainfall=5.50" • Prepared by Tetra Tech Printed 3/29/2013 • HydroCAD®10.00 s/n 05923 ©2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 22 • Area (ac) CN Description • 6.579 98 Power Plant Buildings and Asphalt * 0.909 98 Asphalt and Concrete • * 5.568 39 Power Plant Crushed Stone • 0.444 39 >75%" Grass cover, Good, HSG A 5.740 39 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG A • 0.100 80 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG D • 19.340 62 Weighted Average • 11.852 61.28% Pervious Area 7.488 38.72% Impervious Area • Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description • (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) • 5.0 Direct Entry, Summary for Subcatchment 4S; Drainage Area 4 • Runoff = 14.66 cfs @ 12.07 hrs, Volume= 1.102 af, Depth= 4.92" • • Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt=0.01 hrs Type III 24-hr 25-Year Rainfall=5.50" Area (ac) CN Description * 2.340 98 Asphalt and Concrete • 0.350 76 Gravel roads, HSG A 2.690 95 Weighted Average • 0.350 13.01% Pervious Area • 2.340 86.99% Impervious Area • Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity . Description • (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (f/sec) (cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, Direct Summary for Subcatchment 5S: Drainage Area 5 • Runoff = 3.52 cfs @ 12.07 hrs, Volume= 0.241 af, Depth= 3.24" • Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs • Type III 24-hr 25-Year Rainfall=5.50" • Area (ac) CN Description * 0.138 98 Asphalt and Concrete 0.757 76 Gravel roads, HSG A • 0.895 79 Weighted Average • 0.757 84.58% Pervious Area 0.138 15.42% Impervious Area • • • • • • Proposed Watershed Type /// 24-hr 25-Year Rainfall=5.50" k Prepared by Tetra Tech Printed 3/29/2013 HydroCAD@ 10.00 s/n 05923 02012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 23 Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) t 5.0 Direct Entry, Direct Summary for Subcatchment 6S: Drainage Area 6 Runoff = 7.63 cfs @ 12.07 hrs, Volume= 0.523 af, Depth= 3.05" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Type III 24-hr 25-Year Rainfall=5.50" Area (ac) CN Description :) 0.104 98 Asphalt and Concrete 1.956 76 Gravel roads, HSG A 2.060 77 Weighted Average �^ 1.956 94.95% Pervious Area 0.104 5.05% Impervious Area e j Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 09 5.0 Direct Entry, Direct - Summary for Subcatchment 7S: Drainage Area 7 Runoff = 36.16 cfs @ 12.10 hrs, Volume= 2.834 af, Depth= 4.47' Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs •,i Type III 24-hr 25-Year Rainfall=5.50" Area (ac) CN Description 0.179 98 Buildings 4.058 98 Asphalt and Concrete �. 1.789 89 Gravel roads, HSG C 0.877 74 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG C 0.708 -80 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG D �.3 7.611 91 Weighted Average 3.374 44.33% Pervious Area 4.237 55.67% Impervious Area a Y O W • • • Proposed Watershed Type 111 24-hr 25-YearRainfall=5.50" • Prepared by Tetra Tech Printed 3/29/2013 HydroCADO 10.00 s/n 05923 ©2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 24 • • Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) • 0.9 50 0.0100 0.91 Sheet Flow, • Smooth surfaces n= 0.011 P2= 3.20" • 4.3 520 0.0100 2.03 Shallow Concentrated Flow, Paved Kv= 20.3 fps • 0.2 71 0.0060 6.04 18.98 Pipe Channel, CO-51 • 24.0" Round Area= 3.1 sf Perim= 6.3' r= 0.50' n= 0.012 0.1 47 0.0110 10.72 75.78 Pipe Channel, CO-56 • 36.0" Round Area= 7.1 sf Perim= 9.4' r- 0.75' n= 0.012 • 0.5 226 0.0050 7.23 51.09 Pipe Channel, CO-57 • 36.0" Round Area= 7.1 sf Perim= 9.4' r=0.75' n= 0.012 • 0.1 64 0.0060 7.92 55.97 Pipe Channel, CO-58 • 36.0" Round Area=7.1 sf Perim= 9.4' r- 0.75' n= 0.012 • 0.1 59 0.0050 7.23 51.09 Pipe Channel, CO-58A • 36.0" Round Area= 7.1 sf Perim= 9.4' r- 0.75' n= 0.012, • 0.4 191 0.0050 7.23 51.09 Pipe Channel, CO-59 • 36.0" Round Area= 7.1 sf Perim= 9.4' r- 0.75' n= 0.012 • 0.2 71 0.0050 7.23 51.09 Pipe Channel, CO-60 • 36.0" Round Area= 7.1 sf Perim=.9.4' r=0.75' n= 0.012 • 0.5 225 0.0060 7.92 55.97 Pipe Channel, CO-61 • 36.0" Round Area= 7.1 sf Perim= 9.4' r-0.75' n= 0.012 • 0.1 35 0.0060 9.59 120.54 Pipe Channel, CO-77 • 48.0" Round Area= 12.6 sf Perim= 12.6' r= 1.00' n= 0.012 • 0.0 21 0.0100 12.38 155.61 Pipe Channel, CO-78 • 48.0" Round Area= 12.6 sf Perim= 12.6' r= 1.00' n= 0.012 • 7.4 1,580 Total • Summary for Subcatchment 8S: Drainage Area 8 • • Runoff = 4.85 cfs @ 12.07 hrs, Volume= 0.382 af, Depth= 5.26" • Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs • Type III 24-hr 25-Year Rainfall=5.50" • Area (ac) CN Description ' 0.870 98 Buildings • 0.870 100.00% Impervious Area • • • • • • Proposed Watershed Type 11124-hr 25-Year Rainfall=5.50" Prepared by Tetra Tech Printed 3/29/2013 HydroCAD010.00 s/n 05923 @2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 25 Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (fUft) (ft/sec) (cfs) �.- 5.0 Direct Entry, Direct Summary for Subcatchment 9S: Drainage Area 9 �s Runoff = 34.78 cfs @ 12.07 hrs, Volume= 2.614 af, Depth= 4.92" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Type III 24-hr 25-Year Rainfall=5.50" Area (ac) CN Description 1.228 98 Buildings •l 3.384 98 Asphalt and Concrete 0.134 76 Gravel roads, HSG A 1.636 89 Gravel roads, HSG C 6.382 95 Weighted Average 1.770 27.73% Pervious Area 4.612 72.27% Impervious Area •1 Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (fUft) (fUsec) (cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, Direct Summary for Subcatchment 10S: Drainage Area 10 Runoff = 17.19 cfs @ 12.07 hrs, Volume= 1.221 af, Depth= 4.25" �t Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.0048.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Type III 24-hr 25-Year Rainfall=5.50" Area (ac) CN Description `I 7 0.269 98 Buildings 0.733 98 Asphalt and Concrete 0.739 76 Gravel roads, HSG A 1.706 89 Gravel roads, HSG C 3.447 89 Weighted Average 2.445 70.93% Pervious Area 1.002 29.07% Impervious Area �. Tc . Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (fUft) (fUsec) (cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, Summary for Reach 1: Discharge Point 1 [40] Hint: Not Described (Outflow=Inflow) • • • Proposed Watershed Type 111 24-hr 25-YearRainfall=5.50" • Prepared by Tetra Tech Printed 3/29/2013 HydroCAD@ 10.00 s/n 05923 @2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 26 �• Inflow Area = 32.914 ac, 43.47% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 2.77" for 25-Year event Inflow = 101.00 cfs @ 12.09 hrs, Volume= 7.609 of • Outflow = 101.00 cfs @ 12.09 hrs, Volume= 7.609 af, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min • Routing by Stor-Ind+Trans method, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs • • Summary for Reach 2A: Discharge Point 2A • [40] Hint: Not Described (Outflow=Inflow) • Inflow Area = 21.317 ac, 1.09% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 0.00" for 25-Year event • Inflow = 0.00 cfs @ 0.00 hrs, Volume= 0.000 of • Outflow = 0.00 cfs @ 0.00 hrs, Volume= 0.000 af, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min • Routing by Stor-Ind+Trans method, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs • Summary for Reach 3: Discharge Point 3 [40] Hint: Not Described (Outflow=Inflow) • Inflow Area = 3.447 ac, 29.07% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 4.25" for 25-Year event Inflow = 17.19 cfs @ 12.07 hrs, Volume= 1.221 of • Outflow = 17.19 cfs @ 12.07 hrs, Volume= 1.221 af, Atten= 0%, Lag 0.0 min Routing by Stor-Ind+Trans method, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs • Summary for Reach 4: Discharge Point 4 • • [40] Hint: Not Described (Outflow=Inflow) • Inflow Area= 7.252 ac, 75.59% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 4.96" for 25-Year event Inflow = 39.64 cfs @ 12.07 hrs, Volume= 2.996 of Outflow = 39.64 cfs @ 12.07 hrs, Volume= 2.996 af, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min • Routing by Stor-Ind+Trans method, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs • Summary for Pond 1 P: Stormwater Collection Area • • Inflow Area = 21.317 ac, 1.09% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 3.14" for 25-Year event • Inflow = 47.69 cfs @ 12.35 hrs, Volume= 5.580 of • Outflow = 5.11 cfs @ 14.25 hrs, Volume= 5.580 A Atten= 89%, Lag= 114.0 min Discarded = 5.11 cfs @ 14.25 hrs, Volume= 5.580 of • Primary = 0.00 cfs @ 0.00 hrs, Volume= 0.000 of • Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs • Peak Elev= 9.44' @ 14.25 hrs Surf.Area= 9.124 ac Storage= 2.743 of • Plug-Flow detention time= 263.5 min calculated for 5.579 of(100% of inflow) • Center-of-Mass det. time= 263.4 min ( 1,104.4 - 841.0 ) • • • • • • k Proposed Watershed Type 11124-hr 25-YearRainfall=5.50" Prepared b Tetra Tech Printed 3/29/2013 HydroCAD®10.00 s/n 05923 @ 2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 27 A ': Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description 0 #1 8.50' 0.716 of 6" Crushed Stone (Prismatic)Listed below (Recalc) 1.790 of Overall x 40.0%Voids #2 9.00' 5.790 of Custom Stage Data (Prismatic)Listed below (Recalc) •\ 6.506 of Total Available Storage Elevation Surf.Area Inc.Store Cum.Store (feet) (acres) (acre-feet) (acre-feet) 8.50 3.580 0.000 0.000 9.00 3.580 1.790 1.790 Elevation Surf.Area Inc.Store Cum.Store (feet) (acres) (acre-feet) (acre-feet) 9.00 3.580 0.000 6.000 10.00 8.000 5.790 5.790 Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices •j #1 Primary 9.50' 15.0' long x 290.0' breadth Broad-Crested Rectangular Weir Head (feet) 0.20 0A0 0.60 0.80 1.00 1.20 1.40 ;1:60 Coef. (English) 2.68 2.70 2.70 2.64 2.63 2.64 2.64 2.63 • #2 Discarded 8.50' 0.520 in/hr Exfiltration over Surface area Conductivity to Groundwater Elevation=..0.00' • iscarded OutFlow Max=5.11 cfs @ 14.25 hrs HW=9.44' (Free Discharge) 2=Exfiltration ( Controls 5.11 cfs) 3 Primary Out Flow Max=0.00 cfs @ 0.00 hrs HW=8.50' (Free Discharge) t1=Broad-Crested Rectangular Weir( Controls 0.00 cfs) i. f r i 1} 1y �r • • • Proposed Watershed Type /// 24-hr 100-Year Rainfall=6.60" Prepared by Tetra Tech Printed 3/29/2013 HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n 05923 02012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 28 • Time span=0.00-48.00 hrs, dt=0.01 hrs, 4801 points Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS • Reach routing by Stor-Ind+Trans method. - Pond routing by Stor-Ind method Subcatchment 1 S: Drainage Area 1 Runoff Area=0.318 ac 0.00% Impervious Runoff Depth=3.90" • Tc=5.0 min CN=76 Runoff=1.51 cfs 0.103 of • Subcatchment2S: Drainage Area 2 Runoff Area=21.317 ac 1.09% Impervious Runoff Depth=4.11" • Flow Length=515' Slope=0.0050 'P Tc=25.5 min CN=78 Runoff--62.35 cfs 7.308 of + Subcatchment3S: Drainage Area 3 Runoff Area=19.340 ac 38.72% Impervious Runoff Depth=2.51" • Tc=5.0 min CN=62 Runoff=57.50 cfs 4.047 of Subcatchment4S: Drainage Area 4 Runoff Area=2.690 ac 86.99% Impervious Runoff Depth=6.01" • Tc=5.0 min CN=95 Runoff=17.73 cfs 1.347 of Subcatchment5S: Drainage Area 5 Runoff Area=0.895 ac 15.42% Impervious Runoff Depth=4.22" • Tc=5.0 min CN=79 Runoff=4.57 cfs 0.315 of • Subcatchment6S: Drainage Area 6 Runoff Area=2.060 ac 5.05% Impervious Runoff Depth=4.01" • Tc=5.0 min CN=77 Runoff=10.02 cfs 0.688 of • Subcatchment7S: Drainage Area 7 Runoff Area=7.611 ac 55.67% Impervious Runoff Depth=5.55" • Flow Length=1,580' Tc=7.4 min CN=91 Runoff=44.33 cfs 3.517 of Subcatchment8S: Drainage Area 8 Runoff Area=0.870 ac 100.00% ImperviousRunoff Depth=6:36" • Tc=5.0 min CN=98 Runoff=5.83 cfs 0.461 of • Subcatchment9S: Drainage Area 9 Runoff Area=6.382 ac 72.27% Impervious Runoff Depth=6.01" • Tc=5.0 min CN=95 Runoff=42.07 cfs 3.195 of • Subcatchment 10S: Drainage Area 10 Runoff Area=3.447 ac 29.07% Impervious Runoff Depth=5.32" • Tc=5.0 min CN=89 Runoff=21.24 cfs 1.528 of Reach 1: Discharge Point 1 Inflow=134.20 cfs 10.017 of • Outflow=134.20 cfs 10.017 of Reach 2A: Discharge Point 2A Inflow=1.46 cfs 0.356 of • Outflow=1.46 cfs 0.356 of • Reach 3: Discharge Point 3 Inflow=21.24 cfs 1.528 of • Outflow=21.24 cfs 1.528 of • Reach 4: Discharge Point 4 Inflow=47.90 cfs 3.656 of • Outflow=47.90 cfs 3.656 of . Pond 1 P: Stormwater Collection Area Peak Elev=9.61' Storage=3.719 of Inflow=62.35 cfs 7.308 of • Discarded=5.58 cfs 6.951 of Primary=1.46 cfs 0.356 of Outflow=7.04 cfs 7.308 of • Total Runoff Area=64.930 ac Runoff Volume =22.508 of Average Runoff Depth = 4.16" • 67.62% Pervious = 43.907 ac 32.38% Impervious =21.023 ac • • • • • Proposed Watershed Type /// 24-hr 700-YearRainfall=6.60" Prepared by Tetra Tech Printed 3/29/2013 HydroCAD@ 10.00 s/n 05923 @2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 29 Summary for Subcatchment 1S: Drainage Area 1 ' Runoff = 1.51 cfs @ 12.07 hrs, Volume= 0.103 af, Depth= 3.90" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs �-z Type 11124-hr 100-Year Rainfall=6.60" Area (ac) CN Description 0.318 . 76 Gravel roads HSG A 0.318 100.00% Pervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (fUM (ft/sec) (cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, Direct Entry l Summary for Subcatchment 2S: Drainage Area 2 Runoff = 62.35 cfs @ 12.35 hrs, Volume= 7.308 af, Depth= 4.11" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs . ; Type 111 24-hr 100-Year Rainfall=6.60" Area-(ac) CN Description 0.016 98 Buildings *- 0:216 98 AsphaltandConcrete 10.868 68 <50% Grass cover, Poor, HSG A 4.705 86 <50% Grass cover, Poor, HSG C T 5.512 89 <50% Grass cover, Poor, HSG D 21.317 78 Weighted Average 21.085 98.91% Pervious Area 0.232 1.09% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (f/ft) (fUsec) (cfs) 9.8 50 0.0050 0.09 Sheet Flow, Grass: Short n= 0.150 P2= 3.20" 15.7 465 0.0050 0.49 Shallow Concentrated Flow, `^ Short Grass Pasture Kv=.7 0 fps 25.5 515 Total Summary for Subcatchment 3S: Drainage Area 3 Runoff = 57.50 cfs @ 12.08 hrs, Volume= 4.047 af, Depth= 2.51" • Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Type III 24-hr 100-Year Rainfall=6.60" .r I � • • • Proposed Watershed Type 11124-hr 100-YearRainfall=6.60" • Prepared by Tetra Tech Printed 3/29/2013 HydroCAD@ 10.00 s/n 05923 @2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 30 • Area (ac) CN Description • 6.579 98 Power Plant Buildings and Asphalt ' 0.909 98 Asphalt and Concrete • 5.568 39 Power Plant Crushed Stone • 0.444 39 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG A 5.740 39 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG A 0.100 80 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG D • 19.340 62 Weighted Average • 11.852 61.28% Pervious Area 7.488 38.72% Impervious Area • Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description • (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) • 5.0 Direct Entry, • Summary for Subcatchment 4S: Drainage Area 4 • • Runoff = 17.73 cfs @ 12.07 hrs, Volume= 1.347 af, Depth= 6.01" • Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs • Type III 24-hr 100-Year Rainfall=6.60" • Area (ac) CN Description • 2.340 98 Asphalt and Concrete • 0.350 76 . Gravel roads, HSG A 2.690 95 Weighted Average • 0.350 13.01% Pervious Area • 2.340 86.99% Impervious Area • Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description • (min) (feet) Wit) (ft/sec) (cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, Direct • Summary for Subcatchment 5S: Drainage Area 5 Runoff = 4.57 cfs @ 12.07 hrs, Volume= 0.315 af, Depth= 4.22" • Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs • Type III 24-hr 100-Year Rainfall=6.60" •' Area (ac) CN Description " 0.138 98 Asphalt and Concrete 0.757 76 Gravel roads, HSG A • 0.895 79 Weighted Average • 0.757 84.58% Pervious Area 0.138 15.42% Impervious Area • • • • • • • Proposed Watershed Type 111 24-hr 100-Year Rainfall=6.60" Prepared by Tetra Tech Printed 3/29/2013 z HydroCAD®10.00 s/n 05923 02012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Paae 31 Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (f/sec) (cfs) �•' 5.0 Direct Entry, Direct Summary for Subcatchment 6S: Drainage Area 6 y Runoff = 10.02 cfs @ 12.07 hrs, Volume= 0.688 af, Depth= 4.01" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt=0.01 hrs Type III 24-hr 1 00-Year Rainfall=6.60" Area (ac) CN Description 0.104 98 Asphalt and Concrete 1.956 76 Gravel roads, HSG A 2.060 77 Weighted Average 3 1.956 94.95% Pervious Area 0.104 5.05% Impervious Area 0.4 Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (f/sec) (cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, Direct i ' Summary for Subcatchment 7S: Drainage Area 7 Runoff = 44.33 cfs @ 12.10 hrs, Volume= 3.517 af, Depth= 5.55" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.0048.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Type III 24-hr 100-Year Rainfall=6.60" Area (ac) CN Description 0.179 98 Buildings 4.058 . 98 Asphalt and Concrete 1.789 89 Gravel roads, HSG C 401, 0.877 74 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG C 0.708 80 >75% Grass cover, Good HSG D wt 7.611 91 Weighted Average 01 3.374 44.33% Pervious Area WD 4.237 55.67% Impervious Area Oil ,t �x Y •i •s • • • Proposed Watershed Type /// 24-hr 100-YearRainfall=6.60" Prepared by Tetra Tech Printed 3/29/2013 HydroCADO 10.00 s/n 05923 ©2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 32 • • Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description • (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (f/sec) (cfs) 0.9 50 0.0100 0.91 Sheet Flow, • Smooth surfaces n= 0.011 P2= 3.20" • 4.3 520 0.0100 2.03 Shallow Concentrated.Flow, Paved Kv=20.3 fps • .0.2 71 0.0060 6.04 18.98 Pipe Channel, CO-51 24.0" Round Area= 3.1 sf Perim= 6.3' r= 0.50' n= 0.012 • 0.1 47 0.0110 10.72 75.78 Pipe Channel, CO-56 • 36.0" Round Area= 7.1 sf Perim= 9.4' r- 0.75' n=0.012 • 0.5 226 0.0050 7.23 51.09 Pipe Channel, CO-57 • 36.0" Round Area= 7.1 sf 'Perim= 9.4' r= 0.75' n= 0.012 • 0.1 64 0.0060 7.92 55.97 Pipe Channel, CO-58 • 36.0" Round Area= 7.1 sf Perim= 9.4' r= 0.75' n= 0.012 • 0.1 59 0.0050 7.23 51.09 Pipe Channel, CO-58A • 36.0" Round -Area= 7.1 sf Perim= 9.4' r- 0.75' n= 0.012 • 0.4 191 0.0050 7.23 51.09 Pipe Channel, CO-59 36.0" Round Area= 7.1 sf Perim= 9.4' r= 0.75' n= 0.0.12 • 0.2 71 0.0050 7.23 51.09 Pipe Channel, CO-60 S 36.0" Round Area= 7.1 sf Perim= 9.4' r- 0.75' n= 0.012 • 0.5 225 0.0060 7.92 55.97 Pipe Channel, CO.-61 • 36.0" Round Area= 7.1 sf Perim= 9.4' r= 0.75' n= 0.012 0.1 35 0.0060 9.59 120.54 Pipe Channel, CO-77 • 48.0" Round Area= 12.6 sf Perim= 12.6' r- 1.00' n= 0.012 • 0.0 21 0.0100 12.38" 155.61 Pipe Channel, CO-78 • 48.0" Round Area= 12.6 sf Perim= 12.6' r= 1.00' n= 0.012 • 7.4 1,580 Total • Summary for Subcatchment 8S: Drainage Area 8 • • Runoff = 5.83 cfs @ 12.07 hrs, Volume= 0.461 af, Depth= 6.36" • Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs • Type 111 24-hr 100-Year Rainfall=6.60" • Area (ac) CN Description • 0.870 98 Buildings • 0.870 100.00% Impervious Area • • • • • • Proposed Watershed Type 111 24-hr 100-Year Rainfall=6.60" ? Prepared by Tetra Tech Printed 3/29/2013 HydroCAD®10.00 s/n 05923 ©2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 33 Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, Direct f• Summary for Subcatchment 9S: Drainage Area 9 Runoff = 42.07 cfs @ 12.07 hrs, Volume= 3.195 af, Depth= 6.01" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.0048.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Type III 24-hr 100-Year Rainfall=6.60" Area (ac) CN Description 1.228 98 Buildings ' 3.384 98 Asphalt and Concrete 0.134 76 Gravel roads, HSG A �•'-f 1.636 89 Gravel roads, HSG C 6.382 95 Weighted Average 1.770 27.73% Pervious Area 4.612 72.27% Impervious Area S Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description 63- (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 5.0 Direct Entry, Direct Summary for Subcatchment 10S: Drainage Area 10 �t Runoff = 21.24 cfs @ 12.07 hrs, Volume= 1.528 af, Depth= 5.32" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method,.UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.0048.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs Type III 24-hr 100-Year Rainfall=6.60" Area (ac) CN Description 46} 0.269 98 Buildings ` 0.733 98 Asphalt and Concrete 0.739 76 Gravel roads, HSG A 's 1.706 89 Gravel roads, HSG C 3.447 89 Weighted Average 2.445 70.93% Pervious Area of 1.002 29.07% Impervious Area ` Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 03- 5.0 Direct Entry, 63 y Summary for Reach 1: Discharge Point 1 ` r [40] Hint: Not Described (Outflow=Inflow) �a • • • Proposed Watershed Type 11124-hr 100-Year Rainfall=6.60" • Prepared by Tetra Tech Printed 3/29/2013 • HydroCAD@ 10.00 s/n 05923 @2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 34 • Inflow Area = 32.914 ac, 43.47% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 3.65 for 100-Year event • Inflow = 134.20 cfs @ 12.08 hrs, Volume= 10.017 of Outflow = 134.20 cfs @ 12.08 hrs, Volume= 10.017 af, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min • Routing by Stor-Ind+Trans method, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs • • Summary for Reach 2A: Discharge Point 2A • [40] Hint: Not Described (Outflow=Inflow) • • Inflow Area = 21.317 ac, 1.09% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 0.20" for 100-Year event • Inflow = 1.46 cfs @ 14.03 hrs, Volume= 0.356 of Outflow = 1.46 cfs @ 14.03 hrs, Volume= 0.356 af, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min • Routing by Stor-Ind+Trans method, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs • • Summary for Reach 3: Discharge Point 3 • [40] Hint: Not Described (Outflow=Inflow) • Inflow Area = 3.447 ac, 29.07% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 5.32" for 100-Year event • Inflow = 21.24 cfs @ 12.07 hrs, Volume= 1.528 of • Outflow 21.24 cfs @ 12.07 hrs, Volume= 1.528 af, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min • Routing by Stor-Ind+Trans method, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs • • Summary for Reach 4: Discharge Point 4 • [40] Hint: Not Described (Outflow=Inflow) • Inflow Area = 7.252 ac, 75.59% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 6.05" for 100-Year event • Inflow 47.90 cfs @ 12.07 hrs, Volume= 3.656 of • Outflow = 47.90 cfs @ 12.07 hrs, Volume= 3.656 af, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min • Routing by Stor-Ind+Trans method, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs • Summary for Pond 1 P: Stormwater Collection Area • • Inflow Area = 21.317 ac, 1.09% Impervious, Inflow Depth 4.11" for 100-Year event • Inflow = 62.35 cfs @ 12.35 hrs, Volume= 7.308 of • Outflow = 7.04 cfs @ 14.03 hrs, Volume= 7.308 af, Atten= 89%, Lag= 100.8 min Discarded = 5.58 cfs @ 14.03 hrs, Volume= 6.951 of • Primary = 1.46 cfs @ 14.03 hrs, Volume= 0.356 of • Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs • Peak Elev= 9.61' @ 14.03 hrs Surf.Area= 9.854 ac Storage= 3.719 of • Plug-Flow detention time= 305.4 min calculated for 7.308 of(100% of inflow) • Center-of-Mass det. time= 305.4 min ( 1,138.6 - 833.3 ) • • • • • -? Proposed Watershed Type 11124-hr 100-Year Rainfall=6.60" ' Prepared by Tetra Tech Printed 3/29/2013 HydroCAD@ 10.00 s/n 05923 ©2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 35 Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1 8.50' 0.716 of 6" Crushed Stone (Prismatic)Listed below (Recalc) 1.790 of Overall x 40.0% Voids #2 9.00' 5.790 of Custom Stage Data (Prismatic)Listed below (Recalc) 6.506 of Total Available Storage �? Elevation Surf.Area Inc.Store Cum.Store (feet) (acres) (acre-feet) (acre-feet) 8.50 3.580 0.000 0.000 9.00 3.580 1.790 1.790 Elevation Surf.Area Inc.Store Cum.Store (feet) (acres) (acre-feet) (acre-feet) �Y 9.00 3.580 0.000 0.000 10.00 8.000 5.790 5.790 Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 9.50' 15.0' long x 290.0' breadth Broad-Crested Rectangular Weir Head (feet) 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 1.26 1.40 1.60 �. Coef. (English) 2.68 2.70 2.70 2.64 2.63 2.64 2.64 2.63 #2 Discarded 8.50' 0.520 in/hr Exfiltration over Surface area Conductivity to Groundwater Elevation = 0.00' i Rrded OutFlow Max=5.58 cfs @ 14.03 hrs HW=9.61' (Free Discharge) tExfiltration ( Controls 5.58 cfs) nmary OutFlow Max=1.46 cfs @ 14.03 hrs HW=9.61' (Free Discharge) 1=Broad-Crested Rectangular Weir(Weir Controls 1.46 cfs @ 0.89 fps) �e !3, �3 7, •:r .3 �n • •I • • • • • • • • • • x `o • c C • a Q a • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • Appendix D • StormCAD Drainage Collection System Design Calculations • • • • • • • • • • • • • • Catch Basin Subcatchment Area Flows- CCG facility within Acoustic Landscaped Berm • Salem Harbor Station Redevelopment 24 Fort Avenue,Salem,MA • • Paved Crushed Stone Grass ID COMPOSITE C TOTAL AREA TOTAL AREA Q • (sq-ft acres cfs • CB-1 20,025 0.9 �0 0.7 0 0.4 0.90 20,025 0.46 2.5 CB-2 3,070 0.9 7,750 0.7 0 0.4 0.76 10,820 0.25 1.1 CB-3 1,600 0.9 5,200 0.7 0 0.4 0.75 6,800 0.16 0.7 • CB-4 2,900 0.9 5;200 - 0.7 - 0 0.4 - 0.77 8,100 0.19 0.9 • CB-5 3,100 0.9- 5,500 0.7 0 0.4 -0.77 8,600 .0.20 0.9 • CB-6 3,900 0.9 6;350 - 0.7 0 0.4 0.78 10,250 0.24 1.1 CB-7 16,650 0.9 0 0.7 0 0.4 0.90 1 16,650 0.38 2.1 CB-8 6,050 0.9 0 0.7 0 0.4 0.90 6;050 0.14 -0.8 • CB-9 5,150 0.9 17,100 0.7 0 0.4 0.75 22,250 0.51 2.3 • CB-10 2,425 0.9 4,150 0.7 0 0.4 0.77 6,575 0.15 0.7 CB-11 3,550 0.9 6,850 0.7 0 0.4 0.77 10,400 0.24 1.1 • CB-12 3,000 0.9 6,300 0.7 0 0.4 0.76 9,300 0.21 1.0 CB-13 7,000 0.9 6,200 0.7 0 0.4 0.81 13,200 0.30 1.5 • 'CB-14 6,575 0.9 8,350 0.7 0 0.4 0.79 14,925 0.34 1.6 • CB-15 3,835 0.9 6,225 0.7 0 0.4 0.78 10,060 0.23 1.1 CBA6 5,000 0.9 7,450 0.7 0 0.4 0.78 12,450 1 0.29 1.3 • CB-17 2,600 0.9 4,500 0.7 0 0.4 0.77 7,100 0.16 0.8 CB-18 1,750 0.9 2,650 0.7 0 0.4 0.78 4,400 _ 0.10 0.5 • CB-19 3,125 0.9 22,700 0.7 0 0.4 0.72 25,825 0.59 2.6 • CB-20 2,940 0.9 23,155 0.7 0 0.4 0.72 26,095 0.60- 2.6 CB-21 1,235 0.9 10,720 0.7 0 0.4 0.72 11,955 0.27 1.2 • CB-22 1,550 0.9 2,850 '0.7 0 0.4 0.77 4,400 0.10 0.5 CB-23 4,000 0.9 22,000 - 0.7 1 0 1 0.4 0.73 26,000 0.60 2.6 • CB-24 3,580 0.9 22,515 0.7 0 0.4 0.73 1 26,095 0:60 2.6 • CB-25 1,825 0.9 10,080 0.7 0 0.4 0.73 11,905 0.27 1.2 CB-2611,400 0.9 1_ 5,650 0.7 0 - 0.4. 0.83 17,050 0.39 - 2.0 • CB-276,950 0.9 10,350 0.7 0 - 0.4 0.78 17,300 0.40 1.9 CB-28 3,250 0.9 0 0.7 10050 0.4 0.52 13,300 0.31 1.0 • CB-29 3,210 0.9 0 0.7 9275 0.4 0.53 12,485 0.29 0.9 • CB-30 5100 0.9 1,900 0.7 0 0.4 0.85 7,000 0.16 0.8 CB-31 3,250 0.9 2,200 0.7 0 0.4 0.82 .5,450 0.13 0.6 • CB-32 3,750 0.9 3,425 0.7 0 1 0.4 0.80 7,175 0.16 0.8 - CB-32A 3,900 0.9 2,200 0.7 0 0.4 0.83 1 6,100 0.14 0.7 • CB-33 3,685 0.9 2,400 0.7 0 0.4 0.82 6,085 0.14 0.7 • CB-34 5,000 0.9 6,130 0.7 0 0.4 0.79 11,130 026 1.2 CB-35 3,350 0.9 4,350 0.7 0 0.4 0.79 7,700 0.18 0.8 • CB-36 3,575 0.9 8,700 0.7 0 0.4 0.76 12,275 0.28 1.3 CB-37 7,100 0.9 7,900 0.7 0 0.4 0.79 15,000 0.34 - 1.6 • CB-38 5,435 0.9 8,070 0.7 0 0.4 0.78 13,505 0.31 1.5 • STG 29,900 0.9 0 0.7 0 0.4 0.90 29,900 0.69 3.7 CTG 73,000 0.9 0 1 0.7 0 0.4 0.90 73,000 1 9.0 • Notes: • 1.Shaded columns indicate input values. • 2.A Rainfall Intensity of 6.0 inches per hour is used for the 25-Year Storm Event 3.Q(cfs)=composite C x rainfall intensity(inches/hr)x total area(acres) • 4.STG and CTG Roof Runoff Discharges to an Underground Stormwater Storage Vault and Overflows to CB-29 • • • • • - P:\62117\727-62117-12001\SupportDms\Calcs\Dminage\2013.03.28_Catch_Basin_Subcatcment_Area_Flows • 3/292013 • A 7 7 110 Catch Basin Subcatchment Area Flows-Existing Parking Area and Access Roadway Salem Harbor Station Redevelopment 24 Fort Avenue,Salem,MA i• Paved Grass -COMPOSITE TOTAL AREA TOTAL AREA O' ID IM C acres s (ds) i.• CB-A 81,197. -'0.9 55,212 - 0.4 0.70 136,409 3.13 13.1 CB-B 81,197 0.9 55,212 0.4 0.70 136,409 3.13 13.1 CB-C 6,306 0.9 0 0.4- 0.90 6,306 0.14 0.8 CB-D 5;244 0.9 - 0 0.4 0.90 5,244 0.12 0.7 CB-E 8,163 0.9 36,576 0.4 0.49 44,739 1.03 3.0 • WOS-C 2,483 0.9 - - 0 0.4 0.90 2,483 0.06 0.3 " Notes: 1.Shaded columns indicate input values. 2.A Rainfall Intensity of 6.0 inches per hour is used for the 25-Year Storm Event 3.0(cfs)=composite C x rainfall intensity(inches/hr)x total area(acres) i' i� 3� +t� r 9 091 V As P:\621171127-62117-12001\SupportDors\Calms Drainage\2013.03.28_Catch_Basin_Subcatcment_Area_Flom i. 3/29/2013 • • • • • Catch Basin Subcatchment Area Flows-Landscaped Area • Salem Harbor Station Redevelopment 24 Fort Avenue,Salem,MA • • Paved Grass -ID COMPOSITE C TOTAL AREA TOTAL AREA Q • - (sq.ft) acres cfs CB-F 7,975 0.9 47,241: 0.4 0.47 55,216 1.27 3.6 • CB-G 4,986 0.9 18,959 0.4 0.50 - 23,945 0.55 1.7 • CB-H 2,193 0.9 21,233 0.4 0.45 23,426 0.54 1.4 CB-I 2,635 0.9 18,053 0.4 - - 0.46 20,688 0.47 1.3 • CB-J 3,698 0.9 5,390 0.4 0.60 9,088 0.21 0.8 • CB-K 3,517 0.9 21,568 0.4 0.47 25,085 0.58 1.6 CB-L 5,145 0.9 11,907 0.4 0.55 17,052 0.39 1.3 • CB-11 1,614 0.9 5,598 0.4 0.51 7,212 0.17 0.5 CB-N 2,420 0.9 5,495 0.4' 0.55 7,915 0.18 0.6 • UD-1 0 0.9 15,708 0.4 0.40 15,708 0.36 0.9 . UD-2 0 0.9 11,185 0.4 0.40 11,185 0.26 0.6 UD-3 0 0.9 19,642 0.4 0.40 19,642 0.45 1.1 • UD-4 0 0.9 43,200 0.4 0.40 43,200 0.99 2.4 • Notes: 1.Shaded columns indicateinputvalues. 2.A Rainfall Intensity of 6.0 inches per hour is used for the 25-Year Storm Event 3.Q(cfs)=composite C x rainfall intensity(inches/hr)x total area(acres) • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • P:162117t127-62117-120011SupportDocs\CalcslDrainage12013.03.28_Catch_Basin_Subcatcment_Area_Flows • 3/29/2013 • "i `i Catch Basin Subcatchment Area Flows-Northern and Southern Portions i Salem Harbor Station Redevelopment 1,• 24 Fort Avenue,Salem,MA - Paved Crushed Stone ID COMPOSITE C TOTAL AREA TOTAL AREA Q' M M -(sq.ftacres cfs • Cl116,232 0.9 _ 61,203 0.7 0.83 177,435 4.07 f20 : CB-P 64,575 0.9 11,513 0.7 0.87 76,088 1.75 CB-Q 57,457 0.9 0 0.7 0.90 - 57,457 132 r— Notes: 1.Shaded columns indicate input values. ,t 2.A Rainfall Intensity of 6.0 inches per hour is used for the 25-Year Storm Event ': 3.Q(cfs)=composite C x rainfall intensity(inches/hr)x total area(acres) coo 1i • k� �i • P:\6211T127-62117-12001\SupportDocs\CalmOrainage\2013.03.28_Catch_Basin_Subcatcment_Area_Flo ^�• 3/292013 • • • LU • x �o • c C • a a Q • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • r • • • i i • • • • • • • • Appendix E • Water Quality Structure Efficiency Calculations • • • • • • • • • • 1��-_ Stormceptor® Stormceptor Design Summary PCSWMM for Stormceptor • Project Information Rainfall • Date 3/25/2013 Name BOSTON WSFOAP Project Name Salem Harbor Station State MA • Redevelopment Project Number 127-62117-12001 ID 770 Location 24 Fort Avenue,Salem MA Years of Records 1948 to 2005 • Designer Information Latitude 42°21'38"N • Company Tetra Tech Longitude 71°0'38"W • Contact N/A • Notes Water Quality Objective WQS-1 TSS Removal(%) 80 WQ Flow Rate (cfs) 19.32 • Drainage Area Upstream Storage • Total Area(ac) 4.44 Storage Discharge • Imperviousness(%) 49.8 (ac-ft) (cfs) 0 0 • The Stormceptor System model STC 2400 achieves the water quality objective removing 81%TSS for a • Fine(organics,silts and sand)particle size distribution; providing continuous positive treatment for a ` stormwater quality flow rate of 19.32 cfs. Stormceptor Sizing Summary Stormceptor Model TSS Removal • % • STC 450i 67 STC 900 76 • STC 1200 76 • STC 1800 76 STC 2400 81 • STC 3600 "81 STC 4800 85 • STC 6000 85 • STC 7200 88 STC 11000 91 • STC 13000 91 STC 16000 92 • • • • • Stormceptor Design Summary- 1/2 ju. • • lGTAtEIttA15'"' • Stormceptor • (i Particle Size Distribution Removing silt particles from runoff ensures that the majority of the pollutants, such as hydrocarbons and heavy i• metals that adhere to fine particles,are not discharged into our natural water courses. The table below lists the particle size distribution used to define the annual TSS removal. Fine(organics,silts and sand Particle Size Distribution Specific Settling Particle Size Distribution Specific Settling Gravity Velocity Gravity Velocity m % ft/s Pm % ft/s 20 20 1.3 0.0013 60 20 1.8 0.0051 150 20 2.2 0.0354 400 20 2.65 0.2123 i 2000 20 2.65 0.9417 Stormceptor Design Notes • Stormceptor performance estimates are based on simulations using PCSWMM for Stormceptor. • Design estimates listed are only representative of specific project requirements based on total suspended • solids(TSS)removal. • Only the STC 4501 is adaptable to function with a catch basin inlet and/or inline pipes. • Only the Stormceptor models STC 4501 to STC 7200 may accommodate multiple inlet pipes. • Inlet and outlet invert elevation differences are as follows: ',• Inlet and Outlet Pipe Invert Elevations Differences • Inlet Pipe Configuration STC 4501 STC 900 to STC STC 11000 to 7200 STC 16000 Single inlet pipe 3)n: 1 in. 3 in. ,r Multiple inlet pipes 3 in. 3 in. Only one inlet `� pipe. • Design estimates are based on stable site conditions only,after construction is completed. • Design estimates assume that the stone drain is not submerged during zero flows. For submerged applications, please contact yourlocal Stormceptor representative. • Design estimates may be modified for specific spills controls. Please contact your local Stormceptor ¢ representative for further assistance. • For pricing inquiries or assistance, please contact Rinker Materials 1 (800)909-7763 10 www.rinkerstormceptor.com l� 0.11 1� Stormceptor Design Summary-2/2 • • Stormceptor® • Stormceptor Design,Summary PCSWMM for Stormceptor • • Project Information Rainfall • Date 3/25/2013 Name BOSTON WSFO AP Project Name Salem Harbor Station State MA • Redevelopment • Project Number 127-62117-12001 ID 770 Location 24 Fort Avenue,Salem MA Years of Records 1948 to 2005 • Designer Information Latitude 42°21'38"N • Company Tetra Tech Longitude 71°0'38`W • Contact N/A • Notes Water Quality Objective • WQS-2 TSS Removal(%) 80 7 WQ Flow Rate (cfs) 10.34 • Drainage Area Upstream Storage • rTotaiArea(ac) 2.49 Storage Discharge viousness(%) 14.1 (ac-ft) (cfs) 0 0 • The Stormceptor System model STC 450i achieves the water quality objective removing 85%TSS for a Fine • (organics,silts and sand)particle size distribution; providing continuous positive treatment for a stormwater quality flow rate of 10.34 cfs. Stormceptor Sizing Summary • • Stormceptor Model TSS Removal • % • STC 450i STC 900 91 STC 1200 91 • STC 1800 91 STC 2400 93 • STC 3600 94 STC 4800 95 • STC 6000 96 • STC 7200 96 STC 11000 97 • STC 13000 98 STC 16000 98 • • • • • • • Stormceptor Design Summary- 1/2 *+ • 4 s r �: • { i• Stormceptor Particle Size Distribution Removing silt particles from runoff ensures that the majority of the pollutants,such as hydrocarbons and heavy f• metals that adhere to fine particles,are not discharged into our natural water courses. The table below lists the particle size distribution used to define the annual TSS removal. Fine(organics,silts and sand Specific Settling Specific Settling Particle Size Distribution Particle Size Distribution Gravity Velocity Gravity Velocity m % ft/s urn % ft/s • 20 20 1.3 0.0013 60 20 1.8 0.0051 10 150 20 2.2 0.0354 400 20 2.65 0.2123 2000 20 2.65 0.9417 . Stormceptor Design Notes Stormceptor performance estimates are based on simulations using PCSWMM for Stormceptor. (� • Design estimates listed are only representative of specific project requirements based on total suspended '• solids(TSS)removal. • • Only the STC 4501 is adaptable to function with a catch basin inlet and/or inline pipes. • Only the Stormceptor models STC 4501 to STC 7200 may accommodate multiple inletpipes. • Inlet and outlet invert elevation differences are as follows: '• Inlet and Outlet Pipe Invert Elevations Differences } Inlet Pipe Configuration STC 4501 STC 900 STC STC 11600 to 72000 STC 16000 Single inlet pipe 3 in. 1 in. 3 in. P Multiple inlet pipes 3 in. 3 in. Only one inlet Pipe. • Design estimates are based on stable site conditions only,after construction is completed. q • Design estimates assume that the storm drain is not submerged during zero flows. For submerged applications, please contact your local Stormceptor representative. • Design estimates may be modified for specific spills controls. Please contact your local Stormceptor representative for further assistance. • For pricing inquiries or assistance,please contact Rinker Materials 1 (800)909-7763 www.rinkerstormceptor.com ,. r� Stormceptor Design Summary-2/2 a t t� • • • Stormceptor® • Stormceptor Design Summary • PCSWMM for Stormceptor • Project Information Rainfall • Date 3/25/2013 Name BOSTON WSFOAP • Project Name Salem Harbor Station State MA Redevelopment • Project Number 127-62117-12001 ID 770 • Location 24 Fort Avenue,Salem MA Years of Records 1948 to 2005 • Designer Information Latitude 42°21'38"N Company Tetra Tech Longitude 71"0'38"W • Contact N/A 1 • Notes Water Quality Objective • WQS-3 - TSS Removal(%) 80 • WQ Flow Rate (cfs) 28.1 • Drainage Area Upstream Storage • Total Area(ac) 6.49 Storage Discharge • -Imperviousness(%) 62.4 (ac-ft) (cfs) • The Stormceptor System model STC.6000 achieves the water quality objective removing 80%TSS for a • - Fine(organics,silts and sand)particle size distribution; • providing continuous positive treatment for a stormwater quality flow rate of 28.1 cfs. Stormceptor Sizing Summary • Stormceptor Model TSS Removal • % • - STC 450i 59 • STC 900 69 STC 1200 69 -STC 1800 69 • STC 2400 74 STC 3600 75 • STC 4800 1 79 • STC 7200 83 STC 11000 86 STC 13000 87 • STC 16000 89 • • • • • • Stormceptor Design Summary- 1/2 • MA • • • • 0 Stormceptor® • • • • Particle Size Distribution • Removing silt particles from runoff ensures that the majority of the pollutants,such as hydrocarbons and heavy • metals that adhere to fine particles,are not discharged into our natural water courses. The table below lists the particle size distribution used to define the annual TSS removal. • Fine(organics,silts and sand - • Specific Settling Specific Settling Gravity Velocity Particle Size Distribution Particle Size Distribution • Gravity Velocity Pm % ft/s Jim % ft/s 20 20 1.3 0.0013 • 60 20 1.8 0.0051 - - 150 20 2.2 0.0354 - - • 400 - 20 2.65 0.2123 • 2000 20 2.65 0.9417 - • • Stormceptor Design Notes • Stormceptor performance estimates are based on simulations using PCSWMM for Stormceptor. • Design estimates listed are only representative of specific project requirements based on total suspended' • solids(TSS)removal • • Only the STC 450i is adaptable to function with a catch basin inlet and/or inline pipes • • Only the Stormceptor models STC 4501 to STC 7200 may accommodate multiple inlet pipes. • Inlet and outlet invert elevation differences are as follows: - • Inlet and Outlet Pipe Invert Elevations Differences - • Inlet Pipe Configuration- STC 4501 - STC 900 to STC STC 11000 to 7200 STC 16000 • Single inlet pipe - 3 in. 1 in. 3 in. Multiple inlet pipes 3 in. 3 in. Only one inlet pipe. • • Design estimates are based on stable site conditions only,after construction is completed. - • • Design estimates assume that the storm drain is not submerged during zero Flows. For submerged applications,please contact your local Stormceptor representative. • • Design estimates maybe modified for specific spills controls. Please contact your local Stormceptor • representative for further assistance, - • - For pricing inquiries or assistance,please contact Rinker Materials 1 (800)909-7763 - • www.dnkerstormceptor.com • • • • • • • Stormceptor Design Summary-2/2 �' • rna ` • • • • • • • Stormceptor • Stormceptor Design Summary • PCSWMM for Stormceptor Project Information Rainfall • Date 3/25/2013 Name BOSTON WSFOAP Project Name Salem Harbor Station Redevelopment State MA - • Project Number 127-62117-12001 ID 770 . Location 24 Fort Avenue,Salem MA Years of Records 1948 to 2005 • Designer Information Latitude 42°21'38"N Company Tetra Tech Longitude 71°0'38"W . Contact N/A • Notes Water Quality Objective • yyQg_q TSS Removal(%) 80 • WO Flow Rate (cfs) 29.5 Drainage Area Upstream Storage • r tal Area(ac) 7.55 Storage Discharge perviousness(%) 55.4 (ac-ft) (cfs) 0 0 • The Stormceptor System model STC 7200 achieves the water quality objective removing 82%TSS for a • Fine(organics,silts and sand)particle size distribution; - - providing continuous positive treatment for a • stormwater quality flow rate of 29.5 cfs. Stormceptor Sizing Summary • Stormceptor Model TSS Removal • % . STC 450i 59 STC 900 69 • - STC 1200 69 • - STC 1800 69 STC 2400 74 STC 3600 74 • STC 4800 79 . STC 6000 79 STC ii 82 • - STC 11000 86 STC 13000 86 • STC 16000 89 • • • • • • Stormceptor Design Summary- 1/2 WTEIUAWLS -�' "' • • • • Stormceptor® • • • Particle Size Distribution • Removing silt particles from runoff ensures that the majority of the pollutants,such as hydrocarbons and heavy metals that adhere to fine particles,are not discharged into our natural water courses. The table below lists the • particle size distribution used to define the annual TSS removal. • Fine(organics,silts and sand Specific Settling Specific Settling Particle Size Distribution Particle Size Distribution . Gravity Velocity Gravity Velocity Pm % ft/s PM % fus 20 20 1.3 0.0013 - +. 60 - 20 1.8 0.0051 150 20 2.2 0.0354 • 400 20 2.65 0.2123 2000 20 2.65 0.9417 • • • Stormceptor Design Notes • • Stormceptor performance estimates are based on simulations using PCSWMM for Stormceptor. • • Design estimates listed are only representative of specific project requirements based on total suspended • solids(TSS)removal. _ • • Only the STC 4501 is adaptable to function with a catch basin inlet and/or inline pipes. • Only the Stormceptor models STC 4501 to STC 7200 may accommodate multiple inlet pipes. • Inlet and outlet invert elevation differences are as follows: • Inlet and Outlet Pipe Invert Elevations Differences • Inlet Pipe Configuration STC 450i STC 900 to STC STC 11000 to _ 7200 STC 16000 • Single inlet pipe 3 in. 1 in. 3 in. • Multiple inlet pipes 3 in. 3 in. Only one inlet pipe. • Design estimates are based on stable site conditions only,after construction is completed. - • Design estimates assume that the storm drain is not submerged during zero Flows. For submerged applications, please contact your local Stormceptor representative. • Design estimates may be modified for specific spills controls. Please contact your local Stormceptor • representative for further assistance. • For pricing inquiries or assistance, please contact Rinker Materials 1 (800)909-7763 • www.rinkerstormceptor.com - • • • • • • • Stormceptor Design Summary-2/2 • NMRAWALS- • • • • • • • Stormceptor® • Stormceptor Design Summary • PCSWMM for Stormceptor • Project Information Rainfall • - Date 3/25/2013 Name BOSTON WSFOAP • Project Name Salem Harbor Station State MA Redevelopment Project Number 127-62117-12001 ID 770 Location- 24 Fort Avenue,Salem MA Years of Records 1948 to 2005 • Designer Information Latitude 42°21'38•N • - Company Tetra Tech Longitude 71°0'38"W Contact N/A - • Notes Water Quality Objective 0 WQS-B TSS Removal (%) 80 WQ Flow Rate (cfs) 135.43 • Drainage Area Upstream Storage • Total Area(ac) 7.14 Storage Discharge • Imperviousness (%) 76.6 (ac-ft) (cfs) • 0 0 • The Stormceptor System model STC 7200 achieves the water quality objective removing 80%TSS for a Fine(organics,silts and sand)particle sine - distribution;providing continuous positive treatment L.. • for astormwaterqualitytiowrate of35.43cis. - • • Stormceptor Sizing Summary • Stormceptor Model TSS Removal % • STC 450i - 55 • - STC 900 66 STC 1200 66 • - STC 1800 66 ' • STC 2400 7.1 STC 3600 72 • STC 4800 76 _ - • - STC 6000 77 STC rr :i • STC 11000 84 STC 13000 84 • - - STC 16000 87 • • • • Stormceptor Design Summary- 1/2 WALS • inn • • • • • Stormceptor® • • • • • • Particle Size Distribution • Removing silt particles from runoff ensures that the majority of the pollutants,such as hydrocarbons and hea metals that adhere to fine particles,are not discharged into our natural watercourses. The table below lists • the particle size distribution used to define the annual TSS removal • Fine or anics,silts and sand - • Specific Settling Specific Settling • Particle Sim Distribution Gravity Velocity Particle Sim Distribution Gravity Velocity Pm % ft/s pm % fus • 20 20 1.3 0.0013 60 20 1.8 0.0051 • 150 20 2.2 0.0354 • 400 20 2.65 0.2123 2000 20 2.65 0.9417 • • • Stormceptor Design Notes • Stormceptor performance estimates are based on simulations using PCSWMMfor Stormceptor. • Design estimates listed are only representative of specific project requirements.based on total suspended solids (TSS)removal • • Onlythe STC 450i is adaptable to function with a catch basin inlet and/or inline pipes. • Onlythe Stormceptor models STC 4501 to STC 7200 mayaccommodate multiple inlet pipes. • Inletand outlet invert elevation differences are as follows: • Inlet and Outlet Pipe Invert Devations Differences Inlet Pipe Configuration STC 4501 STC 900 to STC STC 11000 to - • 7200 STC 16000 • Single inlet pipe 3 in. 1 in. 3 in. Multiple inlet pipes 3 in. 3 in. Only one inlet • pipe. • Design estimates are based on stable site conditions only,after construction is completed. • Design estimates assume thatthe storm drain is not submerged during wro flows. Forsubmerged applications,please contact your local Stormceptor representative. • Design estimates maybe modified for specific spills controls. Please contact your local Storm ceptor • representative for further assistance. • • For pricing inquiries or assistance,please contact Rinker Materials 1 (800)909-7763 www.rinkerstormceptor.com • • Stormceptor Design Summary-212 ��,: • "MATERIALS • • • Stormceptor® • Stormceptor Design Summary PCSWMM for Stormceptor • • Project Information Rainfall • Date 3/25/2013 Name BOSTON WSFO AP Project Name Salem Harbor Station State MA • Redevelopment Project Number 127-62117-12001 ID 770 Location 24 Fort Avenue, Salem MA Years of Records 1948 to 2005 • Designer Information Latitude 42°21'36^N • Company Tetra Tech Longitude 71°0'38"W f Contact N/A Notes Water Quality Objective • WQS_C TSS Removal(%) 80 WQ Flow Rate (cfs) 0.33 • Drainage Area Upstream Storage Total Area(ac) 0.06 Storage Discharge Imperviousness(%) 100 (ac-ft) (cfs) 0 0 j • The Stormceptor System model STC 4501 achieves the water quality objective removing 95%TSS for a Fine • (organics,silts and sand)particle size distribution; providing continuous positive treatment for a • stormwater quality flow rate of 0.33 cfs. • Stormceptor Sizing Summary • • Stormceptor Model TSS Removal • STC 450i • STC 900 97 STC 1200 98 • STC 1800 98 STC 2400 98 • STC 3600 99 STC 4800 99 • STC 6000 99 • STC 7200 99 STC 11000 99 • STC 13000 99 STC 16000 99 • • • • • Stormceptor Design Summary- 1/2 # .k....MATERIALS .. • Stormceptor® s i Particle Size Distribution Removing silt particles from runoff ensures that the majority of the pollutants, such as hydrocarbons and heavy . metals that adhere to fine particles,are not discharged into our natural water courses. The table below lists the particle size distribution used to define the annual TSS removal. Fine(organics,silts and sand Specific Settling Specific Settling '. Particle Size Distribution Particle Size Distribution Gravity Velocity Gravity Velocity m % - ft/s urn % WS 20 20 1.3 0.0013 60 20 1.8 0.0051 150 20 2.2 0.0354 (� 400 20 2.65 0.2123 2000 20 2.65 0.9417 rA Stormceptor Design Notes • Stormceptor performance estimates are based on simulations using PCSWMM for Stormceptor. • Design estimates listed are only representative of specific project requirements based on total suspended o solids(TSS)removal. • Only the STC 450i is adaptable to function with a catch basin inlet and/or inline pipes. • Only the Stormceptor models STC 4501 to STC 7200 may accommodate multiple inlet pipes. • Inlet and outlet invert elevation differences are as follows: Inlet and Outlet Pipe Invert Elevations Differences s Inlet Pipe Configuration STC 4501 STC 900 to STC STC 11000 to7200 STC 16000 `• Single inlet pipe 3 in. 1 in. 3 in. Multiple inlet pipes 3 in. 3 in. Only one inlet pipe. • Design estimates are based on stable site conditions only,after construction is completed. • Design estimates assume that the storm drain is not submerged during zero flows. For submerged applications,please contact your local Stormceptor representative. • Design estimates may be modified for specific spills controls. Please contact your local Stormceptor S representative for further assistance. f� • For pricing inquiries or assistance, please contact Rinker Materials 1 (800)909-7763 www.rinkerstormceptor.com • Stormceptor Design Summary-2/2 iwnrEwats: : ''� i • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • i • i i • • X C ! Q CL • a • • i • • •.y •i • i O • Appendix F TSS Removal Calculations •R, �l ._i I it OJ •.,^ ! o ! ! • 0000IR • 0 • 00000001000 • • 0,! ! 00 ! 0 ? •, 0000i � 0 ! ! • c.. u_, Vr3,S r� .r< TSS Removal Efficiency Calculations Salem Harbor Station Redevelopment, 24 Fort Avenue, Salem, MA BMP C 1) E F TSS Removal Rate Starting TSS Load' Amount Removed(C*D) Remaining Load(D-E) w Deep Sump and Hooded y Catch Basin 0.25 1.00 0.25 0.75 0 3 c Stormceptor 0.75 0.75 0.56 0.19 A u. M 0.00 0.19 0.00 0.19 m 0 E 0.00 0.19 0.00 0.19 U) H 0.00 0.19 0.00 0.19 Total TSS Removal= 81% *Equals remaining load from previous BMP(E)which enters the BMP Notes: 1. In accordance with DEP Standards the MASTEP laboratory study found the Stormceptor STC 900 achieved 75%removal of"Bulk TSS", which MASTEP considers equivalent to suspended sediment concentration(SSC). While this information references the STC 900,the performance of the structures can be scaled upward or downward based on the size of the units, and areas and flows to be treated. These TSS Removal Calculations are representative of the MASTEP 75%removal rate. However,according to the Stormceptor®sizing program based upon independent test data,the Stormceptor®structures specified on the plans will achieve TSS removal rates in excess of 80%. See Appendix E for Water Quality Structure Efficiency Calculations. p:\62117\127-62117-12001\SupportDoa\Cala\Drainage\2013.03.28 TSS Removal Cala 3/29/2013 TSS Removal Efficiency Calculations Salem Harbor Station Redevelopment 24 Fort Avenue,Salem,MA BMP C D E F TSS Removal Rate Starting TSS Load* Amount Removed(C*D) Remaining Load(D-E) d s Stormceptor 0.75 1.00 0.75 0.25 N Y 0 O C 0.00 0.25 0.00 0.25 0 A 0 r j 0.00 0.25 0.00 0.25 A 0 E 0 0.00 0.25 0.00 0.25 y to F- 0.00 0.25 0.00 0.25 Total TSS Removal= 75% *Equals remaining load from previous'BMP(E)which enters the BMP Notes: 1. In accordance with DEP Standards the MASTED laboratory study found the Stormceptor STC 900 achieved 75%removal of"Bulk TSS", which MASTEP considers equivalent to suspended sediment concentration(SSC). While this information references the STC 900,the performance of the structures can be scaled upward or downward based on the size of the units,and areas and flows to be treated. These TSS Removal Calculations are representative of the MASTEP 75%removal rate. However,according to the Stormceptor®sizing program based upon independent test data,the Stormceptor®structures specified.on the plans will achieve TSS removal rates in excess of 80%. See Appendix E for Water Quality Structure Efficiency Calculations. P:\62117\127-62117-12001\SupponDocs\Cala\Drainage\2013.03.28 TSS Removal Calcs 3/29/2013 Overall TSS Removal Calculations Salem Harbor Station Redevelopment 7 24 Fort Avenue,Salem,MA �7 TSS Average -" Impervious Pervious Removal Area TSS Area Area Total Area Rate x Removal ---, Structure (acres) (acres) (acres) (%) TSS Rate BMP Description WQS-1 2.21 2.23 4.44 75% 3.33 Stormceptor(75%) WQS-2 0.35 2.14 2.49 75% 1.87 Stormceptor(75%) WQS-3 4.05 2.44 6.49 75% 4.87 Stormceptor(75%) WQS-A 4.18 3.37 7.55 81% 6.12 Deep Sump Catch Basin(25%)+ Stormceptor(75%) " WQS-B 5.47 1.67 7.14 81% 5,75 Deep Sump Catch Basin(25%)+ • ) Stormceptor(75%) WQS-C 0.06 0.00 0.06 75% 0.05 1 Stormceptor(75%) - 28.17 1 22.01 -78% •_ Notes: 1.In accordance with DEP Standards the MASTEP laboratory study found the Stormceptor STC 900 achieved 75%removal of "1 "Bulk TSS",which MASTEP considers equivalent to suspended sediment concentration(SSC). While this information references the STC 900,the performance of the structures can be scaled upward or downward based on the size of the units, -p and areas and flows to be treated. These TSS Removal Calculations are representative of the MASTEP 75%removal rate. However,according to the Stormceptor®sizing program based upon independent test data,the Stormceptor®structures specified on the plans will achieve TSS removal rates in excess of 80%. See Appendix E for Water Quality Structure Efficiency Calculations. •'i sj 0 �F �9kk �J •, P:\62117\127-62117-12001\SupponDo \Calor\Drainage\2013.03.28_T55_Removal_Calcs 3/29/2013 • • search UMass •.;, - Current User. • `: MASTEP GUEST s • • r I I r I i • Loa On]Registration I Forgot Password I Home Paoe • Test Report Details • Back to Summary Page I Back to Profile Stormceptor::A product from IMBRIUM SYSTEMS CORPORATION • General Information: This laboratory study found the Stormceptor STC 900 achieved 75%removal of"Bulk TSS",which MASTEP considers equivalent to •�.." Suspended Sediment Concentration(SSC).Influent sediment concentrations were slightly higher than the target range for laboratory studies,but removal efficiency was fairly consistent at all levels tested.Several field studies were described in this report.None are TARP •�->' compliant(too few tests),but results remain relatively consistent with lab studies,lending some degree of support to lab results/vendor •_') claims.Tests were performed for three influent TSS target concentrations of 100,200 and 300 mg/L;at various increments of the operating rate(i.e.,25%,SO%,75%, 100%,and 125%).NJDEP weighting factors were applied to the test results to generate weighted • 3 - average removal efficiency.MASTEP Rating 2:This study was conducted according to generally sound scientific principles.Some caveats exist regarding use of the study information. •. Report title — Author Agency conducting study Funding source for study, NJCAT Technology.Verification- New Jersey Corporation for New Jersey Corporation Manufacturer Stormceptor. Advanced Technologies. Advanced Technologies c/o •�:? Stormceptor Corporation - •`d Report date Date system installed Study start date Study end date 09/09/2004 09/09/2004 •..v ---_..__— __ ________. •, Name,location of test site Watershed where test site Mo impervious surface in test Size of BMP drainage area exists watershed (acres)_ • Performance claims statement used for this study: ...-j The Stormceptor@ System Model STC 900 provides 75%"Bulk TSS"removal efficiency(as per NJDEP treatment efficiency calculation methodology)for laboratory simulated stormwater runoff with an average influent concentration of 295 mg/L and an average d50 particle •, size of 97 microns.TSS removal testing was conducted with sediment pre-loaded in the lower chamber to 50%sediment capacity for the STC 900.Note that MASTEP staff considers"Bulk TSS"to be equivalent to SSC. Rating/Verification given by agency conducting study: •,:r' Based on the evaluation of the results from laboratory studies,sufficient data is available to support the Stormceptor@ Claim:The Stormceptor@ System Model STC 900 provides 75%"Bulk TSS"removal efficiency(as per NJDEP treatment efficiency calculation �"y4 methodology)for laboratory simulated stornwater runoff with an average influent concentration of 295 mg/L and an average d50 particle 2 size of 97 microns.TSS removal testing was conducted with sediment pre-loaded in the lower chamber to 50%sediment capacity for the STC 900. t 'I •s- Average annual number of storms in Average annual rainfall at test site Average monthly rainfall during test ' test watershed (inches) period(inches) °70 of total annual rainfall monitored Number of storms that occurred during Number of storm events that were during study study period monitored during the study II �3 Dates,precipitation amounts of storm events occurring Dates of storm events that were monitored during study • during study l Qualifying event minimum storm depth Maximum event recurrence interval Was bypass monitored? • (Inches) (years) i Type am of samples Parameters measured Analytical methods Statistical methods Pollution removal • Type used used efficiency calculation methods • i i • • Return to the Home Page • 2004 University of Massachusetts Amherst.Site Policies.This site is maintained by MaSTEP.Comments to:webmaster. • •T5 • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • '^ nrniinnn � • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • x • v m • CL • Q • • • • • • • • • • • • • OF • x .K •f.Y •.J •�J • •:r. } •�t • Appendix G • Stormwater Operation and Maintenance Plan •r r •a • • • r Stormwater Operations and Maintenance Plan ! r Salem Harbor Station Redevelopment Project 24 Fort Avenue Salem, Massachusetts W ~" April 4, 2013 4 It M; 0 • • W !r !v Table of Contents 1.0 Introduction...................................................................................................................................... 1 1.1 Responsibility..................................................................................................................... I 1.2 Documentation.................................................................................................................... I 2.0 Maintenance Program......................................................................................................................2 2.1 Inspection and Maintenance Frequency and Corrective Measures:....................................2 2.1.1 Drop Inlets/Catch Basins.....................................................................................2 2.1.2 Deep Sump/Hooded Catch Basins........................................................................:2 2.1.3 Stormceptoro Water Quality Structures........................................................... 2 2.1.4 Storm Drain Piping...................................... .........................................................2 0,11 3.0 Stormwater Management Access.....................................................................................................3 4.0 Sample Operation and Maintenance Log.........................................................................................4 • 5.0 Sample Inspection Forms.................................................................................................................4 List of Appendices Appendix A StormceptoroD Maintenance Procedure C. Tetra Tech • • • • 1.0 Introduction • This long-term Stormwater Management System Operations and Maintenance (O&M) Plan, filed with the City of Salem, shall be implemented at the "Salem Harbor Station Redevelopment Project' site at 24 Fort Avenue in Salem, Massachusetts to ensure that the stormwater • management system functions as designed. The owner possesses the primary responsibility for • overseeing and implementing the O&M Plan and assigning a Property Manager who will be . responsible for the proper operation and maintenance of the stormwater management system. In case of transfer of property ownership, future property owners shall be notified of the presence of • the stormwater management system and the requirements.for proper implementation of the O&M • Plan. A blank sample Operation and Maintenance Log and Inspection Forms for tracking • inspections and maintenance of key components of the stormwater management system are • attached for reference. • 1.1 Responsibility The purpose of the stormwater O&M Plan is to ensure inspection of the system,removal of • accumulated sediments, oils, and debris, and implementation of corrective action and record • keeping activities. The below O&M activities will be performed by a Contract Operator for the scope of facilities. The Contract Operator will be a professional engineer or other technical • professional with expertise and experience with storm water management facilities operation and maintenance. • The ongoing responsibility is the Owner, its successors and assigns. Adequate maintenance is • defined in this document as good working condition. • Contact information is provided below: • Owner: Footprint Power Salem Harbor Development LP • Address: 24 Fort Avenue • City, State: Salem,Massachusetts • Contact: George Wilson Telephone: (978) 740-8287 • 1.2 Documentation • An Operation and Maintenance Log and Schedule will be kept on the premises and maintained by the Owner or Property Manager summarizing inspections, maintenance, repairs and any • corrective actions taken. The log will include the date on which each inspection or maintenance • task was performed, a description of the inspection findings or maintenance completed, and the name of the inspector or maintenance personnel performing the task. If a maintenance task • requires the clean-out of any sediments or debris,the location where the sediment and debris was disposed after removal will be indicated. • • • • Tetra Tech • • • 2.0 Maintenance Program The Owner or Property Manager will be responsible for the implementation of the O&M Plan set "4 forth in this document. The Owner or Property Manager will ensure that inspections and record keeping are timely and accurate and that cleaning and maintenance are performed in accordance with the recommended frequency for each stormwater component. The Owner or Property Manager will also be responsible for the maintenance of all drainage components to function as they were designed to. The Operation and Maintenance Log shall include the date and the amount of the last significant storm event in excess of one (1) inch of rain in a 24-hour period, physical conditions of the structures, depth of sediment in structures, evidence of overtopping or debris blockage and maintenance required of each structure. 2.1 Inspection and Maintenance Frequency and Corrective Measures The following areas, facilities and measures will be inspected by the Owner or Property Manager and maintained as specified below. Identified deficiencies will be corrected. Accumulated sediments and debris will be properly handled and disposed of off-site, in accordance with local, ' state, and federal guidelines and regulations. 2.1.1 Drop inlets/Catch Basins � ) The drop inlets/catch basins will be inspected monthly and cleaned quarterly. The drop inlets/ �. catch basins should be clear of any obstruction or debris in order to operate properly. Typical observations that would indicate that drop inlets/catch basins are not functioning properly are: sediment/trash accumulation around the grates, vegetation growth within the structure and >t puddles around the grates after a storm event. Sediments and hydrocarbons will be properly 46% handled and disposed of off-site, in accordance with local, state and federal guidelines and regulations. 2.1.2 Deep Sump/Hooded Catch Basins The deep sump/hooded catch basins will be inspected monthly and cleaned quarterly or when sediment teaches %2 full depth from the invert of the pipe to ensure that the catch basins are '} working in their intended fashion and that they are free of debris. If the basin outlet is designed with a hood to trap floatable materials, check to ensure watertight seal is working. Sediments and hydrocarbons will be properly handled and disposed of off-site, in accordance with local, { state, and federal guidelines and regulations. 2.1.3 Stormceptoro Water Quality Structures �u y Stormceptor water quality structures will be inspected and maintained according to the manufacturer's recommendation. See Appendix A for the Stormceptor Maintenance Procedure. Sediments and hydrocarbons will be properly handled and disposed of off-site, in accordance �i with local, state and federal guidelines and regulations. >s 2.1.4 Storm Drain Piping •g The storm drain piping will be inspected annually and cleaned as necessary. Typical ODI observations that would indicate that the storm drain piping system is not functioning properly �- Tetra Tech 2 � I are: puddles around the drop inlets, catch basins, and deep sump/hooded catch basin grates after • a storm event. Sediments and hydrocarbons will be properly handled and disposed of off-site, in • accordance with local, state and federal guidelines and regulations. 2.1.5 Vegetated Areas • Inspect slopes and embankments early in the growing season to identify active or potential erosion problems. Replant bare areas or areas with sparse growth. Where rill erosion is evident, • armor the area with an appropriate lining or divert the erosive flows to on-site areas able to • withstand the concentrated flows. 3.0 Stormwater Management Access The proposed on-site stormwater management system consists of drop inlets, deep sump catch basins, manholes, and drain pipes. The Owner, their successors and assigns authorizes the City of Salem Conservation Commission to enter the premises to inspect the stormwater management • system. Regarding access to each drain manhole, catch basin and other drainage structure on site, The Owner will accept a condition of approval that allows appropriate City of Salem staff(i.e. City • Engineer, DPW Director, Conservation Commission agent) to enter the site with prior Owner • notification to review any or all parts of the stormwater management system. Tetra Tech • 3 • r 4.0 Sample Operation and Maintenance Log Property Manager/ Contract Operator: ' Date: ❑ Routine ❑ Response to Rainfall Event winches) ❑ Other •''' Structures Date BMP Frequency Inspected Performed Comments Drop Inlets/ Monthly Inspections _I Catch Basins Quarterly Cleaning t •,' Deep Sump Monthly Inspections Catch Basins Quarterly Cleaning 1 Stormceptor Manufacturer's Water Quality Recommendations Structures 'g Storm Drain Annual Inspection Piping Maintenance as necessary Annual Inspection Vegetated Areas Maintenance as necessary 5.0 Sample Inspection Forms Attached are sample individual stormwater management system inspection forms to be filled out by the Owner, Property Manager, or Contract Operator. �1 Tetra Tech �l 4 �i • • DROP INLET / CATCH BASIN INSPECTION FORM • SALEM HARBOR STATION REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS • OWNER: • • PROPERTY MANAGER: • INSPECTED BY: • DATE OF INSPECTION: • • DROP INLET/CATCH BASIN INSPECTED: • Acceptable Needs Work Notes • • FRAME • AND GRATE BED OF MORTAR • • • • • • a OUTLET PIPE • c • N • 3 •U m ti • y DATE OF CLEANING: BY WHOM: • DATE OF REPAIR: BY WHOM: • a • NOTE ANY DISCREPANCIES AND SUGGESTED CORRECTIVE ACTIONS: • U • 0 N N N r • N a • • DEEP SUMP CATCH BASIN INSPECTION FORM SALEM HARBOR STATION REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS OWNER: PROPERTY MANAGER: INSPECTED BY: DATE OF INSPECTION: DEPP SUMP CATCH BASIN INSPECTED: 3 Acceptable Needs Work Notes FRAME AND GRATE BRICK/MORTAR 0 OUTLET f PIPE . OIL HOOD �y vmi a V m n DEPTH OFSEDIMENT N • c U1; f DATE OF CLEANING: BY WHOM: �a DATE OF REPAIR: BY WHOM: OG a -v < NOTE ANY DISCREPANCIES AND SUGGESTED CORRECTIVE ACTIONS: •� U 0 N •.'J N N 0 a L�' • • STORMCEPTOR WATER QUALITY STRUCTURE INSPECTION FORM • • SALEM HARBOR STATION REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT • SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS • OWNER: • • PROPERTY MANAGER: • INSPECTED BY: • • DATE OF INSPECTION: • STORMCEPTORINSPECTED: • Acceptable Needs Work Notes • • • III - �DEPTH ND COVER • • PORT • INLET OUTLET OFDIMENT • m 3 • IL • O • DATE OF CLEANING: BY WHOM: • DATE OF REPAIR: BY WHOM: • n • n a NOTE ANY DISCREPANCIES AND SUGGESTED CORRECTIVE ACTIONS: • U • 0 N • N • r •N_ N a • • •2 � � � � •} � � . •1 � � . . � � . � . . •} . � . W) . > . Of . •} � � � •} � � . 0! . !� *> . @} Appendix A . . S or c Moo Maintenance Procedure ! O} . § � OWN iMR � A � � 3 z �„wA@ f t � S '1 y .r r � • • Owner's Manual Page I . • Stormceptor® Owner's Manual Contents • • 1. Stormceptor Overview • • 2. Stormceptor System Operation • 3. Identification of Stormceptor • • 4. Stormceptor Maintenance Guidelines • 4.1 Recommended Maintenance Procedure • 4.2 Disposal of Trapped;Material from Stormceptor • 5. Recommended Safety Procedures • . 6. Stormceptor Monitoring Protocol • 61 Pollutants to be Monitored • • 6.2 Monitoring Methodology Pa g e. • List of Tables • M b.e1.l ' StormceptorDimensions 4 � Table 2. Stormceptor Capacities 5 • Table 3:. ' Sediment Depths Indicating Required aired Maintenance 5 P Table 4. Monitoring Pollutants 9 • • • List of Figures Figure 1. Single Inlet/Outlet"Disc" Insert In-Line Stormceptor 6 Figure 2. STC 4501 Inlet Stormceptor 6 • • • • • • Rev. 3/2006 • • • • • Rinker Materials www.rinkerstormceptor.com • • • Owner's Manua[ page 2 Thank You! �> We want to thank you for selecting the Stormceptor System to use in your efforts in protecting the environment. Stormceptor is one of the most effective and maintenance friendly storm water quality treatment devices available. If you have any questions regarding the operation and.maintenance of •'' the Stormceptor System,please call your local Rinker Materials representative,or the Stormceptor Information Line at(800) 909-7763. 1. Stormceptor Overview The Stormceptor System is a water quality device used to remove total suspended solids (TSS) and free oil (TPH) from storm water run-off. Stormceptor takes the place of a conventional manhole or inlet structure within a storm drain system. Rinker Materials manufactures the Stormceptor System ' with precast concrete components and a fiberglass disc insert. A fiberglass Stormceptor can also be --' provided for special applications. The Stormceptor System product line consists of four patented designs: • The In-Line (Conventional) Stormceptor,available in eight model sizes ranging from 900 to 7200 gallon storage capacity. •'' 0 An In-Line (Series) Stormceptor is available in three model sizes ranging from 11,000 to 16,000 gallon storage capacity. • The Submerged Stormceptor, an in-line system designed for oil and sediment removal in partially . submerged pipes,available in all models sizes ranging from 4501 to 16,000 gallon storage capacity. • • The Inlet Stormceptor is a 450 gallon unit designed for small drainage areas. 03 Stormceptor removes free oil and suspended solids from storm water preventing hazardous spills and non-point source pollution from entering downstream lakes and rivers. Rinker Materials and its affiliates market and manufacture the Stormceptor System in the United States and Australia. Several • ) thousand Stormceptor Systems have been installed in various locations throughout North America, �. Australia and the Caribbean since 1990. �s In the Stormceptor,a fiberglass insert separates the treatment chamber from the by-pass chamber. The different insert designs are illustrated in Figures 1 and 2. These designs are easily distinguishable :) from the surface once the cover has been removed. There are four versions of the in-line disc insert: single inlet/outlet,multiple inlet,in-line series insert and submerged designs. In the non-submerged"disc" design you will be able to see the inlet pipe,the �s drop pipe opening to the lower chamber,the weir,a 6" oil inspection/cleanout pipe,a large 24" riser pipe opening offset on the outlet side of the structure, and the outlet pipe from the unit. The weir oil will be around the 24" outlet pipe on the multiple inlet disc insert and on large diameter pipe applications. The STC(series) Stonnceptors consist of two chambers comprised of similar fiberglass inserts. These units also contain a 6" oil/inspection cleanout pipe and 24" outlet riser pipes. �. The submerged disc insert has a higher weir and a second inlet drop pipe. In the inlet design you lv will be able to see an inlet drop pipe and an outlet riser pipe as well as a central oil inspection/cleanout port. �-> Rinker Materials www.rinkerstormceptor.com �t • Owner's Manual Page, • • • 2. Stormee to or System Operation • The Stormceptor consists of a lower treatment chamber, which is always full of water,and a by-pass • chamber. Storm water flows into the by-pass chamber via the storm sewer pipe or grated inlet (Inlet • Stormceptor). Normal flows are diverted by a weir and drop pipe arrangement into a treatment chamber. • Water flows up through the submerged outlet pipe based on the head at the inlet weir and is • discharged back into the by-pass chamber downstream of the weir. The treated storm water • continues down stream via the storm sewer system. • Oil and other liquids with a specific gravity less than water rise in the treatment chamber and become • trapped under the fiberglass insert. Sediment will settle to the bottom of the chamber by gravity. The • circular design of the treatment chamber is critical to prevent turbulent eddy currents and to promote • settling. • During infrequent high flow conditions, storm water will by-pass the weir and be conveyed to the • outlet sewer directly. The by-pass is an integral part of the Stormceptor since other oillgrit separators • have been noted to scour during high flow conditions (Schueler and Shepp, 1993). • For further details please refer to The Stormceptor System Technical Manual. • • The key benefits of Stormceptor include: Capable of removing more than 80% of the total sediment load when properly applied as a.source • control for small drainage areas • • Removes free oil from storm water during normal flow conditions • • Will not scour or resuspend trapped pollutants • • Ideal spill control device for commercial and industrial developments • • Vertical orientation facilitates maintenance and inspections • Small foot print • 3. Iden ' cation Qf Stormceptor • All In-Line (including Submerged) Stormceptors are provided with their own frame and cover. The cover has the name STORMCEPTOR clearly embossed on it to allow easy identification.of the unit. The name Stormceptor is not embossed on the inlet models due to the variability of inlet grates • used/approved across North America. You will be able to identify the Inlet Stormceptor by looking • into the grate since the insert will be visible. • Once you have located a unit,there still may be a question as to the size of the unit. Comparing the measured depth from the water level (bottom of insert) to the bottom of the tank with Table 1 should • help determine the size of the unit. • • • • • • Rinker Materials www.rinkerstormceptor.com • • Owner's Manual page 4 Table 1. Stormceptor Dimensions* Model Pipe Invert to Top of Base Slab ' 4501 60" 900 55" 01; 1200 71" "a 1800 105" 2400 94" 3600 134" 4800 128" 6000 150" 7200 134' -' 11000s 128"** �.i 13000s 150"** 16000s 134'** * Depths are approximate s ** Depths per structure Starling in 1996,a metal serial number tag has been affixed to the fiberglass insert. If the unit does not have a serial number,or if there.is any uncertainty regarding the size of the Stormceptor using depth measurements,please contact the Rinker Materials Stormceptor information line at (800) 909-7763 for assistance. 4. Stormcgptor Maintenance Guidelines �.a The performance of all storm water quality measures that rely on sedimentation decreases as they fill with sediment(See Table 2 for Stormceptor capacities). An estimate of performance loss can be made from the relationship between performance and storage volume. Rinker Materials recommends maintenance be performed when the sediment volume in the unit roaches 15% of the total storage. This recommendation is based on several factors: • Sediment removal is easier when removed on a regular basis (as sediment builds up it compacts and solidifies making maintenance more difficult). • Development of a routine maintenance interval helps ensure a regular maintenance schedule is followed. Although the frequency of maintenance will depend on site conditions, it is estimated that annual maintenance will be required for most applications; annual maintenance is a routine occurrence which is easy to plan for and remember. • A minimal performance degradation due to sediment build-up can occur. �y In the event of any hazardous material spill,Rinker Materials recommends maintenance be performed r immediately. Maintenance should be performed by a licensed liquid waste hauler. You should also notify the appropriate regulatory agencies as required. -` Rinker Materials www.rinkerstormceptor.com r Owner's Manual Page 5 • Table 2. Stormceptor Capacities Model Sediment Capacity Oil Capacity Total Holding Capacity fe (L) US gal (L) US gal (L) a 450i 45 (1276) 86 (326) 470 (1779) . 900 75 (2135) 251 (950) 952 (3604) • 1200 113 (3202) 251 (950) 1234 (4671) • 1800 193 (5470) 251 (950) 1833 (6939) 2400 155 (4387) 840 (3180) 2462 (9320) 3600 323 (9134) 840 (3180) 3715 (14063) 4800 465 (13158) 909(3441) 5059 (19150) 6000 609 (17235) 909 (3441) 6136 (23227) 7200 726 (20551) 1059 (4009) 7420 (28088) 11000s 942 (26687) 2797 (10588)* 11194 (42374) • 13000s 1230 (34841) 2797 (10588)* 1 13348 (50528) • 16000s 1470 (41632) 3055 (11564)* 15918 (60256) • * Total both structures combined 4.1 Recommended Maintenance Procedure For the"disc"design,oil is removed through the 6" inspection/cleanout pipe and sediment is removed • through the 24" diameter outlet riser pipe.Alternatively,oil could be removed from the 24" opening • if water is removed from the treatment chamber,lowering the oil level below the drop pipes. The depth of sediment can be measured from the surface of the Stormceptor with a dipstick tube equipped with a ball valve (Sludge Judge®). It is recommended that maintenance be performed once the sediment depth exceeds the guideline values provided in Table 3 for the reasons noted in Section 4.0 Stormceptor Maintenance Guidelines. Table 3. Sediment Depths Indicating Required Maintenance Model Sediment Depth* 4501 8" 200 mm 900 8" (200 mm) 1200 10" (250 mm) 1800 15" 375 mm) • 2400 12" (300 mm) . 3600 17" (425 mm) • 4800 15" (375 mm) 6000 18" (450 mm) 7200 15" 375 mm 11000s 17" 425 mm)** 13000s 20" (500 nim)** 16000s 17" (425 mm)** * Depths are approximate ** In each structure Rinker Materials www.rinkerstormceptor.com Owner's Manual Page 6 No entry into the unit is required for routine maintenance of the Inlet Stormceptor or the smaller �T disc insert models of the In-Line Stormceptor. Entry to the level of the disc insert may be required for servicing the larger disc insert models. Any potential obstructions at the inlet can be observed i` from the surface. The fiberglass insert has been designed as a platform for authorized maintenance personnel in the event that an obstruction needs to be removed. Typically, maintenance is performed by the Vacuum Service Industry,a well established sector of the service industry that cleans underground tanks, sewers,and catch-basins. Costs to clean a Stormceptor will vary based on the size of the unit and transportation distances. If you need assistance for cleaning a Stormceptor unit,contact your local Rinker Materials representative, or the Stormceptor Information Line at(800) 909-7763. Figures 1 and 2 will help illustrate the access point for routine maintenance of Stormceptor. Sediment and oil Oil removal can be removal can be �i�I _ performed by vacuum truck • performed by vacuums through the oil/inspection port Disc Insert �k Concrete Stormceptor WY Figure 1 Single Inlet/Outlet"Disc" Insert 04 In-Line Stormceptor 41) ) Wet Crate •,° oil tort 00 Inlet Insert Removable •_< Tee �% Maintenance .i' Figure 2 STC 4501 • Inlet Stormceptor Rinker Materials www.rinkerstormceptor.com ��i • • Owner's Manual Page 7 • • 4.2 D4posal of Trapped Material from Stormceptor • The requirements for the disposal of material from Stormceptor are similar to that of any other Best • Management Practices (BMP). Local guidelines should be consulted prior to disposal of the separator • contents. • In most areas the sediment,once dewatered,can be disposed of in a sanitary landfill. It is not anticipated that the sediment would be classified as hazardous waste. In some areas,mixing the water with the sediment will create a slurry that can be discharged into a trunk sanitary sewer. In • all disposal options,approval from the disposal facility operator/agency is required. Petroleum • waste products collected in Stormceptor (oil/chemicaUfuel spills) should be removed by a licensed waste management company. • What if I see an oil rainbow or sheen at the Stormceptor outlet? • • With a steady influx of water with high concentrations of oil,a sheen may be noticeable at the Stormceptor outlet. This may occur because a rainbow or sheen can be seen at very small oil concen- • trations (< 10 ppm). Stormceptor will remove over 95% of all free oil and the appearance of a sheen at the outlet with high influent oil concentrations does not mean that the unit is not working to this • level of removal. In addition,if the influent oil is emulsified,,the Stormceptor will not be able to • remove it. The Stormceptor is designed for free oil removal and not emulsified or dissolved oil • conditions. • • 5.0 Recommended Safety Procedures • Rinker Materials strongly recommends that any person who enters a Stormceptor System follow all applicable OSHA regulations for entry in permit required confined spaces, as outlined in 29 CFR 1910.146. A permit required confined space consists of a space that: • • • Is large enough and so configured that an employee can bodily enter and perform assigned work. • Has limited or restricted means for entry and exit. • • Is not designed for continuous employee occupancy. • Contains or has one of the following: • - a potential to contain a hazardous atmosphere. • - a material that has the potential for engulfing an entrant. • - any other recognized serious safety hazard. Storm water and wastewater systems fall under OSHA guidelines for a permit required confined space. Failure to follow OSHA guidelines for entry and work in a permit required confined • space can result in serious injury or death. Please exercise extreme caution and follow appropriate • safety procedures when entering any confined space. • Two square pick holes in the cover vent the Stormceptor, allow for removal of the.cover,and • provide sampling ports for air quality monitoring before the cover is removed. If you must • enter the Stormceptor,please note that if the disc insert inside is wet,it can be slippery. • • Rinker Materials www.rinkerstormceptor.com • • • • • Owner's Manual Page 8 Recognizing that every work site is different, the responsibility for safety falls on the contractor. The contractor must ensure that all employees and subcontractors follow established safety procedures and • OSHA regulations for working in and around permit required confined spaces as well as for any other • safety hazard that may be present on that particular site. • • 6.0 Stormceptor Monitoring Protocol •:r •ws If monitoring of your Stormceptor System is required,we recommend you follow the procedures •' outlined below by the Rinker Materials Stormceptor office. If you have any questions regarding monitoring please contact the Rinker Materials Stormceptor Product Manager at (800) 909-7763. 6.1 Pollutants to be Monitored • r •; Table 4 indicates the pollutants to be monitored during the storm events and the minimum acceptable •", detection limit for each pollutant to be analyzed. Approved federal or state laboratory analysis methodologies are to be used for the analysis. • • ' The optional metals indicated in Table 4 refer to the Resource Conservation Recovery Act and may be •s covered by a generic metals scan. Bacteria monitoring will not be required unless explicitly requested •a elsewhere. •'{ Two sediment samples are to be extracted from the monitored Stormceptor at the end of the study and • analyzed for the particle size distribution and water content. A minimum of 8 U.S. sieve sizes should 94 be used to determine the particle size distribution. Sieves that are used must include,but are not • limited to 35,60, 100, 140, 200,270 and 400. Three clay particle sizes must be analyzed to denote particle sizes between 5 and 25µm. The particle size distributions should be plotted on a standard •`' grain size distribution graph. •r • • • �`' Rinker Materials www.rinkerstarmceptor.com • • Owner's Manual Page 9 • • Table 4. Monitoring Pollutants • Pollutant Minimum • Detection Limit • (MDL) • Total Suspended Solids TSS 5 mg/l Total Phosphorus (P) 0.02 mg/1 • Total K'eldahl Nitrogen TKN 0.1 m /l • Copper (Cu) 0.001 mg/l • Cadmium (Cd) 0.005 mg/l • Lead (Pb) 0.05 mg/l • Zinc (Zn) 0.01 mg/1 • Chromium (Cr) 0.01 mg/1 • Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons (TPH) 1 mg/l Conductivity 0.1 fsmho/cm • Fecal Coliform* 1/100 nil • • Additional Metals (optional) • Arsenic (As) 0.005 mg/l • Barium (Ba) 0.01 mg/l • Mercury (Hg) 0.0005 mg/l • Selenium (Se) 0.005 mg/1 Silver (Ag) 0.01 mg/l • * Only if explicitly requested in Terms of Reference • 6.2 Monitoring Methodolopv The following monitoring protocol should be followed to ensure reasonable monitoring results and • interpretation: • • Monitoring protocols should conform to EPA 40 CFR Part 136. • The EPA guideline of 72 hours dry period prior to a monitoring event should be used. This will ensure that there is sufficient pollutant build-up available for wash-off during the monitored event. • • Flow proportional monitoring must be conducted for the parameters indicated in Table 1. Samples • should be analyzed separately for the first flush versus the remainder of the storm event. • Monitoring need not extend longer than an 8-hour period after the start of the storm event • (composite). • Sediment sampling (measuring the sediment depth in the unit at the beginning and end of the • monitoring period) must be conducted. The water content of the sediment layer must be analyzed • to determine the dry volume of suspended solids. Sediment depth sampling will indicate the rate . of pollution accumulation in the unit, provide confirmation that the unit is not scouring and • confirm the flow proportional monitoring results. A mass balance using the sediment sampling • should be calculated to validate the flow proportional sampling. • • Rinker Materials www.rinkerstormceptor.com • • Owner's Manual Page 10 • Grab sampling (just taking samples at the inlet and outlet) is an unacceptable methodology for W.j testing the performance of the Stormceptor during wet weather conditions unless it is flow weighted(flow weighted composite sample from numerous grab samples) over the entire storm. The oil containment area underneath the insert should be inspected via the vent pipe for dry weather spills capture once a month during the monitoring period since the flow rate of a dry weather spill may not trigger the automated samplers. • A tipping bucket rain gauge should be installed on-site to record the distribution of storm •_:" intensities and rainfall volume during the monitored events. { Results that are within the laboratory error(both inlet and outlet) or are representative of relatively clean water should be discarded. Typical concentrations of pollutants in storm water are: TSS 100 mg/L Total P 0.33 mg/L, TKN 1.50 mg/L Total Cu 34µg/L Total Pb 144µg/L Total Zn 160µg/L A threshold fust flush/composite TSS value of 50 mg/L at the inlet to the Stormceptor should be used -# as the lower limit of an acceptable storm for reporting event efficiency. Monitoring results where the influent TSS concentration is less than 50 mg/L,should only be.used in mass load removal calculations -x over the entire monitoring period with other storms where the influent concentration is greater than 50 mg/L. The results should not be analyzed if the influent TSS concentrations during.all monitored storms are less than 50 mg/L. Storms where the influent TSS concentration is less than 10 mg/L should be discarded from all analyses. • A threshold storm event volume equal to 1.5 times the storage volume of the Stormceptor being monitored should be used as the lower limit of an acceptable storm for monitoring. • Sampling at the outlet of the Stormceptor should be conducted within the 24" outlet riser pipe to �• accurately define event performance. • The personnel monitoring the Stormceptor should record incidental information in a log file. Information such as weather,site conditions, inspection and maintenance information,monitoring equipment failure,etc. provide valuable information that can explain anomalous results. W • Laboratory results of monitored samples should be analyzed within 10 days of being submitted to the lab. • Weekly inspections of the sampling tubes,flow meter,rain gauge,and quality samplers should be 04 conducted to ensure proper operation of the monitoring equipment. Debris and sediment that collects around the sampling intakes should be cleaned after each event. • During the installation of automated quality samplers,care should be exercised to ensure that representative samples will be extracted (placement of intakes,ensuring that tubing is not constricted or crimped). • Sampling should be conducted for a minimum of 6 storms. Ideally 15 storms should be sampled *J if the budget allows. 0-r 0- Rinker Materials www.rinkerstormceptor.com 60 Z • • • • • Call the Stormceptor Information Line • (800-909-7763)for more detailed informa- • tion and test results. • RUw • • • P • _r • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • """""'" • 6560 Langfield Rd.,Bldg.3 • Houston,TX 77092 • Phone: 832-590-5300 Fax: 832-590-5399 • Toll Free: 800-909-7763 • wwwxinkerstormeeptor.com 02006 Rinker Materials Corp. • Rev.312006 • • OO0OOO0O � O0 O O 0 O °0 0 0 O ' 0 ' 0 0 O �O 0 0 0 O 0 0 O 0 O O O 0 0 0 0 O i0 • • • • • • • • • • • • mom (D • • Corporate Headquarters One Grant Street • CY y�-� Framingham, MA 01701-9005 a V UEG www.tetratech.comOl 43 Turner Street Salem,MA 01970 July 25,2013 Julia Knisel, Chair Salem Conservation Commission 120 Washington Street Salem,MA 01970 Re: Salem Harbor Station at 24 Fort Avenue-Notice of Intent—DEP#64-552—Footprint Power Salem Harbor Redevelopment LP, 1140 Route 22 East, Suite 303,Bridgewater,NJ Dear Chairwoman Knisel: Since I am not able to attend this evening's hearing,I should like to offer the following concerns about the above referenced proposal: 1) Is it really a"Redevelopment"project if future development of the entire site will not fit that definition?The project is being presented as a Planned Unit Development,but only the portion of the site on which the power plant will be constructed is currently under scrutiny by the Conservation Commission. Despite that,the percentage of pervious surface of total 60+acres has been deemed high enough to merit the lower"Redevelopment"standard,primarily because the western portion of the site(to the left of the proposed power plant, when looking from the harbor) will be crushed stone, etc., However, testimony at the Planning Board points to this western area being pervious only until the power plant is operational, after which a mostly impervious surface structure will be built.It, therefore,seems to me that the developers are benefiting from incomplete plans by presenting the project as a PUD, but using a time limited phase of the project to attain"Redevelopment" status rather than being judged by the standards applicable to the final use of the entire site. 2) It would seem that a condition for permitting would be plans and funds to cover mitigation of the negative impacts of"500-year"storm surges or other catastrophic events on the local area, especially all flora and fauna. I do not know what would be released from this type of power plant into the air, ground or water if such an event did occur, but am especially concerned about the tank of toxic ammonia. It is very obvious from the tsunamis of recent years that steel storage tanks do no hold up under extreme weather conditions, and leakage of chemicals to the local environment can offer the most long-range challenge to communities hoping to rebuild. 3) 1 believe the Salem Health Agent has wisely advised the Planning Board to require pesticide and rodent control of the project during all phases of demolition and construction.Due to potential damage to the environment from chemicals currently used by the power plant for ground maintenance, I hope the Conservation Commission will require that all products used to control pests, as well as to maintain the grounds,be of the type proven safe to plants and animas. Thank you, in advance, for your consideration of this letter, as well as for all the diligent volunteer efforts you contribute to our community. Sin�ely, ind�J A OTETRATECH July 17, 2013 Re: Salem Harbor Station Redevelopment Project 24 Fort Avenue, Salem, MA 01970 DEP #064-552 Response to Comments Dear Commission Members: The following information represents responses to comments prepared by Commission Member St. Louis entitled Project Review Notes dated July 3, 2013 as well as comments made at the t public hearing of July 11, 2013. Responses to Member St. Louis's Comments: Does the 541,000 SF(12.4 Acres)area of Land Subject to Coastal Storm flowage based on the performed on-the-ground survey? Yes,the 12.4 acres of Land Subject to Coastal Storm Flowage is based on the ground survey. Section 4.2. - States that"Most"plantings will be native, whereas the remainder of the documentation specifies native vegetation. The text should read"most"of the plantings will be native, since there will be non-natives in a few locations. Along the eastern berm facing the harbor we are using some non-natives that are well-suited to handle the salt spray and winds. We're also using some non-natives to stabilize steep slopes at different locations around the berm. Section 5.1. - Specifies that the 30-inch pipe to Outfall 001 will be removed. Please confirm that this pipe will not be abandoned in-place. It is confirmed that the 30-inch pipe to Outfall 001 will be removed. Section 5.2.1.-For what storm event is the 30,000 CF infiltration vault sized. The 30,000 CF chamber is not an infiltration vault but rather a stormwater storage chamber for the roof runoff associated with the main building. The runoff will be used for landscape irrigation. Excess water will discharge to the proposed storm drain system which is sized to handle theJlows from the vault. One Grant Street Framingham,MA 01702 Tel 508.903.2000 Fax 508.903.2001 Section 5.2.4. -The second paragraph is unclear as to whether the stormwater collection system is sized for the 100-year or 25-year storm event. Please clarify. The stormwater collection system(pipe network) is sized for the 25-Year storm event,the collection area is sized to handle the 100 year event. Section 5.3. - Specifies that access roadways will be directed over gravel areas with some runoff recharge. Please clarify how this method complies with Standard 3 in relation to the site characteristics established under Standards 5 and 6 of the Massachusetts Stormwater Management Handbook. As part of the overall stormwater management system,recharge is not being promoted due to potential soil contamination.Additionally,the project is a redevelopment due to the decrease in impervious area of approximately 15 acres,therefore additional recharge is not required. Although no credit is being taken for recharge in these gravel areas,recharge will occur due to the fact that the cover type is pervious.Standard 5 and 6 require specific BMP's for stormwater treatment prior to recharge and discharge to receiving waters. The project complies with Standard 5 because concentrated recharge areas are not proposed within the developed portion of the project which qualifies as a Land Use with Higher Potential Pollutant Load(LUHPPL)- see response to Checklist Standard 4 on page 5 for LUPPHL discussion. The project complies with Standard 6 because the runoff is conveyed and treated through proprietary separators (Stormceptor Water Quality Units-Sized for the I" water quality volume and greater than 80% TSS removal rate) which are an approved stormwater Best Management Practice(BMP)for discharges to a critical area.Refer to Volume 1, Chapter 1,Page 17 of the Massachusetts Stormwater Management Handbook. Section 6, Std. 8—An Erosion/Sediment Control plan should be conditioned to be submitted and approved by the Commission or its Agent prior to construction or demolition. A Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP), including erosion and sediment controls, will be prepared and submitted to the Commission prior to demolition and construction. The proponent accepts this as a Condition of the Order. Section 8.1- Specify Erosion Control Practices around storage areas at the Marine Terminal. Erosion and sediment control practices in the vicinity of the Marine Terminal will be included in the SWPPP and at a minimum, will include sediment perimeter protection such as a compost filter tube or silt sock to prevent the migration of soil into Salem Harbor. Erosion control measures will include ground cover stabilization in areas where equipment will operate between the marine based equipment and upland areas. Section 8.2- Pile support details and calculations shall be prepared by a structural engineer and approved by the Building Commissioner as required. Foundation design details, including pile supported structures, will be prepared by a structural engineer and submitted to the Building Commissioner as required for approval. 2 l J� Section 8.2.1 Relocation of the City's 48-inch main should include stormwater quality improvements where practicable. Reuse of the existing outfall is proposed. The applicant continues to coordinate with the City Engineer regarding the relocation of the existing 48 inch line. Section 9.3.4 - What remaining structures and system components will fall below elevation 14.6?Is there a plan to raise other system components to elevation 16.0 to compensate for anticipated sea rise?Will NGRID raise its components accordingly? Within the remaining southern portion of the site,the area will be regraded slightly to direct stormwater to the stormwater collection area. To the north of the Facility,two areas will be slightly regraded to accommodate new catch basins at existing low points. Within the gabion wall,the facility components will be raised to a minimum elevation of 15.0 feet(roadways and areas between buildings) and maximum elevation ofl6feet(all buildingJloors,crowns of roadways and equipment foundations). The existing NGRID substation varies between elevation 15.3 and 15.7feet, which is similar to the proposed facility. Figure 8—Be revised to denoted new surface stormwater management ponds. Figure 8 is titled—Proposed Facility, Overview of Equipment Arrangement It is only intended to depict mechanical equipment within the 13 acre Facility area.Please refer to Sheet 4104 Grading Drainage and Utility Plan for information on the.new surface stormwater management ponds. The acoustic wall profiles provided in Figure l l and Figure 12 depict a swale at the top of the wall. Please confirm drainage patterns from this area. Supply retaining wall specification and details prior to construction. The swale is located along the outside face along the toe of the gabion wall. The purpose of the swale is to provide a secure perimeter, whereby the grade immediately adjacent to the wall will be lower, thereby eliminating the likelihood of someone scaling the wall and entering the facility. An underdrain system along the back of the wall will tie into the proposed facility stormwater management system. General and Plan Notes: Plan Legend label confuses Salem 100 foot Buffer with Coastal Resource Buffer. Revise accordingly. The legend on Plan Sheets C-102, 4103 and 4104 will be revised accordingly. Where are the snow storage areas located? 3 There are three(3)designated areas on provided on Sheet 4103 located on top of the grassed area above the stormwater vault,the area east of the steam turbine generator building ('identified as structure 10 on the legend);and the area south of the ACC units. Identify all earthwork storage areas.Areas should occur outside the 100 foot buffer zone to Coastal Bank and the FEMA floodplains. Earthwork storage areas will be located by the Contractor throughout the site and tracked on the progress maps as part of the Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan inspections. It is expected that the majority of the material storage will occur within the existing coal pile. Although the pile is located within the 100 foot buffer to the coastal bank, it represents the optimum location in terms of its proximity to the loading/offloading area,and because it contains a perimeter swale and dust suppression system. We respectfully request that the Commission allow the storage of material within the limits of the existing coal pile.In addition, the FEMA flood zone occupies the majority of the project site and the prohibition ofstorage within the flood zone would be impractical. Specify planting plan in western detention area. The stormwater collection area located to the south of the facility is a temporary collection system and no plantings are proposed in this area. The collection area will however be stabilized with loam and seed or another surface stabilization material such as crushed stone as required. AUL locations and remediation activities should be detailed and provided to the commission if occurring within its jurisdiction prior to mitigation activities.A soils management plan should be submitted to the Commission prior to earthwork activities. The AUL location and remediation activity locations ate provided on the attached figure. The soils management plan will be prepared in accordance with all applicable provisions of the MCP and submitted to the Commission prior to earthwork activities. Southeastern detention pond does not show any soil testing. Ponds should be provided with an impervious liner. Pond detail should be provided. The depression located to the northeast of the proposed Facility is not a detention pond,but an existing low point where runoff collects during intense rain events. In order to alleviate this ponding water, a catch basin will be constructed and the grading is proposed to direct runoff to the new basin. Gravel Stormwater Collection Area Section detail specifies geo-textile fabric on undisturbed material. Does that include undisturbed fill? The geotextile fabric is provided to prevent the migration of sediment and fines up through the layer of stone which would compromise the integrity of the holding capacity by clogging the voids. 4 The existing NPDES permit should be provided to the Commission.An updated NPDES permit shall be obtained prior to construction and documented with the Commission as necessary. There are two types ofNPDES permits applicable to the project. One is for operation of the facility under the Multi-Sector General Permit and one for demolition and construction activities(the Construction General Permit)for the disturbance to one or more acres where discharges enter a Water of the U.S. The current facility operates under a Multi-Sector General Permit for operation term discharges. There will be no updates to the existing permit for operations since the plant will no longer discharge pollutants,the applicant will be filing for "No Exposure." As far as the Construction General Permit,once the SWPPP is prepared, the applicant will file a Notice of Intent with the EPA for coverage during demolition and construction activities. A copy of the Notice oflntent will be included in the SWPPP. Please clarify if the current application is for total site work,Phase 1 through Phase 3, or only Phase 1 and demolition? Please provide an itemized breakdown of demolition and construction activities falling under each phase with approximate durations. The current application is for total site work, including Demolition Phases 1 through 3 which is the current expected demolition sequencing. A separate phasing plan for construction will be developed in conjunction with the SWPPP and will include input from the contractor. The itemized breakdown including phases and expected duration for both demolition and construction will be provided in the SWPPPP, a copy of which will be provided to the Commission. Figure 14 of the Notice of Intent included the approximate durations associated with the demolition phasing. Infiltration area technology, StormTrap, details to be provided prior to construction. No infiltration area is proposed in the project. The StormTrap system is a stormwater runoff storage structure that will collect and store roof top runoff to be reused for landscape irrigation.Details will be provided prior to construction. Stormwater Management Report: Appendix A Checklist Standard 3 -Recharge has only been provided to the extent practicable. Revise. Acknowledged,revised checklist page is attached Checklist Standard 4- Treatment BMPS subject to LUHPPL and discharge near critical areas requiring additional pretreatment. 5 Because the project does not include infiltration practices,this standard does not apply. However,the proposed water quality structures treat the 1 inch water quality volume and also provide a TSS removal rate greater than the required(80%). Projects that are classified as LUPPHL's include industrial sectors regulated by the EPA through the NPDES Multi Sector General Program(MSGP). The new facility qualifies under Sector O of the NAIS code(formerly.the SIC) as a LUPPHL and requires coverage under the MSGP. However, the requirement for coverage under the MSGP is only for stormwater runoff coming into contact with an actual area of activity that may generate the higher pollutant load. If it is determined that the pollutant generating activities at the site will not be exposed to precipitation,then the project qualifies for and will file for "No Exposure Certification"under the MSGP. Because the operation of the new facility will eliminate discharges coming into contact with pollutants,additional structural controls are not required per Standard 5. Appendix D Manhole A and Catch basins C,D,E, H;and J have discharge velocities below 2.5 ft/sec. Due to the existing elevation of Outfall 001 the system was designed with a minimum 0.5% slope throughout,therefore affecting the velocities within some of the upper system. Increasing the slope throughout the system to 1% would lower the invert of the Outfall 001 an additional 5 feet resulting in an invert approximately 3 or more feet below mean low tide. The lower discharge velocity in a few upstream pipe segments is preferred over submerging the outfall. Catch basin Subcatchment Area Flow Chart-Total Area unit labels are reversed. Acknowledged,revised page is attached Catch basin Subcatchment Area Flaw Chart-Based on calculation provided,Flow rates potentially exceed catch basin grate capacities at greater than 2.0 cfs. Confirm grate capacity or revise. (Specifically Catch basin O, P, Q). The grate capacity has been confirmed under the low point design condition. These grates are located at the low point of their respective depressions and junction as basin outlets with available storage above. Confirm Water Quality Unit Manufacturer can accommodate invert differences across structure. Invert differences are based upon the manufacturer's structure details and specifications that can accommodate the differences across the structure. Confirm Stormceptor's were sized utilizing manufacturer's software. The sizing of the Stormceptors was based on the manufacture's software. 6 Does StormCAD account for reverse flows?Hydraulic grade line exceeds inlet conditions at several structures. There is no reverse flow in the system due to the presence of tide gates. Were tidal conditions taken into account in the redevelopment's drainage system aside from tide gates? Yes,the system is designed under the spring high-tide condition which represents the worst case condition. Responses to Comments Raised During the Public Hearing of July 11, 2013: Provide additional details on barge rig and boring procedures, including how barge fluids will be controlled. The equipment to be used for the project will be a skid mounted rotary drill rig on a pontoon system. The boring would be completed through the center ofpontoon through an opening. The drilling fluid would be recycled back up inside the casing and discharged to a 45 gallon stilling pan.An intake from the stilling pan would be used to pump the drilling fluid back down the drill string.As soil settles out in the stilling pan, it is removed by hand into buckets or barrels that are then offloaded from the barge and disposed of at the end of the day. The equipment will not operate over the water and all fluids will be contained on the barge. Provide the elevation of the 500-year flood zone within Salem Harbor. According to the Flood Insurance Study,the 500 year flood zone elevation of Salem Harbor is elevation 10.4 feet or 0.4 feet higher than the 100 year flood elevation of l0 feet. Provide a plan showing the location of the monitoring wells and borings performed in conjunction with the site characterization. A plan showing the location of the monitoring and boring wells, entitled"Site Plan with Sample Location"is attached. Very truly yours, 1/U Brian R. Marchetti, P.E. Lisa M. Carrozza CESSWI 'Sr. Project Engineer Sr. Project Manager P\6211T127-62117-12001DOCSUt RTSVOCAL\CONCOMV SPONSE TO MEMBER PH COMMENTS 7-17-I3 MAL.DOCX 7 Previously Closed Releases ll-�lµ_If + �B"NEVffi� �•• ""' PARCEL _ w . r41 p 77 ' .+. sernon_e.e_ •.. � �.-.. __ ��. _. ''_ tea. . ^w+""_ I � I _ter` 'f n.+.eti —U in b,..lu IA Mslin lI-1T8�11�—c s) ®i Footprint Power .. . .. Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection Bureau of Resource Protection - Wetlands Program Checklist for Stormwater Report Checklist (continued) Standard 2: Peak Rate Attenuation ❑ Standard 2 waiver requested because the project is located in land subject to coastal storm flowage and stormwater discharge is to a wetland subject to coastal flooding. ❑ Evaluation provided to determine whether off-site flooding increases during the 100-year 24-hour storm. ® Calculations provided to show that post-development peak discharge rates do not exceed pre- development rates for the 2-year and 10-year 24-hour storms. If evaluation shows that off-site flooding increases during the 100-year 24-hour storm, calculations are also provided to show that post-development peak discharge rates do not exceed pre-development rates for the 100-year 24- hour storm. Standard 3: Recharge (Not Applicable due to Environmental Constraints—Refer to SW Report) ❑ Soil Analysis provided. ❑ Required Recharge Volume calculation provided. ❑ Required Recharge volume reduced through use of the LID site Design Credits. ❑ Sizing the infiltration, BMPs is based on the following method: Check the method used. ❑ Static ❑ Simple Dynamic ❑ Dynamic Field' ❑ Runoff from all impervious areas at the site discharging to the infiltration BMP. ❑ Runoff from all impervious areas at the site is not discharging to the infiltration BMP and calculations are provided showing that the drainage area contributing runoff to the infiltration BMPs is sufficient to generate the required recharge volume. ❑ Recharge BMPs have been sized to infiltrate the Required Recharge Volume. ® Recharge BMPs have been sized to infiltrate the Required Recharge Volume only to the maximum extent practicable for the following reason: ❑ Site is comprised solely of C and D soils and/or bedrock at the land surface ® M.G.L. c. 21E sites pursuant to 310 CMR 40.0000 ❑ Solid Waste Landfill pursuant to 310 CMR 19.000 ® Project is otherwise subject to Stormwater Management Standards only to the maximum extent practicable. ❑ Calculations showing that the infiltration BMPs will drain in 72 hours are provided. ❑ Property includes a M.G.L. c. 21E site or a solid waste landfill and a mounding analysis is included. Checklist for Stonnwater Report.doc•04/01/08 Stormwater Report Checklist•Page 4 of 9 r ' Catch Basin Subcatchment Area Flows-Existing Parking Area and Access Roadway Salem Harbor Station Redevelopment 24 Fort Avenue,Salem,MA Paved Grass ID AREA' C AREA_ C• COMPOSITE C TOTAL AREA TOTAL AREA Q (so.o ft` FACTOR s q.ft ' FACTOR' (sq.ft acres cfs L 81,197 0.9 55,212 0.4 0.70 136,409 3.13 13.1 81,197 0.9 55,212 0.4 0.70 136,409 3.13 13.1 6,306 0.9 0 0.4 0.90 6,306 0.14 0.8 5,244 0.9 0 0.4 0.90 5,244 0.12 0.7 8,163 0.9 36,576 0.4 0.49 44,739 1.03 3.0 2,483 0.9 1 0 0.4 0.90 2,483 0.06 0.3 Notes:` 1.Shaded columns indicate input values. 2.A Rainfall Intensity of 6.0 inches per hour is used for the 25-Year Storm Event 3.Q(cfs)=composite C x rainfall intensity(inches/hr)x total area(acres) P:\62117\127-62117-12001\SupportDom\Calcs\Drainage\2013.03.26_Catch_Basin Subcatcment_Area_Flows.ds 7/17/2013 NONE EEEIllm � , ' N _ _� ■■■ u-Ma � ■ ME m Ali ■■ !■ ■ mm' 1■■■■■ P WAvi'x�.�` y�y�;,� +��,s�_•�-- _.� ��ay� r,.. „ . FIS:., 1p y yV; .Mbr -- ..� ail mamm,' • tl ! - ----"� 11 'w3 �r r' �►..'" ',�'.t.!I���!ice■�i� l`n' f��r�i �f !'i�! :w��� C■■CC■ C® TETRATECH July 9, 2013 City of Salem Salem Conservation Commission Salem City Hall Annex 120 Washington Street Salem, MA 01970 Re: DEP File 064-0552 Notice of Intent Salem Harbor Station Redevelopment Project 24 Fort Avenue Salem, MA Dear Commission Members: Tetra Tech is providing supplemental information regarding work to be added to the Notice of Intent (NOI) filed on June 27, 2013 for the above referenced project. The additional work identified to support the project includes performing two exploratory geotechnical borings within Salem Harbor in the vicinity of the bulkhead and discharge channel. The borings will be performed in support of the design of the final upland location of the reinforced concrete deck for loading/unloading operations shown in the initial filing. Attached is a plan showing the location of the proposed borings and a narrative description of the work. In addition, page 3 of 8 of WPA Form 3 —Notice of Intent has been updated to quantify the temporary impact to Land Under Ocean. We respectfully request that this information be added to the Notice of Intent on file with the Commission. If you have any questions or require additional information,please contact me at 508-903-2048. Very truly yours, Lisa M. Carrozza Senior Project Manager Enclosures: DEP Form page 3 of 8 Narrative and Sketch of Proposed Borings CC: DEP Northeast Regional Office One Grant Street Framingham, MA 01702 Tel 508.903.2000 Fax 508.903.2001 Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection Provided by MaeeDEP: )�'^ Bureau Of Resource Protection -Wetlands lassDEP File Number i / I\n`\ WPA Form 3 - Notice of Intent I Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act M.G.L. c. 1.31, §40 and Document Transaction Number The City of Salem Wetlands Protection and Conservation SALEM Ordinance cityrrown Waterways 3.cubic yards dredged B. Buffer Zone & Resource Area Impacts (temporary & permanent) (cont'd) Resource Area Size of Proposed Alteration Proposed Replacement(if any) d. ❑ Bordering Land Subject to Flooding 1.square feet 2.square feet 3.cubic feet of flood storage lost 4.cubic feet replaced e. ❑ Isolated Land Subject to Flooding 1.square feet 2.cubic feet of flood storage lost 3.cubic feet replaced f. ❑ Riverfront Area 1. Name of Waterway(if available) 2.Width of Riverfront Area (check one): ❑ 25 ft. -Designated Densely Developed Areas only ❑ 100 ft. - New agricultural projects only ❑ 200 ft. -All other projects 3. Total area of Riverfront Area on the site of the proposed project: square feet 4. Proposed alteration of the Riverfront Area: - a.total square feet - - b.square feet within 100 ft. c.square feet between 100 ft.and 200 ft. 6. Has an alternatives analysis been done and is it attached to this NOI? ❑ Yes❑ No 6.Was the lot where the activity is proposed created prior to August 1, 1996? ❑ Yes❑ No 3. ® Coastal Resource Areas: (See 310 CMR 10.25-10.35) Check all that apply below. Attach narrative and supporting documentation describing how the project will meet all performance standards for each of the resource areas altered, including standards requiring consideration of alternative project design or location. Online Users Include your Resource Area Size of Proposed Alteration Proposed Replacement(if any) document transaction number a Z Designated Port Areas Indicate size under Land Under the Ocean, below (provided on your 5.0 receipt page) b. ®. Land.Under the Ocean-. 1.square feet with all supplementary - - information you 2..cubic yards dredged submit to the - - Department. c. ❑ Barrier Beach Indicate size under Coastal Beaches and/or Coastal Dunes below d. ❑ Coastal Beaches 1.square feet - 2.cubic yards beach nourishment wpaforrn3.doc•rev. 11/16/09 - Page 3 of 8 DEP File No.064-0552 Supplemental Notice of Intent Information Salem Harbor Station Redevelopment Project—Exploratory Geotechnical Borings Purpose The purpose of the proposed borings is to better define subsurface conditions in the vicinity of the unloading platform (bulkhead area).The design and location of the unloading platform requires an understanding of the subsurface conditions both inshore and offshore of the bulkhead.The capacity of the existing bulkhead depends on both the inshore and offshore soil properties.The platform design and location will also include global soil stability checks-looking at the strength of the soil in different failure planes through the onshore and offshore soil profiles. Description of Work -The borings will be completed from a deck barge utilizing standard onshore boring equipment. The boring rig is typically loaded onto the barge using a crane;although truck mounted boring rigs could be driven onto a barge. Spud piles will be utilized to hold the barge in place during drilling operations. The barge will be maneuvered to the project site from an offsite staging area with a tug boat. f 14 WJ F -w Photograph 1 -Typical Barge and Drilling Rig Setup Two(2) offshore borings(location shown on the attached drawing) are proposed.The water depth at the boring locations is anticipated to be approximately 20 feet(at mean low water).We anticipate approximately 50 feet of overburden above the bedrock.The soil will be sampled at 5 foot intervals in accordance with industry practice in order to obtain engineering properties.Approximately 30 feet of bedrock will be cored to obtain the engineering properties of the rock. The borings will be cased to the mudline to allow for the return of the drilling fluid and soil,into a storage/ recirculating system on the barge. The casing will be progressively lowered into the boring hole as needed to maintain the stability of the hole.Casing pipe is typically on the order of 4 inches diameter.The drill rad will be run inside of the casing and is typically 2 to 3 inches in diameter. A split spoon sampler(SPT) is used for standard soil sampling.A rock coring bit will be utilized to sample the bedrock. Soil samples collected during the boring program will be laboratory tested to determine engineering properties. Temporary Impact to Land Under Ocean Soiling boring and associated activities are minimally invasive,creating de minimis,short term impacts to bottom substrate and water quality. For example,the listing of soil boring activities in the USACE Nationwide Permit Program indicates that, in general,they do not create individual or cumulative adverse environmental impacts that should be more closely regulated. We understand that activities that are included in the Nationwide Permit Program have been afforded a comprehensive review under the National Environmental Policy Act and coordinated with coastal states. The total temporary impact area will be approximately 5 square feet. Measures to avoid re-suspension of sediment Suspended sediment generated from the boring operation will be contained within the casing.The boring equipment will utilize a recirculating system for the drilling fluid to prevent discharge of drilling fluid or cuttings to surface waters. All fluids and sediment will be contained on the barge and disposed of at an appropriate off site upland location. Duration of work Each boring will typically take approximately 1 day to complete.With mobilization and demobilization and an allowance for potential delays,a 1 week time frame should be anticipated. Borings are tentatively scheduled for the August/September time frame. / ll{ A\V NY NNN NP + \ 1 0000 PROPOSED PROPOSED PILE 20�50' STEEL RTED _ \ Oe FRAMED RAMP CONC�P PLATFORM Z 6H-2 0 'Ramp will be attaphetl by a hinged mnnectian at bulKNeatl. The ramp ' •.' Q W BH._ will remain in place for Uum intlusMal uses. n ` 707779{/� 1 PRELIMINARY RESULTS D 3D 6D PT \ SCALE 1.-30•-0. �y,�l SALEM HARBOR STATION C•:uWlvb V\/�I cm SKETCH NO. GENERAL PLAN SK-01 1ON. Jtr Ge /d r � : F — IIIA{fIIStI S ISpy, r� � y 11 r.' = � I r ; I�.n � \ _� 1R 1:>i.iY y,= u1WYu.i�. .. *a..� 1 i G::TT• ' �1t� J IS k•' � � � 8 '� �I, µi IIr� r y 'W ' E - � — t• I �.. �'�� +�5� ��� i,'Ir"r �� ' t ® r � �1 } "�'�lu�-r, ■ — ...., mrz— _ ' ` �1,; -✓ ..� •-P4 I T#F1 F:_•— { I'Ils «°' -._ ; {('�'t 1- y �'`' �, fill "•-'r 1 -�--'",�I_,r'"�� ¢$� �_L1� I>��,371�' 1�T l ��� �I�k9��111 . tI�Y's� .�.� ' �INII! !; ra --�--� - __ � � � Ai r i� �' ��. �iII y_e'��f�t1���11��{ S�iii •x f ' ��' wr i .L.I ! . aF _ _ _ ,_ �; ,, • _ ; -- I Al 4 Salem Conservation Commission Review Notes Member Gregory M. St. Louis, PE, LEED AP BD+C Re: Salem Harbor Station Redevelopment Project Project Review Notes: July 3,2013 Salem Harbor Station Redevelopment Project Initial review comments. *Please provide a copy of any previous peer review materials. NOI Application Package • Does the 541,000 SF(t2.4 Acres) area of Land Subject to Coastal Storm flowage based on the performed on-the-ground survey? • Section 4.2. - States that "Most" plantings will be native, where as the remainder of the documentation specifies native vegetation. Please clarify. • Section 5.1. - Specifies that the 30-inch pipe to Outfalls 001 will be removed. Please confirm that this pipe will not be abandoned in-place. • ,. Section 5.2.1. - For what storm event is the 30,000 CF infiltration vault sized. • Section 5.2.4. - The second paragraph is unclear as to weather the stormwater collection system is sized for the 100-year or 25-year storm event. Please clarify. • Section 5.3. - Specifies that access roadways will be directed over gravel areas with some runoff recharge. Please clarify how this method complies with Standard 3 in relation to the site characteristics established under Standards 5 and 6 of the Massachusetts Stormwater Management Handbook. • Section 6, Std.8 - An Erosion/Sediment Control plan should be conditioned to be submitted and approved by the Commission or its Agent prior to construction or demolition. • Section 8.1. - Specify Erosion Control practices around storage areas at the Marine Terminal. • Section 8.2. - Pile support details and calculation shall be prepared by a structural engineer and approved by the Building Commissioner as required. • Section 8.2.1 - Relocation of the City's 48-inch main should include stormwater quality improvements where practicable. Reuse of the existing outfall is proposed. • Section 9.3.4 - What remaining structures and system components will fall below elevation 14.6? Is there a plan to raise other system components to elevation 16.0 to compensated for anticipated sea rise? Will NGRID raise its components accordingly? • Figure 8- Be revised to denoted new surface stormwater management ponds. • The acoustic wall profiles provided in Figure 1 l and Figure 12 depict a swale at the top of the wall. Please confirm drainage patterns from this area. Supply retaining wall specification and details prior to construction. General and Plan Notes: • Plan Legend label confuses Salem 100 foot Buffer with Coastal Resource Buffer. Revise accordingly. 6 Where are the snow storage areas located? Salem Conservation Commission Review Notes Member Gregory M. St. Louis, PE, LEED AP BD+C Re: Salem Harbor Station Redevelopment Project • Identify all earthwork storage areas. Areas should occur outside the 100 foot buffer zone to Coastal Bank and the FEMA floodplains. • Specify planting plan in western detention area. • AUL locations and remediation activities should be detailed and provided to the commission if occurring within its jurisdiction prior to mitigation activities. A soils management plan should be submitted to the Commission prior to earthwork activities. • Southeastern detention pond does not show any soil testing. Ponds should be provided with an impervious liner. Pond detail should be provided. • Gravel Stormwater Collection Area Section detail specifies geo-textile fabric on undisturbed material. Does that include undisturbed fill? • The existing NPDES permit should be provided to the Commission. An updated NPDES permit shall be obtained prior to construction and documented with the Commission as necessary. • Please clarify if the current application is for total site work, Phase I through Phase 3, or only Phase 1 and demolition? Please provide an itemized breakdown of demolition and construction activities falling under each phase with approximate durations. • Infiltration area technology, StormTrap, details to be provided prior to construction. Stormwater Management Report: Appendix A • Checklist Standard 3 - Recharge has only been provided to the extent practicable. Revise. • Checklist Standard 4 - Treatment BMPS subject to LUHPPL and discharge near critical areas requiring additional pretreatment. Appendix D • Manhole A and Catch basins C, D, E, H, and J have discharge velocities below 2.5 ft/sec. • Catch basin Subcatchment Area Flow Chart - Total Area units labels are reversed. • Catch basin Subcatchment Area Flow Chart - Based on calculation provided, Flow rates potentially exceed catch basin grate capacities at greater then 2.0 cfs. Confirm grate capacity or revise. (Specifically Catch basin O, P, Q • Confirm Water Quality Unit Manufacturer can accommodate invert differences across structure. • Confirm Stormceptor's were sized utilizing manufacturer's software. • Does StormCAD account for reverse flows? Hydraulic gradeline exceeds inlet conditions at several structures. • Were tidal conditions taken into account in the redevelopment's drainage system aside from tide gates? Massachusetts Department of Environmental ProtectionProvided by MassDEP:<< Bureau of Resource Protection -Wetlands MassDEP File Num bar WPA Form 3 - Notice of Intent L11 . Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act M.G.L. c. 131, §40 and Document TransactionNumbe The City of Salem Wetlands Protection and Conservation SALEM Ordinance Cityrrown E. Fees 1. ❑ Fee Exempt: No filing fee shall be assessed for projects of any city, town, county, or district of the Commonwealth, federally recognized Indian tribe housing authority, municipal housing authority, or the Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority. Applicants must submit the following information (in addition to pages 1 and 2 of the NOI Wetland Fee Transmittal Form) to confirm fee payment: 1093 June 7, 2013 2. Municipal Check Number 3.Check date 1094 June 7, 2013 4.State Check Number 5.Check date Footprint Power Salem Harbor Devl LP 6. Payor name on check:First Name 7.Payor name on check:Last Name F. Signatures and Submittal Requirements I hereby certify under the penalties of perjury that the foregoing Notice of Intent and accompanying plans, documents, and supporting data are true and complete to the best of my knowledge. I understand that the Conservation Commission will place notification of this Notice in a local newspaper at the expense of the applicant in accordance with the wetlands regulations, 310 CMR 10.05(5)(a). further certify under penalties of perjury that all abutters were notified of this application, pursuant to the requirements of M.G.L. c. 131, §40. Notice must be made by Certificate of Mailing or in writing by hand delivery or certified mail (return receipt requested)to all abutters within 100 feet of the property line of the project location. Footprint Power Salem Harbor Development LP By Footpliw SH DevCo GP LLC, its General Partner By Scott2. Date lican' Footprint Power Salem Harbor Real Estate LP By Footprint Power SH RealCo GP LLC, its General Partner By Scott SiIv (Mein, Presiden COO _ �i 3. fthat&06f Properly CpWer(ifdifferent) 4. Date 5.Signature of Representative(if any) 6. Date For Conservation Commission: Two copies of the completed Notice of Intent(Form 3), including supporting plans and documents, two copies of the NOI Wetland Fee Transmittal Form, and the city/town fee payment, to the Conservation Commission by certified mail or hand delivery. For MassDEP: One copy of the completed Notice of Intent(Form 3), including supporting plans and documents, one copy of the NOI Wetland Fee Transmittal Form, and a copy of the state fee payment to the MassDEP Regional Office (see Instructions) by certified mail or hand delivery. wpaform3.doc•rev. 11/16/09 Page 8 of 8 MA DEP http://public.dep.state.ma.us/wetland/wetland.aspx Public Access to Wetland Notices of Intent Search Criteria:Irlstrmtions Region: Find Your Reaion eDEP: File Notices and Orders Online -City/Town: SALEM Start Date:.6/11/2010 End Date:;7/11/2013 v Results per page:5 Ea - .n ;Search' e.Clear The search returned 53,...14.).OIsplarng 100 records per page. _ NDN File p Filing I alowlassints licenl'e Location Gprmlmnv ReglQn Tons, Commends Dale n aA Namre Last Nene .�, POWERSALEM NO Comments 4 M52 611]2013 SCOTT SILVERSTEIN 24 FORT FOOTPRINT NE SALEM AVENUE HARBOR . rDEVELOP ENT LP -0551 OW N711/2013 DAVID KNOWLTON COMMERCIAL CITY OF SALEM NE SALEM STREET ENGREERWG Under Review DEPARTMENT 0 DAVID004,146 AN._.-._ 0&0550 51312a13 DAVID KNOWLTON 144,146 AND CRY OF SALEM PE SALEM 48 MA NO CPmnenb ROAD ROAD 064 M49 VIN2013 AMANDA WAY& OSBORNE KILL PE SALEM OSBORNE HILL REALTYTRUST Under Review DRIVE 0840548 3/152013 GING CNSIRLO 6CHAMPLNN NE SALEM WGomrenU ROAD 0640547 31142013 MICHAEL HAMARD SO&64 GROVE MRM PROJECT NE SALEM Comments vera a..led t0 ST.a IAS MANAGEMENT Conservation Comenbn on HARMONY LLC VW13 as may were too GROVE RD. ecn iveropost in WIRE 084-0546 1222013 ANDREW BRENNAN 252BRIDGE MBTA NE SALEM Th.erorrrteter narrative STREET Ratesa'etormcepbr-ryPe system'b proposed.Hoverer, to TSS chars aM derail in the report notes a StomcepWr (STC)11 NO,but Me manufacturer a information an the oWving page is for a STC 9006 PK clearly,The proponent Is gNing themselves 2%TSS removal credit for sheat avesping for 3 different trucips,lea fund method.. Table OW21n the Skm rrler Report notes that it a high efficiency vacuum syeeper used the frequency of cleanings can be retluced b onceqdo*,Plwse nate the TSS credits in Out 2,Oh I,pg 190f the$mrmmebr Handbaak.The TES then should be revised N ragect Mb It is not clear how the contraatlons for the to, qualityvolurreves done.Wr t b the almunt oNltpalvious area befog proposed?The O&M Pon should Include vow storage areas.VNB cannot dommarea an-site unlit the Important has obtained a Ch 91 License. 064-0545 9/172012 ROBERT DUN1AM 631/2 RTD NOMINEE NE SALEM AroWofthestornrebr JEFFERSON REALTYTRUST report yea ml IncludedIm AVENUE MasSDEP'9 N01.Therefore no mmrenb era provided. _____ 6666_.-......... 0605—.— .._.___- ___-. ____-- _...._.5666.. ..._._._...._5556 OW 0544 9IN2012 KIMBERLEY ORI$OOLL 2W 305 CrY OF SALEM NE SALEM Anplica trust meet BRIDGE performance standards for STREET BLSF ._.._ 0640543 829/2012 SUSAN MCARTHUR BRIDGE MASSACHUSETTS h£ SALEM STREET OEPARTMENI NO Comments TRANSPORTATION HIGHWAYDIVSKIN .. 064-0542 7/20/2012 ERIC PALM 10 DEN II REALTY NE SALEM JEFFERSON TRUST NO Comments AVENJE 0_6_4--05461 7I18/2012206KIMB ERLE Y O_RBGOU-666_ 297-305 CITY OF SALEM tJ= SALEM BRIDGE NJ Commenb STREET 064-0Sd0 ]/5/2012 24-jm s DONALD3 <JE SALEM STREET/281 GI-ARKEREAL DERBY STREET ESTATE/SOUTH NO Comments HARBOR HOLDINGS LLC 0660539 7/52012 S=BVENlJE M THENORTHPE SALEM claim Bion aystarmirvaly4 AVENUE THE NORTH AL aUImtionO'k TSS sieve only CENTER,NC. debined Wth a pmetreatnent devbe.There dpplieant cannot claim and additgnal TSS I of 7/11/2013 1:21 PM f SERAFINI, DARLING & CORRENTI, LLP ATTORNEYS AT LAW 63 FEDERAL STREET SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS 01970 i JOHN R. SERAFINI. SR. TELEPHONE JOHN E. DARLING 978-744-OaI2 JOSEPH C. CORRENTI FACSIMILE 978-741-4683 July 31, 2013 VIA HAND DELIVERY Tom Devine, Agent City of Salem Conservation Commission 120 Washington Street Salem, Massachusetts 01970 Re: Footprint Power Salem Harbor Development LP 24 Fort Avenue Dear Tom: In connection with the above referenced matter, can you please provide us with certified copies of the approved Meeting Minutes for each meeting of the Conservation Commission on July 11, 2013 and July 25, 2013. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to call me. Very truly your , J septi C. Corr ti