HomeMy WebLinkAboutFeasibility Study
~ "
I
I
I
1-.
1
I'
I '
I
1
],
1/
1:.
r
1 '
J!
1
J
l
"
J
'~ '
\, '
J
7!
:'
"
jJ
"August3, 2005
" ,
, ,
, "
.'tECEI\I~I.] "
'" AUG 1 6 2005 "
" "
'City- of Meridian
, CityÇlerk -Office -
, " , "',' ""', '"" ",
, ,Eeasì bility Study
N"""'b"'R""""."""""C""¡'l'
,,' .Ortavlnee
Ada County Lal1dfìJl
," , ,', "". "',-," ,'Prepared for
," Ada Coup.ty Solid Waste ManageméntI)epartl11ent ,"
200 West FrpntStreef ,
Boise, Idaho: 83702
Prepared by
" .-
" " .. ,,(I!ltHl
Riley, Park,' Hayden and Associates
\
¡
j
F easibili ty Study
North Ravine Cell
Ada County Landfill
)
i
J
Prepared for
Ada County Solid Waste Management Department
200 West Front Street
Boise, Idaho 83702
Kenneth S. Obenauf, P.E.
Prepared by:
August 3,2005
[1~ltHj
Riley, Park, Hayden and Associates
2
Owner's Criteria
North Ravine Cell
- 1 -
August 3, 2005
Ada County Landfill
Contents
""
!
3.
4.
5.
6.
Section Page
1. Introduction..........................................."""""""""""""""""""""""""""................1
1.1. Purpose of Feasibility Study.......... ..................................................................... 1
1.2. Additional Information.......... ............ ................................................................. 2
2. Background................................................................................................................. 2
2.1. .. Overview of Landfill Operations.................................... """""""""""""""""" 2
2.2. History of Ada County Landfill Property........................................................... 2
2.3. Board of County Commissioners Decision Process ........................................... 4
2.4. Permitting and Design Documents """""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""", 5
2.4.1. Site Certification Report "'..........................................................................5
2.4.2. Preliminary Design Report """""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""", 7
2.4.3. Conditional Use Permit...............................................................................7
Capital Cost................................................................................................................8
Operations Cost............................:............................................................................. 8
Life Span.....................................................................................................................8
References.. .... ... .... .... ...... ............ ..................... ......................... ...... ........................ .... 9
',"
i
, I
j
j
Figures and Drawings
Location Map
Existing Facilities Plan
Master Site Plan
Cell Staging Plan
Following Text
Tables Following Figures and Drawings
Table 1 - North Ravine Cell, Capital Cost
Table 2 - North Ravine Cell, Operational Cost
Table 3 - North Ravine Cell, Life Cycle Analysis
j
Feasibility Study
North Ravine Cell
August3,2005
Ada County Landfill
1.
INTRODUCTION
, '1,
The Ada County Solid Waste Management Department operates the Hidden Hollow
Landfill Cell (HHLF Cell) located just north of the Boise City limits (see Figure I
location map) on Seamans Gulch Road.
I
The existing HHLF Cell will would reach maximum capacity by 2009 or 2010 if
additional landfill capacity is not developed. Beyond 2007, efficiency will decrease
because the HHLF Cell's working area will rapidly diminish as the Cell is filled closer to
the final design limits. This crowded condition will make it more difficult to effectively
handle landfill waste hauling traffic. In response to the need for more landfill capacity,
, the Board of Ada County Commissioners determined that developing a new Municipal
Solid Waste (MSW) Landfill cell within the current Ada County Landfill property is the
most prudent approach to meet Ada County's waste disposal needs in the future. As
envisioned, the new cell will begin receiving part of the waste stream in 2007. The new
cell, designated the North Ravine Cell (NRC), will have a capacity of approximately 70
million cubic yards which will meet all of Ada County's MSW needs for approximately
100 years.
)
ì
\
"
1.1. Purpose of Feasibility Study
Title 31, Chapter 44 of the Idaho Code contains the following requirements for Solid
Waste Disposal Sites (emphasis added):
31-4407 A. (2) Whenever a county shall propose the establishment of a new solid
waste processing/acility within the boundaries o/the county or in conjunction with
adjoining counties, it shall give notice to all municipalities within its boundaries that
it intends to establish a processing/acility. In conjunction with the notice, the county
shall provide a copy of a feasibility study prepared by a licensed professional
engineer concerning the proposed processing facility which shall address the
estimated capital cost of the facility, estimated costs of operation of the facility, and
the estimated life span of the facility. The notice shall be provided to potentially
affected municipalities at least one hundred eighty (180) days prior to the scheduled
initiation of construction of any solid waste processing facility.
This document thus presents the feasibility study identified in the Idaho statures and
contains the following three major items:
a) Estimated capital cost of the facility (Section 3)
b) Estimated cost of operation of the facility (Section 4)
c) Estimated life span of the facility (Section 5)
The Idaho statutes continue with directions to the municipalities:
31~4407A (3) Within ninety (90) days of receipt of the notice, each affected
municipality shall respond to the notice provided by the county, indicating in its
response the intention of the municipality to participate in the use of the proposed
I
Feasibility Study
North Ravine Cell
August 3. 2005
Ada County Landfill
--,
facility or to develop or continue operation of an independent solid waste processing
facility of its own for the projected duration of the proposed county project.
,
i
Therefore, this Feasibility Study will be submitted with a notice from the Board of Ada
County Commissioners and each municipality has 90 days to respond with their
intentions concerning participation in the use of the NRC Municipal Solid Waste
Disposal Facility.
1.2.
Additional Information
In addition to the three basic requirements specified in the Idaho Code for a Feasibility
Study, some background information is included in Section 2 to describe the overall
County MSW program operations, the history of property needs for Landfill operations,
and the decision process undertaken by the Board of Ada County Commissioners to
determine if, when, and where a new MSW cell should be constructed. Also included in
Section 2 is a summary of the design documents and permit applications submitted to the
appropriate regulatory agencies to date.
2.
BACKGROUND
!
i
;1
2.1. Overview of Landfill Operations
The Ada County Landfill, managed by the Ada County Solid Waste Management
Department, provides MSW disposal services for Ada County residences, businesses, and
institutions. Other than waste generated at the Bogus Basin Recreation Area, out-of-
county MSW is not accepted at the landfill. The landfill served more than 200,000
customer loads in 2004, two-thirds of which were from individuals hauling their own
waste or from small businesses doing construction-site clean-up. The remaining third
came from commercial trash haulers. A total of 1,716,000 cubic yards of waste was
delivered to the Ada County Landfill in 2004. In addition to MSW landfilling, Ada
County Solid Waste Management Department is responsible for many waste recycling
programs available to all County residents, and closely coordinates solid waste
management and recycling programs with city programs.
Ada County landfill operations include numerous diversion and recycling programs to
reduce landfilling and promote recycling, and to eliminate potentially hazardous
substances from being landfilled. Wastes handled in these programs include waste oil,
batteries, refi.-igeration units, cathode ray tubes ("picture tubes" in television and
computer monitors), paints, fluorescent lights, tires, and wood wastes. The Ada County
landfill facilities are used to process and handle city-sponsored household hazardous
waste collection events held in Boise, Eagle, Kuna, and Meridian. The waste diversion
and recycling programs diverted more than 60 million pounds of waste from the landfill
in 2004.
'.'
2.2. History of Ada County Landfill Property
Ada County opened the current HHLF Cell on 240 acres of leased property in 1972. In
1984 Ada County purchased the leased property and an additional 2,000 acres
(approximately) of surrounding property to provide a buffer zone for landfill operations
2
t
:i
,
1
'I
-'.
Feasibility Study
North Ravine Cell
August 3, 2005
Ada County Landfill
and space for future MSW landfill capacity. Additional property purchases since 1984
have added to the Ada County Landfill property area. Currently, the Ada County Landfill
Property includes approximately 2,700 acres. The current Ada County Landfill, including
the HHLF Cell, facilities, and supporting infrastructure, is shown in Drawing, Existing
Facilities Plan.
Key facilities at the Ada County Landfill include the following:
. The HHLF Cell is a 1l0-acre landfill cell with an estimated total capacity of
16,000,000 cubic yards. By July 2005, the estimated remaining capacity will be
approximately 3,000,000 cubic yards.
.
The HHLF closure facilities include 46 acres of the HHLF Cell completed to final
grade and closed (Phase 1 closure). The closure project includes the final
evapotranspiration (ET) cover planted with native vegetation, a landfill gas (LPG)
extraction and collection system, and LPG flares to bum extracted LFG. A second
closure phase to complete the remainder of the HHLF Cell is planned for
approximately 2012.
Landfill entrance facilities include the office, cashier booths, and the main access
road off Seamans Gulch Road that provides customer access to the landfill.
.
The Household Hazardous Materials Collection Facility provides for collection,
diversion, and processing of household hazardous materials.
. The Soil borrow area is where the County obtains soil to bury the waste at the end
of each operating day and for soil used for other landfill operations.
.
The Ada County Landfill property also includes the following:
.
An Office/warehouse complex located off of Goose Creek Road. The complex is
used by Ada County and portions may be leased to private companies.
The Sheriff's Shooting Range is located at the far east end of the Goose Creek
drainage. The property is used by the Ada COlUlty Sheriff's Department which
operates a firearms training facility for law enforcement officers. This facility will be
relocated with the development of the NRe.
.
.
The Eagle Skate Park is located off Horseshoe Bend Road. The park facilities are
maintained by the City of Eagle; however, Ada County owns the land.
The Ridge to Rivers Trail Development Area is located on 200 acres in the southern
tip of the Landfill property, east of Seamans Gulch Road. To date, approximately 2.5
miles of trails have been established on this portion of the property which overlooks
the Boise Valley.
.
During 2005, Ada County acquired an SO-acre privately owned parcel located along the
northern property line. The county is also in the process of acquiring a 7-acre privately
owned parcel located in the Goose Creek drainage that is surrounded by Ada County
landfill property. The Ada County Highway District (ACHD) owns a 15-acre parcel off
Goose Creek Road that it uses for gravel storage and road work support. The Drawing,
3
Feasibility Study
North Ravine Cell
August 3, 2005
Ada County Landfill
1
,)
Master Site Plan, presents the proposed North Ravine Cell limits, supporting facilities,
and individual properties identified above.
Î
,
2.3. Board of County Commissioners Decision Process
In early 2003, the Board of Ada County Commissioners began considering options and
plans for providing future MSW disposal capacity for Ada County. In July 2003, the
Board decided that a fresh look at the range ofMSW disposal options and public
participation were needed to assist the Board in selecting the best option for Ada County.
In response to the Board's directive, Ada County's Solid Waste Management
Deparhnent prepared a public participation plan and decision process to evaluate future
disposal options to help select the option that would best serve the County's future
MSW disposal needs.
The public participation plan and decision process were conducted over a 7~month period
from September 2003 through March 2004. Nine open houses were held. The public
participation plan also included a comprehensive plan to involve interested individuals,
community groups, cities, local communities, businesses, institutions, public officials,
and various associations.
During the process to identify options for increasing Ada County's solid waste disposal
capacity, community members and business people shared many ideas and concerns
about future solid waste management planning. More than 200 public comments were
received and considered by the Board. As a result ofthe community's input,
considerations to improve and enhance future solid waste management planning and the
landfill expansion project were identified.
The four solid waste disposal options were:
.
OptionA: Landfill in Idaho (Not owned by Ada County)
Option B: New Landfill in Idaho (Owned by Ada County)
Option C: New Landfill at Hidden Hollow Sanitary Landfill (Owned by Ada
County)
Option D: Out-of-State Landfill (Not owned by Ada County)
.
.
.
The Board of Ada County Commissioners considered technical information and all
public input before selecting Option C: a New MSW Landfill cell within the current Ada
County Landfill property, as the best solid waste management option for Ada County.
The new cell, the NRC, will be sited in an east-west trending ravine adjacent to the
northern edge of the current HHLF Cell at the Ada County Landfill.
The site was found to be optimal for the following reasons:
. Capacity of the Location for a 100- Year Cell. The NRC is strategically located
within the existing north ravine area in close proximity to the existing HHLF Cell. It
has the shape and dimensions necessary to accommodate a new cell with an .
anticipated 100 years of capacity. (During the public involvement process, the public
expressed a desire for a long-term solution, i.e., greater than 50-60 years of capacity.)
4
Feasibility Study
North Ravine Cell
August 3. 2005
Ada County Landfill
I
I
, j
. Infrastructure Efficiency Minimizes Impact. Existing landfill operation
infrastructure will be used to support the NRC, consolidating operations into a
comparatively small footprint. The result will be both cost savings and a
minimization of impacts to natural resources.
. Efficient Use of Space Provides Maximum Capacity with Minimum Impact. The
topography of the NRC site provides a natural basin shape. The NRC design uses this
configuration and will provide approximately 70,000,000 cubic yards of landfill
capacity within the 260-acre NRC footprint.
" ,
I
;
. Isolated Location Limits Visual Impacts. The NRC site is isolated in the east end of
thE; Goose Creek dry drainage. It is surrounded by dry foothills that block any view
from the Boise Valley. A 100-foot-high soil berm will form the west end of the NRc.
The isolated location will shield landfill operations from view. During the first 50 to
70 years of operation, no landfilling will be visible from offsite because all activities
will be located below the ridgelines of the surrounding foothills and west berm ridge
lines.
.
Feasibility for Meeting Target Dates. Retaining a location within the previously
approved Ada County Landfill property, using existing infrastructure, and applying
institutional knowledge of site geology and hydrogeology in design, will contribute to
an aggressive permitting, construction, and start-up plan driven by an aging HHLF
Cell with limited capacity. Given these circumstances, the County and its technical
team are confident that development of the NRC can meet the schedule for accepting
a portion of the MSW stream in 2007.
, j
, ",
2.4. Permitting and Design Documents
As part of the permitting process, three major permitting and design documents have
been completed and submitted to the appropriate regulatory agencies. They include a
Site Certification Report and a Preliminary Design Report (submitted to the Idaho Depart
of Environmental Quality), and a Conditional Use Permit Application (submitted to Ada
County Development Services).
2.4.1. Site Certification Report
The NRC Site Certification Report (CH2M HILL, 2005) submitted to the Idaho
Department of Environmental Quality (IDEQ) and the Central District Health
Department (CDHD) included a detailed description of the proposed new cell and the
geology, hydrogeology, and topography ofthe site. Specifically the layout of the
proposed new cell was shown on the plan and profile diagrams of the geology and
hydrogeology to demonstrate that the proposed location of the new cell complies with
siting criteria, in accordance with 40 CFR Part 258 Subpart B and Idaho Code Section
39- 7407.
The Site Certification Report consisted of the following:
1. An evaluation ofthe location restrictions of 40 CFR 258 Subpart B and Section
39- 7 407 (Local Restrictions), Idaho Code to determine the potential effects that
the NRC may have on the surrounding environment, and the effects that natural
5
Feasibility Study
North Ravine Cell
August3,2005
Ada County Landfill
and human-made conditions may have on the performance of the landfill unit.
The list of location restrictions is as follows:
. Airport Safety
. Floodplains
. Wetlands
. Fault Areas Seismic Impact Zones
. Unstable areas
, )
i,
2. Characterize site hydrogeology pursuant to 40 CFR 258 Subpart E and Section
39- 7407 (Local Restrictions), Idaho Code to identify the following:
. Lithology, soil types, and stratigraphy
. Zones of potentially high hydraulic conductivity
. The presence of confining formations
. Unpredicted geologic features, such as fault zones, cross-cutting
structures, and pinch-out zones
. Continuity of petro graphic features
. Groundwater gradients, velocities, and flow directions
. Pre-construction groundwater quality
. Potential receptors of a release
¡
!
,
¡
\
,,)
3. Collect sufficient site geotechnical information to ensure that the cell design will
meet the criteria specified in 40 CPR 258 Subpart D and Idaho Code 39-7409 for:
. Composite liner
. Leachate collection system
. Point of compliance
. Leachate discharge
To collect the data necessary to evaluate the site the following investigations were
conducted:
. Forty (40) Soil Borings were drilled at strategic locations throughout the NRe.
These borings were drilled to depths ranging from 8.5 to 200.5 feet below ground
surface.
. Geotechnical Soil Information were collected from each borehole at a minimum
interval of every 10 feet and lithologies were logged based on cuttings, split-
spoon and continuous core samples.
. Ten (10) test pits were excavated to observe soil profiles, collect bulk samples,
and evaluate the suitability ofthe underlying soils.
. Twenty-eight (28) Groundwater Monitoring Wells were installed at selected
soil borehole locations to characterize groundwater flow and water quality of the
uppermost water-bearing unit.
IDEQ has reviewed this data and issued Site Certification to Ada County.
6
Feasibility Study
North Ravine Cell
August 3. 2005
Ada County Landfill
, j
2.4.2. Preliminary Design Report
The overall design for the NRC is presented in the Preliminary Design Report. The
report, which has been submitted to IDEQ, includes background information on the NRC
project, current permitting status, past and current development of Ada County Landfill
operations, and the future plans for MSW management in Ada County at the NRe. The
preliminary design was organized as follows.
. Section 1: Introduction
0 Overview
0 Permitting statues
. Section 2: Preliminary Design
0 Master Plan
. Site Plan (includes topsoil stockpiles, ponds, roads, etc.)
0 Stage 1 Cell Plan and Future Staging Plan
0 Composite Liner Design
0 Leachate Collection System
. Leachate Generation Design and Evaporation Pond Sizing Design
. Leachate Collection System Design
. Leachate Evaporation Pond Design
0 Stormwater Management Design
0 Landfill Gas System Design
0 Final Cover System Design
0 GrOlmdwater Monitoring System Design
1,
¡
2.4.3. Conditional Use Permit
A Conditional Use Permit (CUP) application for the development ofthe NRC at the Ada
County Landfill has been submitted to the Ada County Development Services for review,
comments, and approval. The major sections ofthe CUP application were as follows:
.
Conditional Use and Master Site Plan Application (Completed Forms)
Detailed Letter
Plot Plan
Parcel Map
Neighborhood Certification
Warranty Deed
Proper Fee
Master Site Development and Design
Conditional Use Standards (8-5b-2)
Master Site Plan Checklist Responses
Overlay Districts
Recommended Findings
Attachments
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
..i
.
.
7
Feasibility Study
North Ravine Cell
August 3. 2005
Ada County Landfill
3.
CAPITAL COST
ì
Table 1 presents Capital Cost to construct the NRC based on 13 stages of construction
(see Drawing, Cell Staging Plan) and the full cell life for the gas collection system and
miscellaneous improvements and upgrades. The data is based on a detailed analysis
prepared by the County's engineering consulting firm, CH2M Hill, which is responsible
for the pennitting and design of the NRc. The table shows design beginning in Fiscal
Year 2005 with construction budgeted in Fiscal Year 2006. The last stage of construction
of the bottom liner system will be in Fiscal Year 2063. Waste will then be placed over
the waste placed during the filling of the 13 stages until Fiscal Year 2104 when the final
crown design elevations are reached. The subtotal cost estimate for construction equals
$95,100,265 in 2005 dollars. If an annual inflation rate of 2.5% is applied to the cost
estimate, the total equals $182,330,000. Other capital costs include property acquisitions,
upgrades for roads, stormwater facilities and office facilities, and landfill gas system
improvements and expansion. The total capital cost for the NRC totals $323,571,700
based on an annual inflation rate of 2.5%.
", '~,
4.
OPERATIONS COST
"
I
CH2M Hill developed a detailed spreadsheet covering the lifetime development costs for
the NRC. Table 2 presents a summary ofthis spreadsheet. Although detail figures are
given for each line item for each year from 2006 to 2104 (when the landfill will be
completely filled with waste and ready for closure), Table 2 shows only subtotals for
select years, 2006 and 2007, then years 2025, 2050, 2075, 2100, and the last year, 2104.
A sum of all the subtotals is presented as the last column ofthe table. The first subtotal
of the table includes Landfill General Expenses which include such items as staff salaries,
building and equipment maintenance, landfill operations subcontractors, other general
expenses, and the hazardous waste management and recycling programs. The second
subtotal includes NRC Annual Operating Expenses which includes groundwater
monitoring program, landfill gas collection system, leachate monitoring program, and
miscellaneous operations support. The resulting total for the two major subcategories
mentioned above over the life of the landfill cell is an estimated $2,229,908,425.
In addition, a fund must be maintained for closure of the landfill cell and for a 30 year
post closure monitoring and maintenance program. Table 2 shows that an estimated total
of$777,667,220 will be needed for closure ofthe NRC in the year 2104 and the post
closure care period that will extend to the year 2134.
5.
LIFE SPAN
Table 3 summarizes a detailed analysis developed by CH2M Hill ofthe NRC life cycle.
The analysis was based on the following assumptions:
. The population growth was based on COMPASS projections for 2000 - 2025,
and then 1 % increase annually thereafter.
.
Waste generation rate based on 1.4 tons per person per year.
. Waste reduction/diversion/recycling assumed to increase 1 % per year
beginning in 2010 until a maximum of 20%.
8
Feasibility Study
North Ravine Cell
August3,2005
Ada County Landfill
. Daily cover will be 50% of waste tonnage.
. Biodegradation of waste will increase from 1% up to 20% spread over the life
of the cell.
. Average waste density will gradually increase (due to long-term compaction
and biodegradation) from 1,800 to 2,800 Ibs/yd3 over the life ofthe cell. '
The final column of Table 3 shows that the Cumulative Waste plus daily cover less
biodegradation will reach 72 million cubic yards, the maximum capacity of the NRC, by
2104. Therefore, the life span of the NRC is approximately 100 years. IfBFI builds a
landfill east of Boise, the life span of the NRC is expected to increase approximately 20
years. '
6.
REFERENCES
Ada County Landfill, North Ravine Cell, Site Certification Report, CH2M Hill, May
2005.
Ada County Landfill, North Ravine Cell, Conditional Use Permit Application, CH2M
Hill, July 2005.
Ada County Landfill, North Ravine Cell, Preliminary Design Report, CH2M Hill, July
2005.
Financial Forecast Analysis Spreadsheets, Landfill Revenue Forecast 06/21/05, dated
07/22/05, NRC Life Cycle Analysis, dated 07/25/05, and NRC Life Cycle Analysis_BFL
dated 07/25/05, CH2M Hill, July 2005.
9
Figures
,
j
, j
ADA COUNTY
r"" SANITARY
""'" .~ LANDFILL SITE
"\./ ~~
¡........11' ~
" "
" I'.
" "
\ 1/
.J
l.LL
"
.. ~
\'/'"
{C ",I~
OIl. ~ Î, ~ Œ.
~!~ ¡ I ~jl'.'Il-'Î,,~::'::I"i~~¡~
~ ~ -,;II ""I'
: ~it'.' ~ "c" ,~~
;¡P, ~- " """"
, "
r! I- 'ib., 6. 'I .'
'~'~~!'~'h;l':¥f ~j¡; ~ .~.I
~ 'd , ,!(: l.J,~"I' 'I" .. "
/'
,",
I~:fø
-- '..~
¡;¡
>-'
i ". ;,1
, "
h-- '3 ~ ;:i):'T
"""I...,,'" I::is:
}.." <- !It. L ""t
Þ\ 'y ¡; "'" ,....,
¡¡ ¡-T , -' "-
>-' ~...,.l... , "
-~&.-i':": f-.. "
'[II ...... ",, cl!!
Lr ¡( :-...- T
---' T '....
ï
I
"'"
~ /
>-' ~
r--.-
't
"
"-,,
I--
," iJ'"
'Ig " ". \
tJ\
'\.
W$E
S
,"
"
I" .
J
,
"
""'"
~
~ .....
0 1 2 3 4 5 Miles
1""""'1 --
R, "
""-
'<
I),
....
\
',2e
>-'
r
'"
It~\.;
~5
R."
~
j
I--
-,¡
J "I
""I
P;t--.
""II¡
""II¡
" "
~
,"
-'
..
1
~1
,", V
;'~~ T [f
" ..... f"'i J~
--'i':')A
;:¡
>-'
..,
~
"" ß-J-
~I\ r==
...,.- ,
'\.
'"
~
\.-
"
Z
,"
>'
"
"
'\
,
-
"
"'
\-
'-
"
-r if,
ç:¡; I I"
../ .........
'Ç
"
r\:
",
"
>-'
,/
\
~
~
c,
~
R,J<
" "
Figure 1
Location Map
,
..-..-..
() 15()() 3()OO
~ . ......... . . 1
1
,
1
,
, (ADA COO""" PROPERTY
I BOUNIJARY
, ,
.. -.. - .'._.. -.. -..... -.. -. .-.. -..-
1
,
/\,
"'1'-'-" // ".
( ,/ '-
i "'¡
- - j
,
"
,
,
,
,
,
1
,
,
,
,
,
1
<'~~-~;~~~-~-=-=-~T ~~~~~
1 : =we ~"F'~OO
PRQPERIYBEING ' RELOCATED
AOOUIRID '
, , SOIL "aRROW
, AREA
1
,
,
1
1
,-J
,
,
t
,
, H"",EN SPRINGS
,
,
L
L
1 '
: ~ '-HIOOENSPRINGS
, WASTEWATER
[ lREAThIENT
~~~----~~~~-------
,
I
,
i
~
is
~
;¡:
'"
;:
D'
Z
!II
'"
0,
;¡:
'"
~
\1
1
, .
'~!._.._..-:
I
1
"- ---~- - - ~ ~-' - - -~- - - - - - - i ¡[~-
!¡! , 1 'DAHOSTATE i IJ
Ii! ': , IIETERANS ...
1 CEr.ETERY .,'
, /:
1 .f
, ,.
, -I'
'I /.
.. :' i
./
, ,
--._---
'(',
',¡'.-.
',1".
".-;"-'.'\4 '
\'!'o~";';'.
J
, ,
1
,
,
"
1
1
,
1
1
"
"
.. .. 1
------~--'--~~-18---~-----~-----
1 '"
1
I
J
"
~ -. - .,.~-~ ~-:. ~ - ~ - -1~- ~;-- - -- -- ~ - - -.~ - --
I"
'l.,
PREL'M""'" DESIO"
..
1,2-1
i
CH2MHILL
NORTH RAVlNE C"""'SlGN
JoDACOUtfTYlAID'fLL
_Co""".~"'"
EXISTING FACILITIES PLAN
'"
JlINE 2005
05'Jl/l'2"'"
323394
..---...
"O, I QAT(
ÆvatIN
.,.1......,
,
,
,
,
,
I ~~ONS :
AREA~ '
,
,
: C=,:'."
HIDOEI< SPRJNGS
-
~
~
~
~
'"
'i'
I
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
"
- :"0- - - - - - - - - -,-, - - -14- - - - - - - - - - - ~ - - -,- - --
-- I '
,
,
CH2MHILL
NORTH RA\ONECELL "..",'"
ADA COUHN lANI>FfLL
"""C"'nty.~"'o
NO, 1 DArE
., I......,
........
~
0 1500 3000
,'......~. I
PRElIM""""'DESI"N
2.1-1
MASTER SITE PLAN
,T[ JUt£ 2OOS
'" 32330<
05--JLL'>005 " _t~ -""
,..,~O'..'".....""'-"'-.".,~", "
"",.-" '","'.
.""","'
""
. /","'::::;Ý'{~.¿;::::~:;;.-:c
",
,l'
I
~I
l
I
,i:/'
,-;:/"
! ~I:~
iii ä;./ f' iil
\/II~
, " il Iii
II
/ II "
~I~ þ~:/(I~"t l'
,q / ~I II
/. / :i
'I "
¡-/,,(, I I¡;
"¡;,~t:~~~i" if
1,'\ ,'/
¡'/I "~'
'1// j'
. ,"
d ~II
;~ ; ~
o~ "h
~~ ~~w
~ h~ Îd
11 ~~i ni
('
I~
)
b~
1,'0
0
0
~
~ß
0
~ = :I
~ ~ ~ f
::> ~ .,. II!
CI '" " I:
¡¡ ,~~ N
..J" Z
~ 'l U
,/
~
e
'"
'"
- ¡
!
¡
..
"I
, )
Tables
í
I
I
[
Table 1
'j North Ravine Cell
f Capital Cost
f
2005 dollars
NRC Stage Construction
Engineering &
Area Construction Fiscal Inflated Cost in
Development Stages Acres Management Construction Total Year Year of Expenditure
Permit NRC & Stage 1 Design $ 5,017,000 2005 $ 5,020,000
Construct Stage 1 25 $16,000,000 $ 21 ,017,000 2006 $ 16,000,000
Design Stage 2 $ 1.525,000 2008 $ 1,640,000
Construct Stage 2 22 $ 6,100,000 $ 7,625,000 2009 $ 6,730,000
Design Stage 3 $ 1.325,000 2011 $ 1,540,000
Construct Stage 3 18 $ 5,300,000 $ 6,625.000 2012 $ 6,300,000
Design Stage 4 $ 1,125,000 2014 $ 1,400,000
Construct Stage 4 20 $ 4,500,000 $ 5,625.000 2015 $ 5,760,000
Design Stage 5 $ 1,480,926 2018 $ 2,040,000
Construct Stage 5 23 $ 5,929,074 $ 6,570,200 2019 $ 8,380,000
Design Stage 6 $ 1.744,202 2023 $ 2,720,000
Construct Stage 6 27 $ 6,983.131 $ 7,818,373 2024 $ 11,160,000
\ Design Stage 7 $ 2,336.573 2029 $ 4,230,000
¡ Construct Stage 7 36 $ 9.354,761 $11,691,333 2030 $ 17,340,000
Design Stage 8 $ 918,832 2036 $ 1,980,000
Construct Stage 8 14 $ 3,678,661 $ 4,597,493 2037 $ 8,110,000
I Design Stage 9 $ 1,151,832 2041 $ 2,800,000
!
- ¡ Construct Stage 9 18 $ 4,611,502 $ 4,982,813 2042 $ 11,500,000
Design Stage 10 $ 1,020.194 2047 $ 2,880,000
Construct Stage 10 16 $ 4.084,473 $ 4,310.973 2048 $ 11,810,000
1 Design Stage 11 $ 849,064 2052 $ 2,710,000
;
¡ Construct Stage 11 13 $ , 3,399,336 $ 4,248,400 2053 $ 11,120,000
1-
Design Stage 12 $ 858,279 2056 $ 3,020,000
Construct Stage 12 13 $ 3,436,228 $ 4,294,507 2057 $ 12,410,000
Design Stage 13 $ 1,138.010 2062 $ 4,650,000
Construct Stage 13 17 $ 4,556,164 $ 5,694,173 2063 $ 19,080,000
SUBTOTAL CONSTRUCTION 259.69 $ 20,489,911 $ 77,933,329 $ 95,100,267 $ 182,330,000
Landfill General
Property Acquisitions 2005 $ 770,000
Allowance for Mise
(N ew/ReplacementlU pgrades
Roads, Stormwater, Office,
Facilities, etc.) 2005 - 2104 $ 102,479,700
Landfill Gas Collection System:
Flare Station Upgrades 2008, 2030,
2060. & 2090 $ 10,120,000
LFG Header Extensions 2008 $ 80,000
Horizontal Collectors & Monitoring Stations 2008 - 2104 $ 18,764,000
Engineering Professional Services (and Permitting Assistance) 2009 - 2104 $ 9,028,000
SUBTOTAL GENERAL & GAS COLLECTION $ 141,241,700
j
TOTAL CAPITAL COST , ,- >$' "'.,' 323,571 ,700
.... ....-..
Inflation =
2.5%
Note:
Based on data from Landfill Revenue Forecast 06 21 05.xls spreadsheet, tabs D&C Summary and Cash Flow Balance by CH2M Hill.
..-
Feasibility Study Cost Study.xls
Table 1 - NRC Capital Cost
Page 1 of 1
8/2/2005
3:03 PM
Table 2
North Ravine Cell
Operation Cost
Fiscal Year
2050
l{~
2075
2100
"",'
,~'"
2104
TOTALS
2025
l<
,'C
2006
2007
"'~i~~::~,'~~;:~~~:::~:: ~¡ ~¡ ~¡ ¡j ~
Subtotal-General Support Facilities $2,968,164 $3,611, 740 }~ $4,707,705 tJ $8,730,354 fk: $16,188,377 Y $30,014,645 ;;~
Hazardous Materials Facility & Recyclin9 Program: t~'-; ~-j; ~ ~"'; [-~
Subtotal-Hazardous Materials Facility & Recycling Program $1,969,968 12,018,480 2 $3,128,510 f-:' $5,783,020 ?~$10,701,050 ~: $19,818,370 :,C¡ 121,875,170
SUBTOTAL lANDFilL GENERAL EXPENSES", '.. " "", . $4,938,132, $5,630,220:ii ,S1,836;215{' $14,513,374~1 $26,889,427 ~j $49,833,015 r~ , $55,007,832
'-::-i;¡¡~~~::~:~~~ ::~~~=,'f.,;:;;"":?",,, ~¿;;j'¡¡' "", J, ""."ii'. "', '::"be:~;",. >:.,:- :', .~'" ,. ',' 'S'~" ':, "', .iiCti ::, """ , .: "1f"'" ,CO; "'L",-,
Subtotal - GW Monitoring Program $102,500 ß'~ $84,560 ç; 1157,100 t; $291,440 f¡ $540,500 ~~
LFG Collection System (assumes 40CFR60 part WWW compliance): ~;; L:; ¡~;l ~;i ~~
Subtotal- LFG Collection System $75,000 i"i: $175,370 ;;.; $584,868 r~ $1,084,260 ;., 12,010,160 i;;
Leachate Monitoring (and Ponds) Program: t:,' ':< ~1 ~é~ ~_c;
Subtotal- Leachate Monitoring System $22,000 ð~ . $34,420 ~ $63,250 r{ $117,460~";1 1217, 790 ~;
Miscellaneous Operations Support; ~ ~:' ~j iJj ~1
Subtotal-Misc. Ops Support , , $0 ,$655,OOOfu $203,000 ~$377,OO°!i $699,400 \1.i $1,296,600 ~~
. SUBTOTAL NRC Operating Expenses . $0 ,$854,500 ~ $497,350 'þ:J$1;182,218 m $2,192,560~$4,065~050' ~"
TOTAL OPERATING EXPENSES' '$4,938,132 $6,4&4,720 '@$8,333,565 ~$15,895,592 ~$29,081,981 ¡¡¡¡ $53,898;085 -;
$33,132,662
$1.245,684,719
$820,490,918
~f~:~~6~;:5,~~!:,
$596,600 122,322,430
$2,218,780 $78,289,018
$240,470 $8,981,340
$1,431,100 $54,140,000
$4,486,950' ' $163,732,788
$59,494,78J: $2,229,908,425
Landfill ClosureJPost-Closure
NRC Cell {closes 2104J ,
,Subtotal NRC Landfill Cios'urelPost-Closure "
:~
'<$0
0$0
$0'
$0
$0 ."
.$777,667.,220
$777 ,a57 ,220;
Note:
Based 011 data from Landfill Revenue Forecast 06 21 05.xls spreadsheet, tab Cash Flow Balance by CH2M Hill.
Feasibjlity Study Cost Study,xls Table 2 ,NRC Operation Cost
8/212005 3:03 PM
Table 3
North Ravine Cell
Life Cycle Analysis
Est. Future NRC Cumulative Waste
Est. Future Waste Reduction (%) Waste Tonnage Cumulative Waste plus daily cover less bio. deg,
Year Po ulatlon Waste Tonna e Diversion/Ree elin After Diversions to NRC tons e
2003 333,135
2004 343,108
2005 353,082 504,851 0% 504,851 0
2006 363,055 519,111 0% 519,111 0
2007 373,029 533,372 0% 533,372 160,012 266,323
2006 383,002 547,633 0% 547,633 324,301 533,108
2009 392,976 561,893 0% 561,893 661,437 1,074,029
2010 402,949 576,154 1% 570,392 1,203,310 1,930,260
2011 413,458 591,180 2% 579,358 1,753,698 2,779,417
2012 423,987 606,205 3% 588,019 2,312,316 3,621,221
2013 434,475 621,231 4% 596,382 2,878,879 4,455,408
2014 444,984 636,257 5% 604,444 3,453,102 5,281,727
2015 455.493 651,263 6% 612,206 4,034,698 6,099,938
2016 457,743 654,501 7% 608,686 4,612,949 6,894,224
2017 459,994 657,719 8% 605,101 5,187,795 7,665,232
2018 462,244 660,936 9% 601,452 5,765,189 8,422,372
2019 464,495 664,154 10% 597,739 6,350,973 9,174,475
2020 466,745 667,372 11% 593,961 6,933,055 9,904,364
2021 471,700 874,457 12% 593,522 7,526,577 10,634,096
2022 476,655 881,542 13% 592,941 8,119,518 11,346,810
2023 481,610 688,626 14% 592,219 8,711,737 12,042,794
2024 486,565 695,711 15% 591,355 9,303,092 12,722,328
2025 491.520 702,796 16% 590,349 9,893,441 13,385,683
2026 496,435 709,824 17% 589,154 10,482,595 14,033,056
2027 501,400 716,922 18% 587,876 11,070,471 14,664,780
2028 506,414 724,092 19% 586,514 11,656,985 15,350,319
2029 511,478 731,333 20% 585,066 12,242,051 16,025,631
2030 516,592 738,646 20% 590,917 12,832,968 16,700,357
2031 521,758 746,032 20% 596,826 13,429,794 17,374,551
2032 526,976 753,493 20% 602,794 14,032,588 18,048,263
2033 532,246 761,028 20% 608,822 14,641,410 18,721,543
2034 537,568 768,638 20% 614,910 15,256,320 19,394,441
2035 542,944 776,324 20% 621,059 15,877,380 20,067,007
2036 548,373 784,087 20% 627,270 16,604,650 20,739,289
2037 553,857 791,928 20% 633.543 17,138,192 21,411,335
2038 559,396 799,848 20% 639,878 17,778,071 22,083,194
2039 564,990 807,846 20% 646,277 18.424,348 22,754,912
2040 570,639 815,925 20% 652,740 19,077,087 23,426,536
2041 576,346 824,084 20% 659,267 19,736,354 24,098,113
2042 582,109 832,325 20% 665,860 20.402,214 24,769,688
2043 587,930 840,648 20% 672,518 21,074,732 25.441,306
2044 593,810 849,054 20% 679,244 21,753,976 26,113,013
2045 599,748 857,545 20% 686,036 22,440,012 26,784,854
2046 605,745 866,120 20% 692,896 23,132,908 27,456,872
2047 611,803 874,782 20% 699,825 23,832,733 28,129,111
2048 617,921 883,529 20% 706,824 24,539,557 28,801,614
2049 624,100 892,365 20% 713.892 25,253.449 29,474,425
2050 630,341 901,288 20% 721,031 25,974.479 30,147,586
2051 636,644 910,301 20% 728,241 26,702,720 30,821,139
2052 643,011 919,404 20% 735,523 27,438,244 31,495,127
2053 649,441 928,598 20% 742,879 28,181,122 32,169,591
2054 655,935 937,884 20% 750,307 28,931,430 32,844,571
2055 662,495 947,263 20% 757,810 29,689,240 33,520,110
2056 669,120 956,736 20% 765,389 30,454,629' 34,196,248
2057 675,811 966,303 20% 773,042 31,227,671 34,873,024
2058 682,569 975,966 20% 780,773 32,008,444 35,550,480
2059 689,395 985,726 20% 788,581 32,797,025 36,228,654
2060 696,289 995,583 20% 796,466 33,693.491 36,907,587
2061 703,251 1,005,539 20% 804,431 34,397,923 37,587,317
2062 710,284 1,015,594 20% 812,475 35,210,398 38,267,884
2063 717,387 1,025,750 20% 820,600 36,030,998 38,949,325
2064 724,661 1,036,008 20% 828,806 36,859,804 39,631,680
2065 731,806 1,046,368 20% 837,094 37,696,899 40,314,987
2066 739,124 1,056,831 20% 845,465 38,542,364 40,999,284
2067 746,516 1,067,400 20% 853,920 39,396,284 41,684,608
2068 753,981 1,078,074 20% 862.459 40,258,743 42,370,997
Feasibility Study Cost Study,xls 8/212005
Table 3 - LIfe Cycle of NRC Page1of2 3:04 PM
Est. Future NRC Cumulative Waste
Est. Future Waste Reduction ('I.) Waste Tonnage Cumulative Waste plus daily caver less bio. deg.
Year Population Waste Tonnage Diverslon/Recycling After Diversions to NRC (tons) (cy)
2069 761,521 1,088,855 20% 871,084 41,129,826 43,058,488
2070 769,136 1,099,743 20% 879,794 42,009,621 43,747,118
2071 776,827 1,110,741 20% 886,592 42,898,213 44,436,925
2072 784,595 1,121,848 20% 897,478 43,795,692 45,127,944
2073 792,441 1,133,066 20% 906,453 44,702,145 45,820,213
2074 800,366 1,144,397 20% 915,518 45,617,662 46,513,767
2075 808,369 1,155,841 20% 924,673 46,542,335 47,208,643
2076 816,453 1,167,399 20% 933,920 47,476,255 47,904,877
2077 824,618 1,179,073 20% 943,259 48,419,513 48,602,505
2078 832,864 1,190,864 20% 952,691 49,372,205 49,301,561
2079 841,192 1,202,773 20% 962,218 50,334,423 50,002,083
2080 849,604 1,214,801 20% 971,840 51,306,263 50,704,104
2081 858,100 1,226,949 20% 981,559 52,287,822 51,407,661
2082 866,881 1,239,218 20% 991,374 53,279,197 52,112,788
2083 875,348 1,251,610 20% 1,001,288 54,280.485 52,819,519
2084 8114,102 1,264,126 20% 1,011,301 55,291,786 53,527,891
2085 892,943 1,276,768 20% 1,021,414 56,313,200 54,237,937
2086 901,872 1,289,535 20% 1,031,628 57,344,828 54,949,693
2087 910,891 1,302,431 20% 1,041,944 58,386,773 55,663,191
2088 920,000 1,315,455 20% 1,052,364 59,439,137 56,579,819
2089 929,200 1,328,609 20% 1,062,888 60,502,024 57,503,382
2090 938,492 1,341,896 20% 1,073,516 61,575,541 58,433,931
2091 947,877 1,355,315 20% 1,084,252 62,659,792 59,371,523
2092 957,356 1,368,868 20% 1,095,094 63,754,886 60,316,212
2093 966,929 1,382,556 20% 1,106,045 64,860,931 61,268,052
2094 976,598 1,396,382 20% 1,117,106 65,978,037 62,227,099
2095 986,364 1,410.346 20% 1,128,277 67,106,313 63,193,409
2096 996,228 1,424,449 20% 1,139,559 68,245,873 64,167,038
2097 1,006,190 1,438,694 20% 1,150,955 69,396,828 65,148,042
2098 1,016,252 1,453,081 20% 1,162,464 70,559,292 66,136,479
2099 1,026,415 1,467,611 20% 1,174,089 71,733,381 67,132,406
2100 1,036,679 1,482,288 20% 1,185,830 72,919,211 68,135,881
2101 1,047,046 1,497,110 20% 1,197,688 74,116,900 69,146,962
2102 1,057,516 1,512,081 20% 1,209,665 75,326,565 70,165,707
2103 1,068,091 1,527,202 20% 1,221,762 76,548,327 71,192,176
2104 1,078,772 1,542,474 20% 1,233,979 77,782,306 72,226,427
Feasibility Study Cost Study,xls
Table 3 - Life Cycle of NRC
Page 2 of2
8/2/2005
3:04 PM