Chem Waste Kettleman Closure Plan Appendices Vol 2 … - rbiliw Evaltrofion. Kettleman Hills Faciliiy. MSlV Landfill L'nir B-19, Kin~s Cr Coifinria - Table 2b - Summary of Pseudo-Static

TABLES

.S lo~>~ ~ l ~ r i i f ! . I ~ v ~ ~ I ~ ~ ~ ~ f i ~ ~ ~ ~ . h~c~fflt,i?1i18z ilil/.~ l ~ ~ r ~ i / ~ f ~ ~ . .ll.Sll' / . ~ ~ ~ r ~ l / i l l ( ~ r i f l j -19. Li1ix.s ( , , J I , ~ ~ , . , . ('<!l!l~>ri~if~

Table 1 - Selected Material Properties for Static and Seismic Stability Analyses

(1) R.lodclcd [IS ;t l a y in sitc d?namic rcspansc ;lnalysis l o include cWcts orso l ic i cla! Iahcr in isal;~tiiig grolind molion. ( ? I I<usl l:nviri~nrncnlal & liili;~slructurc. Inc. (1')')7). A l l rcl2rcnccs arc listed iii I ;~hlc 3 nl l lost 's IlIO7 l l c p o ~ includcd in Appendix A. (31 I ~ t y r c South. Inc. (2003). (icoSyntcc ( 19')')). I lcndron. I).hq.. I:cr~~andc,. (i.. I'n)~iimcr. ['..I.. (iirood. 1.1'. ;md O r o ~ o . 1.1,'. i 1'10')). K;~\;~/nii.iian. I:. . I F . I lcndron.

I1.M.. :lnd ('orct1r;ln. 1i. l ' . (2001). M;~taso\ic. N. and I:. Ki~vamiian .Ir ( IC)'IX). (4) (irlldcr Associi~lcs. Inc. (2003). (51 (ialdcr Associ;ilcs. lnc. (2006).

k latcr ial l lnterfare

XlSW '

I3innlacIor MSLY '

ll\\?

('lay l.incr '

\lodulus Retluction & {)amping Curves

Scc l.'igurc I I1 (~I;II;Iw\ ic and Ka\ii,:~~i,iit~n lc)L)X)

S;iinc ;IS h l S \ I

Scc IFigurc 10 l l c l i ~ ~ i \ c l y dciisc sand (Scc~l ct al..

I1)XJ: Scud ; I I I ~ ldiiss. IL)70)

see I.ig:irc 11) (Vucclic and llohr!. I')')I: Sun el

al. IC)K81

l l n i t \+'eight

ice l : i y ~ ~ r c 7 Avcl-;lyc - X j pcl'

scc 1:l:urc 7 A \ crilsc - I l l5 pel.

115pcV

125 pcl'

See I.'iforc 10 11)O Conipaclcd l.'iil ' 33 ( V ~ c c t i c ilntl Ilohr!. 1001: SLUI c l

(I l:~rdin ;111<l I ) r cn~ ic l~ . 1972) :I[. l9XXl

Hcdlou l ' - I'hasc I;\ I3ollom l.iticr l i~ ter l i~cc '

1'h:irc l A Side Slope I.incr Inlcri;~cc ' Phasc l l ~ / l l / l l l 130ttoim l.incr lnlcr~i lcc '

l'hssc II31II/III Side Slope I.incr Intcrl jcc ' I IWIMSW Separation I. incr'

l i nn l C O V C ~ Soil and lnrcrlbcc I'ropcriics

Shear \l'ave Velocity (V.) or

Shear \lodulus ( G ) Relation

See l i yo rc ( i i ~ o d i l i c ~ l ;~l icr K:~v~v:~nj i :~~, el ill. l~Ic)6)

Siunc as I\IS\\

(i = lllllll K: la.m\ K, - 00 li,r rclaii\cl! ilcnsc \;~nds (Sccd

~ i n d ldriss. I97111

l2.3lll 2 97 Y, I 2 (; . 10~~lllh nc

I i e ( I lnrdin and l l r c n ~ i c h . 1972)

S h w r Strength Properties

I50 pel.

....

-...

.-..

....

....

I I 0 pc f

Angle (degree)

3 3

ZX

3 1

20

Cohesion

0 '~ f )

I l l0

150

O

1.1511

40

X

7

X

8.5

17

Scc Appendix ('

800

0

100

I1

O

100

Scc A p p c n d i ['

V, - 7500 lps

....

....

....

..-.

.-..

S~I~IL. as compaclcd lill

(Schn;~hi'l ct ill. 1072)

....

....

-...

....

.... .

Siltiic as co~~ip;~clcd lill

Slr rbilliy Evnlirnrion Kelllemnn Htlls Facrlrly, MSI~'LandJil1 L2nrt B-19. Kzngs Cc Calrjornra - Table 2a - Summary of Static Slope Stability Analysis Results

A1hlun!H4l~r~cr-2OO3lKeIlIen~0n-2OO3lkrlt/en1nn-rpl wpd November 2003

Cross Section

A- A'

B-B'

D-D'

G-G'

H-H'

1-1'

1-1'

K-K'

( I ) Factor of Safety was

Failure Plane Number Description

(2) 4 value was estimated using Ianbu Method. Spencer Method did not converge for thc analysis.

(3) For Cross Section G-G', Failure Plane No. IlI (Buttress Stability Evaluation) a pseudostatic FS of 1 .I5 was calculated for a horizontal acceleration of 0.1 5.

I

I1

111

IV

1

11

I

I

I1

111

IV

I I0 ft North of G-G'

100 ft South of G-G'

I

I1

111

1

I

I

11

calculated using Janbu Method.

Static Factor of Safety Yield Acceleration

k,

Deep Block Failure through Bottom Liner

Circular Failure through Bioreactor


Shallow Block Failure through Separation Liner






Circular Failure through Buttress Fill











Spencer Method did not converge for the analysis.

1.85'

2.19

2.33

3.21

2.44

3.13

3.85

2.22

2.67

1.50

1.70

2.12

2.11

1.94

2.34

2.29

2.04

2.34

2.11

2.71

0.214

0.298

0.124

0.409

0.126

0.332

0.207'

0.126

0.302

---

0.240

0.175'

0.269'

0.153

0.149

0.322

0.157

0.130

0.121

0.302

SIC rbiliw Evaltrofion. Kettleman Hills Faciliiy. MSlV Landfill L'nir B-19, K i n ~ s Cr Coifinria - - Table 2b - Summary of Pseudo-Static Slope Stability Analysis Results

Cross Section

A-A'

B-B'

Failure Plane Number

D-D'

G-G'

H-H'

1-1'

I-I'

2 Shallow Block Failure through Separation Liner 2.86 0.290 11 (I ) Factor of Safety was calculated using Janbu Method. Spencer Method did not converge for the analysis. (2) For Cross Section G-G', Failure Plane No. 3 (Buttress Stability Evaluation) a pseudostatic FS of 1 . I 5 was calculated for a horizontal acceleration of 0.15.

I

2

3

4

5

6

I

2

K-K'

Arhion'~HAliprglea-2OO3lKe1fiem0n-2003Ike111en~0n-1pr llpd November 2003

1

1

2

3

4

1

2

3

I

1

Yield Acceleration

k. Description


Deep Block Failure through Bonom Liner







1

Static Factor of Safety

2.94

2.94

2.23

2.47

2.46

3.29

2.45

3.13 ~- - --

0.168'

0.125

0.298

2 ---

0.190'

0.145

0.141

0.322

0.148

0.126

~- - p~p-p




Circular Failure through Buttress Fill

Relatively Deep Block Failure through Separation Liner






I 11 - - - --

Deep Block Fa~lure through Bottom Liner

(9)

0.130

0.139

0.298

0.121

0.124

0.355

0.126

0.335

4.48

2.22

2.67

1.50

1.71

1.94

2.22

2.28

2.07

2.47 - p p

2 36 0 121

& rbilrty Evahmtzon Ketlienia~? H ~ l l s Facrl~ty MSlY I.mdfill L111rt B-19 K~ngs Cc Cai~fornza - Table 3 - Seismically-Induced Permanent Displacements from Newmark Deformation Analyses

ALlonlHAl~rq'~ct-2OO3lKet1Ieman-2003lkl~len~~n-~p~ wpd November ZOO3

Cross Section

A-A'

9-B'

G-G'

H-H'

K-K'

Failure Plane Number

I

2

3

4

5

6

1

I

2

I

2

3

1 ~p

2

Static Factor of Safety

2.94

2.94

2.23

2.47

2.46

3.29

2.45

2.22

2.67

1.94

2.22

2.28

2.36

2.86

Description





Deep Block Failure through Bottom Lincr





Deep Block Failure through Bottom L iner



Deep Block Failure through Bottom Liner ~p -


Yield Acceleration

k, (9)

0.130

0.139

0.298

0.121

0.124

0.355

0.126

0.125

0.298

0.145

0141

0.322

0.121

0.290

Maximum Acceleration

k,,, (g)

0.25

0.27

0.68

0.22

0.23

0.68

0.25

0.27

0.67

0.34

0.33

0.24

0.80 ~p~

0.63

- Permanent

Displacement (in)

3.5

3.7

4.2

2.9

3.1

3.5

4.0

4.6

approx. 6

5.3

1.9

7.8

approx. 6 -

5.9

FIGURES

-2-

0 loo 200 - FEET

NOTES:

1) BASE mmww FROM ADVANCED DIGITAL MAPS, INC., DATE OF PHOtbGRAPHY 1/26/90.

2) BASE CONTOURS FOR U N D f l U 0-19 WERE GENERATED FROM AS-BUILT NRMYS FOR TOP OF OPERATIONS U K R OM BASE AND TOP Of SECONDARY CUI FOR SIDE SLOPES.

3) onKirtm DRAWING REFEREWE; COLDER *SSOCUTES (1991). UNIDflLL 0-19 BASE COUNTROUS AND SURROUNDING TOPOGRAPHY, DRAWING YO. 2. REV. 0.

HUSHMAND ASSOCIATES INC. coob&&& kltbqmk. lad bvkommaaW U w r l

AND CROSS SECTION LOCATIONS

0 100 POD . FEET

BEDROCK t 700 SECTION B-B'

o 400 a00 1200 1600 zoo0 2400 1000 1000

900 900

800 800

BOO

700 -

600

-1 BEDROCK --

BEDROCK I 700

BEDROCK

I I I I 1

- 700

SECTION A-A' 600

0 400 800 1200 1600 2000 2400

SUMMARY OF SLOPE STABILITY ANALYSIS RESULTS

SECTION D-D'

----.-- SEPARATION LINER

------- STATIC FAILURE PLANE

------- PSEUDO-STATIC FAILURE PLANE

D l STATIC PLANE NUMBER

@ PSEUDO-STATIC PLANE NUMBER

0 0

0 m

0 L 0' 50' 100' 200'

SCALE l H = 2 O O '

Project No. oz-0207 ANALYSIS CROSS SECTIONS A-A', B -B' ,

D-D' AND POTENTIAL FAILURE PLANES

Kettleman hills Facility - Unit B-19 KetUeman City, m g s count^^ Califoma Figure

4 HUSHMAND ASSOCIATES INC. -4 hrmqwk8 8nd b-W mdnwn

HAZARDOUS TASTE-----: - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

.-a

7001

BEDROCK

-01 BEDROCK t 700

SUMMARY OF SWPE STABILITY ANALYSIS RESULTS

--.-am- SEPARATION LINER

- - - - - - - STATIC FAILURE PLANE


STATIC PLANE NUMBER

@ PSEUDO-STATIC PLANE NUMBER

0 0

0 u3

0 i!!- 0' 50' 100' 200'

SCALE lw=20O'

900 -

BUTRESS FILL

800-

BEDROCK

HAZARDOUS WASTE

Project NO. 02-0207

SECTION H-H'

ANALYSIS CROSS SECTIONS G - G' , H-H' , K-K' AND POTENTIAL FAILURE PLANES

Kettleman hills Facility - Unit B-19 Kettleman City. mgs county, California

SECTION 1-1'

Figure

5 &+,J HUSHMAND G=.bahica l,arolprurr ASSOCIATES .ad Er,-d En&6ezw INC.

SECTION G-G'

BEDROCK t 700

7 0 0 1 BEDROCK BEDROCK 1 700

SECTION K-K'

SECTION J-J'

SubfMARY OF SLOPE STABILITY ANALYSIS RESULTS

-.--*-- SEPARATION LINER - - - - - - - STATIC FAILURE PLANE


STATIC PLANE NUMBER

O PSEUDO-STATIC PLANE NUMBER

0

0

0' 50' 100' 200'

SCALE 1 "=ZOOy

Project NO. 02-0207

Kettleman hills Facility - Unit B-19 Kettleman City, County, California ANALYSIS CROSS SECTIONS J -J' , K-K'

AND POTENTIAL FAILURE PLANES HUSHMAND ASSOCIATES INC. G W b o b h L Mqn.ke .nd ~~W thdtmun

Figure 6

· Unit Weight (kN/m3)

4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 280 <, --\ - ...... i I

, 0

" .... , I30 ... I 'I 10

), 1\~60 I- 1\ ', I, \ 20

90 I , \ - --- -- -

I 30

, 120 I

4? I 40 l:lC1l~

"0s: 150 I -- ::T0.

IQ) 50 "3Cl ~

180 1I 60

210 I

I I70

I240 l- I

I! II 80

270 l-I

I I I , I, , , 90300!

20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180

Unit Weight (pet)

KAVAZANJIAN ET Al. (1995)MSW--_. (USEDINTH'SSTUDY)

- - - - • BID·REACTOR MSW(USEDIN THIS STUDY)

-- - -_. AVERAGE MSW(65 pc~

- - - - • AVERAGE BID-REACTOR MSW (105 pc~

EPARECOMMENDATION (1995)

-- - - EARTH TECHNOLOGY (1966)

Project No.02·0207 I Kettleman Hills Facility- Unit 8-19

Kettleman City, Kinas County. California

HUSHMAND ASSOCIATES INC.Geotechnical and Earthquake Engineers

UNIT WEIGHT PROFILE FOR MUNICIPAL SOLIDWASTE (MSW) AND BIO-REACTOR MSW

Figure

7

0 50 100 150 200 250 300 31 NORMAL STRESS (kPa)

Source: Kavazanjian et al. (1995) I '

Project No. 02-0207

Kettlernsn Hills Facility- Unit B-19 Kettleman Cjry, Kings County, California MSW SHEAR STFUZNGTH Figure

8

Shear Wave Velocity ( d s )

200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 I600 1800

Shear Wave Velocity (fps)

I-I---- After Kavazanjian et al. (1996) (used in this study)

€PA ( 4 995) ------ Kavazanjian et al. (1 994) (8 sites) - - - - after Earth Technology (1988) (downhole)

after Earth Technology (I 988) (crossbo~e) - - - - - after Carey et al. (1 993)

Project No. 02-0207

Kettleman Hills Facility- Unit B-19 Kettleman City, Kings County, California SHEAR WAVE VELOCITY OF MSW HUSHMANU ASSOCtA TES INC.

Geotechnical and Earthquake Engineers

Figure

9

0.0001 0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10 Cyclic Shear Strain ( 7 0 )

0.0001 O.OOt 0.01 0.1 I 10 Cyclic Shear Strain (%)

-------- Augello et al. (1998) - - . - ldriss e l ol. (1995) - - -+ Morochnik et 01. (1998)

Motasovic and Kovazan jion ( 1 998)

w

Project No. Keltteman Hills Facility- Unit B-19 02-0207 Kettleman City, Kings County, California CoMPARISON BETWEEN SHEAR Figure

INC. MODULUS REDUCTION AND DAMPING CURVES FOR MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE 10A

h I I - - - \

- -

,-

F

- MATASOVIC AND KAVAtANJIAN (1998). MSW - - SEED €7 AL. (1984.86). AVERAGE SAND - - SEED AND IDRISS (1970). CLAY

I I I I

I I I I

MATASOVlC AND KAVAZANJIAN (t998). MSW - - - SEED ET Al. (198468). AVERAGE SAND - - - SEED AND IDRISS (1970). CLAY

-

- -

-

-

- -

1

0.8

0.6 i!

B C3

0.4

0.2

0

0.000 1 0.00 1 0.0 1 0.1 1 10

Cyclic Shear Strain (%)

30 -

s 20 w

0 .- ..d

2 cn C . - i?

10

0

0.000 1 0.001 0.0 1 0.1 1 10

Cyclic Shear Strain (%)

Note: Hazardous waste dynamic material properties are modeled as sand. Buttress compacted soil and soil liner properties are modeled as clay.

Project No. 02-0207

Kettlemen H~lls F a c ~ l ~ t y - Unit B-19 Kettleman City. Kings County, Calrfornla

USHMAND A SSOCIA TES INC. !eotechnIcaI and Earthquake Engineers

SHEAR MODULUS REDUCTION AND DAMPING Figure CURVES FOR MSW, SAND, AND CLAY

USED IN THIS STUDY 1 OB

1300

1200-

1100-

1000-

900 -

BOO -

700 -

800-

500 0

0 400 800 1200 1800 2000 I I I I I

NORTH + Bio-Reactor Separation Line Between Bio-Reactor k MSW

Failure Plane 1 Municipal Solid Waste

Failure Plane 3 Failure Plane 2

Separation Liner Hazardous Waste

Buttress Limit

Soil Buttress

Failure Plane 5 Failure Plane 4

I I I I I 400 800 1200 1800 2000

2400 1300

- 1200

- 1100

- 1000

- 900

- 800

- 700

- 800

500 2400

Project No. I Kettleman Bills Facility - Unit B-19 02-0207 l~ettleman City, Kinpa County. California

"SHMAND --..1-WmZa.=. ASSOCIATES INC. SECTION A-A'

FINITE ELEMENT (QUAD~M) MESH Figure

11

SOUTH + 1300

- 1200

- 1100

- 1000

- 900

- 800

- 700

- 600

500 1800

0 1300

1200-

1100-

1000 -

QOO-

800 -

700-

600-

500

300 600 900 1200 1500 1800 I I I I I I I 1 I I I I I

Separation Line Between Bio-Reactor & MSW

Municipal Solid Waste

Failure Plane 1 Bio-Reactor Separation Liner

Hazardous Waste Buttress Limit

Soil Buttress Buttress Limit

Soil Buttress

I I I I I I I I I 1 I I 1 I I

0 300 600 900 1200 1500

Figure 12

Project No. Kettleman Bills Facility - Unit B-19 02-0207 Kettleman City, Kinga County, California I HusHwD hotmhba-mAd-mda..n AssOcuTEs I N C

SECTION B-B' FINITE ELEMENT (QUADIM) MESH

EAST

1300

1200 -

1100-

1000 -

900 -

a00 -

700 -

600 -

500 0

0 500 1000 I I I I I I I I

Pallure Plane 4 Municipal SoUd Waste Separation h e Between

Uo-Reactor k MSW

Separation Ihm

Failure Plane 2 Bio-Reactor

Soil Buttress Buttress Limit

Hazardous W a d e

Failure Plme 1

I I 1 1 1 I 1 I I 1 r I I 500 1000 1500

Project No. 02-0207

1500 1300

- 1200

- 1100

-

- 1000

- 900

- 800

- 700

Kettleman Hills Facility - Unit B-19 Kettleman City, Kings County, California

- 600

500

a- w t d d d . ~ m d - m w m

SECTION G-G' Figure

FINITE ELEMENT ( Q u A D ~ M ) MESH 13

EAST

Failure Plane 1-

Fallwe Plane 3 Bio-Reactor

Buttress Wmit Failure Plane 2 Soil Buttress

/ \

Clay Liner /' Separation &er

Hazardous Waste

1500 1300

- 1200

- 1100

- 1000

-

- 900

- 800

- 700

- 600

-

500

1300

1200 -

1100 -

1000 -

900 -

800 -

700 -

600 -

500

0 500 1000 I 1 I I I I 1 I I I I I

I I I I I t I 1 I I I I 1

0 500 1000 1500

Figure 14

Project No. 02-0207

Kettleman hills Facility - U d t B-10 Kettleman City, Kin- County, California SECTION H-H' (Revised)

ASSOCVLTES INC. --&-111-

FINITE ELEMENT (QUAD4M) MESH

12,00o 18001300+-------'------'---------L-------'------'---------L-------'- -'--- ---L ---'- '---- ..1- ---'- '---- .1- ---'-- -----''--- + 1300

NORTH1200-

-~f- 1200

1100- f- 1100Separation line Between Bio-Reactor & MSW

Municipal Solid Waste--__

1000-Failure Plane 1--_ ---Bio-Reactor

f- 1000

Failure Plane 2--_

900- Buttress limit f- 900

800

Soil Buttress

f- 800

700Hazardous Waste

Separation liner f-700

Clay liner

600- f- 800

I300 8~0

Project No.02-0207

Kettleman hills Facility - Unit B-19KetUeman City, KinKS County. California

HUSHMAND ASSOCIATES INC.GeotIoaIiIdnJo IuOlqub u;ul~ta1~

FINITESECTION K-K'

ELEMENT (QUAD4M) MESHFigure

15

12.0

10.0

-

- -

-- Northridge, Kagel Canyon CH-3 (Flipped) - C - Castaic, CH-i (Original) .- V

C C E 8.0

8 m - a V) . - (3

P 6.0 a3 0 3 -0 C - 6 x m

4.0 D 6 L 3 . 5 - - - - l3

2.0

I

0 .o 0.f3

V

0.09 0. 1 0.1 1 0.12 0.1 3 0.14 0.15 0.1 6

Yield Acceleration Coefficient Ky (g)

Earthquake-Induced Displacement of Landfill Slope Along Bottom Liner vs. Yield Acceleration Coefficient, Ky (g), Cross Section A-A' - Failure Plane 1

I I I

I

I Cross Section A-A' - Failure Plane 1 -

Project No. 02-0207

Kettleman Hills Faciliry- Unit B-19 Kettleman City, Kings County, California

-, Northridge, Kagel Canyon CH-3 (Original)

- Modified Seed-Hayward (Original) - Modified Seed-Hyward (Ripped)

HU A 0 T IN ~ ~ E d i c f : Z ~ ~ h F ~ ~ e ~ ~ g ~ n ~ ~ s

-

EARTHQUAKE INDUCED DISPLACEMENTS Figure SECTION A-A' - FAILURE PLANE I

2-D QuAD4M DYNAMIC RESPONSE ANALYSIS 16


Earthquake-Induced Displacement of Landfill Slope AIong Bottom Liner vs. Yield Acceleration Coefficient, Ky (g), Cross Section A-A' - Failure Plane 2

Project No. 02-0207

Kettleman Hills Facility- Unit B-19 Ketllcman City, Kings County. California

k$#!d EEf:Y2SS,"f2ZZf11F;S EARTHQUAKE INDIKED DISPLACEMENTS Figure

SECTION A-A' - FAILURE PLANE 2 2-D Q U A D ~ M DYNAMIC RESPONSE ANALYSIS 17

10.0

8.0 - C , .- - * C

E ln 0 m 6.0 - a UI

ii D a,

-

-

0 3 r, 4.2 C - d, 4.0 Y rn 3 r + w"

2.0

0.0 0.298

0.27 0.28 0.29 0.3 0.31 0.32 0.33 0.34


Earthquake-Induced Displacement of Landfill Slope Along Circular Failure Plane vs. Yield Acceleration Coefficient, Ky (g), Cross Section A-A' - Faiure Plane 3

I I I

Project No.

Cross Section A-A' - Failure Plane 3

----B---- Northridge. Kagel Canyon CH-3 (Original) Norlhridge. Kagel Canyon CH-3 (Flipped) -

Kettleman Hills Facility- Unit 6-19

-

-

02-0207 Kettleman City, Kings County, California EARTHQUAKE INDUCED DISPLACEMENTS SECTION A-A' - FAILURE PLANE 3

2-D QUm4MDyNAMIC RESPONSE ANALYSIS I E &&d $ 2

Figure

18


Earthquake-Induced Displacement of Landfill Slope AIong Bottom Liner vs. Yield Acceleration Coefficient, Ky (g), Cross Section A-A' - Failure Plane 4

Project No. Kettleman Hills Facility- Unit B-19 02-0207 Kettleman City, Kings Coalnty, California EARTHQUAKE INDUCED DISPLACEMENTS Figure

SECTION A-A' - FAILURE PLANE 4

-- -

19

*

. .

--- Modified Seed-Hayward (Original) -- Modified Seed-Hyward (Flipped) - Northridge, Kagel Canyon CH-3 (Original)

Northridge, Kagel Canyon CH-3 (Flipped) - Castaic. CH-1 (Original)

I

0.124 0.09 0.1 0.1 1 0.1 2 0.13 0.14 0.1 5 0.16


Earthquake-Induced Displacement of Landfill Slope Along Bottom Liner vs. Yield Acceleration Coefficient, Ky (g), Cross Section A-A' - Failure Plane 5

Project No. 02-0207

Kettleman Wills Facility- Unit B-19 Kettleman City. Kings County, California

N -E5 EARTHQUAKE INDUCED DISPLACEMENTS Figure

SECTION A-A' - FAILURE PLANE 5 2-D QUAD4M DYNAMIC RESPONSE ANALYSIS 20

0.32 0,33 0.34 0.35 0'355 0.36


Earthquake-Induced Displacement of Landfill Slope Along Separation Liner vs, Yield Acceleration Coefficient, Ky (g), Cross Section A-A' - Faiure Plane 6

Projcc~ No. 02-0207 EARTHQUAKE INDUCED DISPLACEMENTS

SECTION A-A' - FAILURE PLANE 6 2 - 0 QUAD4M DYNAMIC RESPONSE ANALYSIS

Kettleman Hills Facility- Unit B-19 Kettleman City. Kings County, California Figure

2 1 I m. e%!f:ft$ t."i,"U'i~$~Bi!%~S

10.0 I I

- Cross Section 0-B' - Failure Plane I - Modified Seed-Hayward (Original) - Modified Seed-Hyward (Flipped)

-

s, Norlhridge, Kagel Canyon CH-3 (Original)

-- Northridge. Kagel Canyon CH-3 (Flipped) - C - Castaic, CH-3 (Original) .- u Castaic, CH-1 (Flipped)

- u C

0.126 0.09 0.1 0.1 1 0.12 0.13 0.14 0.1 5 0.1 6


Earthquake-Induced Displacement of Landfill Slope Along Bottom Liner vs. Yield Acceleration Coefficient, Ky (g), Cross Section B-B' - Failure Plane 1

Project No. 02-0207 EARTHQUAKE INDUCED DISPLACEMENTS

SECTION B-B' - FAILURE PLANE 1 2-D QUAD4M DYNAMIC RESPONSE ANALYSIS

Kettleman Hills Facility- Unit 8-19 Kcltlcrnan City, Kings County, California Figure

2 2 H N SOCl TESIN . G~E?E;~,!,,A Earthpu:c Engine%


Earthquake-Induced Displacement of Landfill Slope Along Bottom Liner vs. Yield Acceleration Coefficient, Ky (g), Cross Section G-G' - Failure Plane 1

Project No. Kenlernan Hills Facility- Unil B- 19 02-0207 Kettleman City, Kings County, California EARTHQUAKE INDUCED DISPLACEMENTS Figure

SECTION G-G' - FAILURE PLANE 1 23

0.0 - 0.3 0.3 0.33 0.36 0.39 0.42 0.45


Earthquake-Induced Displacement of Landfill Slope Along Separation Liner vs. Yield Acceleration Coefficient, Ky (g), Cross Section G-G' - Failure Plane 2

Figure

24

Project No. 02-0207

Kenleman Hills Facility- Unit B-19 Kettleman City, Kings county, California EARTHQUAKE INDUCED DISPLACEMENTS

H A A SO /A E I C. c + e U o S E c E n d $arth$akT,l&teers

SECTION G-G' - FAILURE PLANE 2 2-D QUAD4M DYNAMIC RESPONSE ANALYSIS


I 1 i *

Earthquake-Induced Displacement of Landfill Slope Along Bottom Liner vs. Yield Acceleration Coefficient, Ky (g), Cross Section H-H' - Failure Plane 1

Cross Section H-H' - Failure Plane 1

Modllid Seed-Hayward (Original) - Modified Seed-Hyward (Flipped)

-

Northridge. Kagel Canyon CH-3 (Original)

Northridge. Kagel Canyon CH-3 (Fl~pped) - Cadaic. CH-I (Original) - -- Castaie. CH-I (Flipped)

0.145 ,09 0.1 0.1 1 0.12 0.13 0.14 0.15 0.16 0.17 0.18

Project No. Kcnlcman Hills Facility- Unit B-19 02-0207 Kettlcman City, Kings County, California EARTHQUAKE INDUCED DISPLACEMENTS

SECTION H-H' - FAILUIUl PLANE 1 QUAD4M DYNAMIC RESPONSE ANALYSIS

Figure

25

#

10.0

8.0 ? C .- V

4-

ti Q)

6.0 +! .P n

I Cross Section H-H' - Failure Plane 2

Modified Seed-Hayward {Original)

,- Modified Seed-Hyward (Flipped]

--. Northridge, Kagel Canyon CH-3 (Original) ,--&- Northridge, Kagel Canyon CH-3 (Flipped) - Castaic, CH-1 (Original]

Castaic, CH-1 (Flipped)

-0 a 0 3 u C - 6 4.0 x 3 F m W

2.0 7.9

0.0 0.741

0.09 0.1 0.1 1 0.12 0.13 0.14 0.1 5 0.16


Earthquake-Induced Displacement of Landfill Slope Along Bottom Liner vs. Yield Acceleration Coefficient, Ky (g), Cross Section H-H' - Failure Plane 2

-

Project No. Kettleman Hills Facili~y- Unit B-19 02-0207 Kettleman City, Kings County, California EmTHQUAKE INDUCED DISPLACEMENTS

SECTION H-H' - FAILURE PLANE 2

Y

Figure

26 A

Earthquake-Induced Displacement of Landfill Slope Along Circular Failure Plane vs. Yield Acceleration Coefficient, Ky (g), Cross Section H-H' - Faiure Plane 3

Figure

27

EARTHQUAKE INDUCED DISPLACEMENTS SECTION H-H' - FAILURE PLANE 3

2-D QUAD4M DYNAMIC RESPONSE ANALYSIS

Project No. 02-0207

Kcnlernan Hills Facility- Unit B-19 Kettleman City, Kings County, California

k%& 2~~!222!2~.",51~!25?2f2~

-

12.0

-

i 1 Cross Section K-K' - Failure Plane 1 - Modified Seed-Hayard (Original) - Modified Seed-Hyard (Flipped) -

.- Northridge, Kagel Canyon CH-3 (Original) - Northridge. Kagel Canyon CH-3 (Flipped) h

ci - ------&---- Castaic. CH-I (Original) -

.- w *.r

-------)------ Castaic. CH-I (Flipped) C

0 (II - - a - m fi 6.f

L] 3 u

I

0.721 0.09 0.1 0.1 1 0.12 0.13 0.14 0.1 5 0.16


Earthquake-Induced Displacement of Landfill Slope Along Bottom Liner vs. Yield Acceleration Coefficient, Ky (g), Cross Section K-K' - Failure Plane 1

-

Project No. Kc~tlernan Hills Facility- Unit B-19 02-0207 I Kettleman City, Kings County, California

H 0 !ATE IN ~.U.$,!%zfl,A Z f f l h E a k e Z g i n z ~

EARTHQUAKE INDUCED DISPLACEMENTS SECTlON K-K' - FAILURE PLANE 1

QUAD4M DYNAMIC RESPONSE ANALYSIS

Figure

28

Earthquake-Induced Displacement of Landfill Slope Along Separation Liner vs. Yield Acceleration Coefficient, Ky (g), Cross Section K-K' - Failure Plane 2

Project No. 02-0207

Kcltlemsn H~lls Facility- Unrt B-19 Kcttlcman City, Kings County, California

&&J ! ,

EARTHQUAKE INDUCED DISPLACEMENTS Figure SECTION K-K' - FAILURE PLANE 2

2-D QUAD4M DYNAMIC RESPONSE ANALYSIS 29

I

16.0

D~stant Earthquake 14.0

Caltech A-I Synthet~cRemrd (Orlglnal)

2 12.0 .- - C

E 10.0 0

-fi .Y 0 V 8.0 8 3 v C -

6.0 m 3 z 6! 4.0

2.0

0.0

0.05 0.06 0.07 0.08 0.09 0.1 0.1 1 0.12 0.13 0.14 0.15


Earthquake-Induced Displacement of Landfill Slope Along Bonom Liner vs. Yield Acceleration Coefficient, Ky (g), Cross Section H-H' - Failure Plane 1

Distant Design Earthquake

P q a l No Kettleman Hnlls Faclltty- UnllB-19 02-0207 ( Kctllcrnan c ~ t y . ~ l n g s county. ~sltfornla

H D I G22?~t2a2~f2$i~$?~~2~ EARTHQUAKE INDUCED DISPLACEMENTS

SECTION H-H' - FAILURE PLANE 1 DISTANT DESIGN EARTHQUAKE

Figure

30

Earthquake-Induced Displacement of Landfill Slope Along Bottom Liner vs. Yield Acceleration Coefficient, Ky (g), Cross Section K-K' - Failure Plane 1

Distant Design Earthquake

Project No. Kenleman Hills Facilily- Unit B-19 02-0207 K ~ I I I ~ ~ ~ ~ ritw ~i".. r o a n w rn~ifnrnia EARTHQUAKE INDUCED DISPLACEMENTS

APPENDIX A

Figures from Rust E&I 1997 Report (Landfill Final Fill Plan, Analysis Cross Sections, Liner Systems, and Design Earthquake Ground

Motions)

APPENDIX A

FIGURES FROM RUST E&l1997 REPORT (LANDFILL FINAL FILL PLAN, ANALYSIS CROSS SECTIONS, LINER SYSTEMS, AND DESIGN EARTHQUAKE

GROUND MOTIONS)

A number of figures from the Rust E&l 1997 stability report are presented in this appendix for reference to more clearly illustrate modifications applied to geometry of the B-19 landfill 1997 final f i l l plan and perimeter stability buttress to arrive at the 2006 revised fill plan and buttress configuration presented and discussed in this report and in the landfill closure plan report prepared by Golder Associates, Inc. (2006). These figures show plan view and cross sections of the 1997 (old) final fill plan geometry (Figures 5, 13, 14, 15, and 16), liner and cover systems used in the 1997 stability analyses (Figures 6, 7, 8. 9, 1 I, and 12), configuration of the perimeter stability buttress (Figure lo), and information on the design earthquake and selected earthquake ground motions used in the landfill dynamic response analyses (Figures 29 through 33). The only changes applied to the landfill design are those shown in the final fill plan and the buttress geometry (Figures 3, 4. 5, and 6 of this report). Therefore, Figures 5, 10, and 13 thru 16 of the 1997 Rust E&I report are not anymore applicable. I-lowever. the 1997 landfill liner and final cover configurations and design earthquake ground motions shown in the rest of figures in Appendix A remain unchanged and are used in the 2006 stability analyses for the new landfill final fill plan geometry.

LANDFILL FINAL FILL PLAN, ANALYSIS CROSS SECTIONS, AND LINER SYSTEMS

A

2' OPERATIONS LAYER

16 OZ NON-WOVEN 1' LCRS DRAINAGE ROCK

2' PRIMARY SOlL LINER (K I 1 x1 0-7 CM/SEC) (ADD CLAY TO EXISTING SOlL LINER) 80 MIL HDPE

6" 8 HDPE LEACHATE GEOMEMBRANE (TOP COLLECTION PIPE AND B O l l O M TEXTURED)

3.5' EXISTING SECONDARY SOlL LINER (K ~lx10-7cm/sec)

NOTE: BASE LINER DETAIL

NTS 60 MIL HDPE SEE TABLE 3 FOR GEOMEMBRANE INTERFACE PROPERTIES (TOP AND BOTOM K : HYDRAULIC CONDUCTIVITY OF SOIL LINER SMOOTH)

FIGURE

6 200444

PREPARED BY:

Rurr. Rust Environment 8 infrastructure Inc.

4

MODIFIED PHASE IA BOTTOM LINER INTERFACE DETAILS

(INTERFACE 1)

5-19 CLASS 11/11l LANDFILL K e t t l e m a n Hil ls Fac i l i ty

K e t t l e m a n City, Kings County, Cali fornia

G EOCOMPOSITE DRAINAGE LAYER

2' OPERATIONS LAYER 80 MIL HDPE GEOMEMBRANE (TEXTURED BOTTOM, SMOOTH TOP)

1 3.5' EXISTING CtAY LINER (REPAIR CRACKS BY FILLING WITH LOW PERMEABILITY MATERIAL)

SDESLOPE L E R NTS N 0 TE:

SEE TABLE 3 FOR INTERFACE PROPERTIES

PREPARED B Y

WWT RUStmdmnmmt&-!n~.

G:\IiTRR\PRO-JECT\KETTI FMAN\DETATLS.TIWG

MODIFIED PHASE IA SDESLOPE LNER NlEFFACE ETALS

(INTERFACE 2)

B-19 CLASS Il/lll LANDFILL

Fl GURE

Ket t lemon H i l l s Focility

7 tleman City, Kings County, California 444

B-

16 OZ NON-WOVEN 2' OPERATIONS LAYER

1' LCRS DRAlNAGE ROCK

1.5' PRIMARV SOIL LINER (K I? 1 ~ 1 0 ' ~ CM/SEC)

60 MIL HOPE GEOMEMBRANE (SMOOTH TOP AND BOTTOM SIDES)

16 OZ NON-WOVEN

3.5' SECONDARY SOIL LINER (K 5 1 x10" CM/SEC)

60 MIL HDPE

BASE LINER DETAIL GEOMEMBRANE NOTE: (SMOOTH TOP AND

SEE TABLE 3 FOR NTS BOITOM SIDES) INTERFACE PROPERTIES

PREPARED BY:

RSWl ~ E n v b w w n e n t & ~ ~ ~ r e k r c .

EXISTING PHASE IB BOTTOM LIhER INTERFACE DETAILS

(INTERFACE 3)

0-19 CLASS ll/lI1 LANDFILL Ket t leman Hills Focitity

Ket t leman City, Kings County. California

FIGURE

8 200444

T; \ I ITR?\PRn IFrT\ KTTTI TMdhl\ TITTAT1 T n\.lC

J

40 MIL HDPE PROTECTIVE HDPE GEOMEMBRANE (SMOOTH TOP AND BOTTOM) 16 OZ NON-WOVEN GEOTEXTILE GEONET

2' OPERATIONS LAYER 60 MIL HDPE GEOMEMBRANE (SMOOTH TOP AND BOTTOM SIDES)

GEONET

60 MIL HDPE GEOMEMBRANE (SMOOTH TOP AND B O l l O M SIDES)

3.5' CLAY LINER

SIDESLOPE LINER NOTE: SEE TABLE 3 FOR

NTS INTERFACE PROPERTIES

PREPARED BY: EXISTING PHASE 1B/11/111 SIDESLOPE FIGURE

LINER INTERFACE DETAILS (INTERFACE 4)

0-19 CLASS II/III LANDFILL Rust hnment & htrast~cture inc. K e t t l e m a n Hills Facility

9

FINAL COVER 7

STRUCTURAL FILL 3

1 ' DRAINAGE GRAVEL PERIMETER CHANNEL DETAIL

6" 0 HDPE LCRS COLLECTION PIPE

SEPARATION LINER OVER CLASS f WASTE 2' OPERATIONS LAYER

EXISTING GROUND

EXlSTlNG ANCHOR TRENCH

PERIMETER BERM DETAIL ,

NTS PREPARED BY: I PROPOSED PHASE B/W11 FIGURE

PERMETER BERM DETAILS (INTERFACE 5)

6-79 CLASS H/lII LANDFILL Kettleman Hills Facility

Kett leman City, Kings County, Catifornia

2' OPERATIONS LAYER

GEOCOMPOSlTE DFUINACE LAYER 60 MIL HDPE GEOMEMBRANE (TEXTURED TOP AND BOTTOM SIDES)

2' FOUNDATION LAYER WASTE FILL J

(EXISTING CLASS I COVER, K 5 1x10-5 CM/SEC)

SEPARATION LINER OVER CLASS I WASTE NTS

NOTE: SEE TABLE 3 FOR INTERFACE PROPERTIES

FIGURE

11 200444

PREPARED BY:

RlKT Rutst b w b m m a & hhsbwtwe Inom

PROPOSED PHASE IB/II/lI-HW/MSW SEPARATION LINER INTERFACE DETAILS

(INTERFACE 6)

B-19 CLASS 1l/III LANDFILL Kett leman Hills Facility

Kett leman City, Kings County, California

r 2.5' VEGETATIVE SOlL

12 OZ NON-WOVEN GEOTEXTILE

40 MIL HDPE GEOMEMBRANE (TEXTURED TOP AND BOlTOM SIDES)

I L 1 ' INTERMEDIATE COVER SOlL

L 1' LOW PERMEABILITY SOlL FOUNDATION LAYER (K s 1x10-5 CM/SEC)

FINAL COVER NTS

Section Bearing = N 33' W

0 200 SCALE IN FEET

m - I

m

----- Proposed separation Liner (see Figure 1 1 )

Proposed Final Cover (see Figure 12)

--------- Existing/Modified Bottom and Sideslope Liner (see Figures 6 to 9)

Phase II - Phase 16 1 . Phase IA - -

'Phase Ill -

CROSS SECTION A-A'

B-19 CLASS 11/IIl LANDFILL

cn 7

t rn

REFERENCES: + Golder Associates, "Existing Landfill 8-19 Base Contours and Surrounding ~ o p o ~ r a ~ h y " . Drawing No. 2. Rev. 0, Dated 4/15/91

RUST €&I, CWMl Kettleman Hills Facility, 0-1 9 Class Il/tll Londfill, dated August 1997.

Kettlemoo ills Facility Kettleman City. Kings County, California

1 PREPARED BY: FIGURE

Section Bearing = N 05' W

2000

C'1000

800

900

ProposedButtress Fill(See Figure 10

Bedrock

c;::J-o

HORIZONTAL DISTANCE (feet)

I

Phose IA

1500

A

A

Phase IB

1000

JE

Existing HW Fill

Phose III

.coc

"

Bedrock

-t---.,----------,--1---+,-----+-,--+-----,-I--,--,---t---,.------,-------h----,----,----,-L-700

900

800

(J)

Im~

c::J- 0 F0

~

C.~-'

1000

7000 a 5000

--' FJ""o1=

'"~ 0 E G JHORIZONTAl

0

0 200SCALE IN FEET

LEGENDREFERENCES:

• Golder Associates. "Existing Landfill B-19 Bose Contours and Surrounding Topography", Drawing No, 2. Rev. 0, Dated 4/15/91• RUST E&I, CWMI Kettleman Hills Facility, 8-19 Class II/III Landfill, doted August 1997,

PREPARED BY: FIGURE

- - - - - Proposed Separation Liner (see Figure 11)

Proposed Final Cover (See Figure 12)

--------- Existing/Modified Bottom andSideslope Liner (See Figures 6 to 9)

Rust .....w..-ta... I ...........

CROSS SECTION c-cB-19 CLASS I!jill LANDFILL

Kettleman Hills FacilityKettleman City. Kings County, California

15200444

EARTHQUAKE DESIGN GROUND MOTIONS

I AVERAGE RETURN PERIOD vs. ACCELERATION I

0 0 0 0 0 , 6 Qee3O I d r iss ( 1994) 4 lwssa Abraharnson ( 1995)

2 m G e o r n a t r ix ( 1992) W'WO Compbe I I / B o z o r g n l a

1 OCOO , I I I -. . r -4- A v e r a g e ! ? e ~ a L : o n s h u

I N 1.000 years T---3

PEAK HORIZONTAL ACCELERATION (g) - ROCK SITES

.Seismic Hazard Evaluation, Landfill Unit B-19, Kettleman Hills Facility

At tenuat ion re lat ions f o r bl ind th rus t fau l ts a n d rock sites.

PREPARED BY: I PEAK HORIZONTAL ACCELERATION IN ROCK I FIGURE

W R Q ~ W & VERSUS AVERAGE RETURN PERIOD

m m u m 6 - 1 9 CLASS II/III LANDFILL

KETTLEMAN HILLS' FACILITY KINGS COUNTY, CALIFORNIA

L

0.3 I 0.2 m L 0.1 0 .- C

0.0 i3 - ffl 0 -0.1 0 <

-0.2

-0.3 0 20 40 60 80 100 120

Time -sec

(a) Caltech A- 1 Synthetic Record Scaled to 0.2 1g Peak Acceleration

2.0

1.5 0)

I

C

1

0 rE e al - a, u 1.0 U Q - 0, .+- 0 a, a V)

0.5

0 .o 2 0.1

2 5 2 5 1 0.0 1 10 Period - sec

(b) Comparison of Pseudo-Acceleration Response Spectrum of Caltech A- 1 Synthetic Earthquake Record and Target Design Spectrum (Peak Acceleration Scaled to 0.2 1g)

FIGURE

30 200444

PREPARED BY-

ENvIRONhmw & I I ! @ ~ u ~

"

CALTECH A-1 SYNTHETIC ACCELERATION RECORD

AND DYNAMIC RESPONSE SPECTRUM

- DISTANT DESIGN EARTHQUAKE - B-19 CLASS II/III LANDFILL

Kettleman Hills Facility Kettleman City. Kings County. California

0.6

0.4 0 I

S 0.2 .- C

9 0.0 Q, - aJ

-0.2 0 4

-0.4

-0.6 0 10 20 30 4 0

Time -sec

I (a) Modified Seed-Hayward Synthetic Record Scaled to 0.57g Peak Acceleration

0.0 2 0.1 2 5 2 5 1 0.0 1 10

Period - sec

(b) Comparison of Pseudo-Acceleration Response Spectrum of the Modified Seed-Hayward Synthetic Earthquake Accelerogram and Target Design Spectrum peak Acceleration of Synthetic Record Scaled to 0.57g)

FIGURE

31 PREPARED BY:

ENvIR~bbfENT& I I 'mwaRm . -

Kettleman ills Facility Kettlemon City. Kings County, Colifomia

MODtFlED SEED-HAYWARD SYNTHETIC ACCELERATION RECORD AND DYNAMIC RESPONSE SPECTRUM SCALED

TO TARGET MCE RESPONSE SPECTRUM

- LOCAL DESIGN EARTHQUAKE - 6-g9 CLASS II/lIi LANDFILL

200444

- Castaic Spectr

t

. 0.6 - 0.4

- U)

- 1

r 0.2 -

0 - .- + P 0.0 QJ - - a, 0 -0.2

- U 4

- -0.4

- -

-0.6 0 10 20 30 40

Time -sec

(a) Northridge Castaic Old Ridge Route CH 1 Record Scaled to 0.57g Peak Acceleration

2.0

1.5 0, t

6 G=

2 a, - Q) L) 1.0 9 - E C

0 a, L1. m

0.5

0.0 2 0.1 2 5 2 5 1 0.0 1 10

Period - sec

(b) Comparison of Pseudo-Acceleration Response Spectrum of M6.7 January 17, 1994 Northridge Earthquake Castaic - Old Ridge Route, CHN 1:90 DEG Record and Target Design Spectrum (Peak Acceleration Scaled to 0.57g)

FIGURE

32 200444

PREPARED BY:

ENVIRO- & ~ u m

CASTAIC ACCELERATION RECORD' AND DYNAMIC RESPONSE SPECTRUM - LOCAL DESIGN EARTHQUAKE -

- B-19 CLASS II/III LANDFILL Kettleman Hills Facility

Kettleman ~ ~ t y , Kings ('mnty, CaIifornia

0.6

0.4 0

; 0.2 0 .- C e 0.0 ar - (I) u -0.2 2

-0.4

-0.6 0 10 20 30 40

Time -sec

(a) Northridge Pacoima - Kagel Canyon CH 3 Record Scaled to 0.57g Peak Acceleration

2.0

1.5 0 I

C 0 . - C

n a, - Q, 0 1.0 1: - 2 C

0 (1) Q

V)

0.5

0.0 2 0.1 2 5 1 2

0.0 1 10 Period - sec

(b) Comparison of Pseudo-Acceleration Response Spectrum of M6.7 January 17, 1994 Northridge Earthquake Pacoima - &gel Canyon, CHN 3:360 DEG Record and Target Design Spectrum (Peak Acceleration Scaled to 0.57g)

FIGURE

33- 200444

PREPAREO BY:

~ R o m m &C w m , m

PACOIMA-KAGEL CANYON ACCELERATION RECORD AND DYNAMIC RESPONSE SPECTRUM - LOCAL DESIGN EARTHQUAKE -

B-19 CLASS lllllt LANDFILL Kettlemon Hills Facility

Kettleman City, Kings County, California

. ~ d 3

Available Material and Interface Propenlea u a d for Seiectlon of Deslgn Parameters

Cahorlon mr) o

360 100 500

uoo 0

?,OM 5CO 6W

0 410

3,6W f 2 W 1,300 i.156

n t r r . Inca

F4. W

MSW

E h l b l d ProposN

Llnrr cmtt.t.cilon

Waste F,T C h r l / W a r W O p m k n ~ Lryor

C / r r l # / / I f wash

B K I ~ C L ~ u b g r n d b ~ ~ r v i m w s ~ & ~ r n d & n a - c r o r t . e r ~ n u Perk Shear Slmnplh C l b y ~ ~ I I a ~ a n d , b w . A b n p B r M w Pbak Shear Smnolh Ena lnwnd FUI *a#? SlnxbmlFlR (bp Mmp.cled maledab bum dsslflkpnlod brdmckj

Compaelrd Chy Uner (rhofl I s m at low confining s h a d

Rlmrrks

Oerp Srp Swllcer ShaRow Sip SIlnpcss

Oar# Slp Sdaces Shaaw Slp Swlacos

DS lash DS and TXUU h r l f

TrUU

Benn maletinla. ~ b i v t a l ~ d DS felts Brnn mrlsdalx, nalwal mdslm.DS lor16

T X ~ U

I fC4prl [P.rk), 000 pf (mSldmr) 1 x . c ~ kr lx , m m c i u s d d n t e u ~ l d f l ly lmne

CAI (19dO. 1901). ESI(I093) QAI (I*#% 1D911, E S I ( ~ ~ # S )

REI. ~ ~ m r r ( r # 0 4 j ESI (10031

' REI, K ~ ( l D 9 4 1 ESl(fP91)

RE1 ESf(t992) ESI llO92J

ESI(1992) ESl(fO90)

Kormw flQa6) Glnma (tO80)

ESI (190)

OAl ( m e IPDO)

RE1 K o e m r (1994J ESI (fs9$

REI. K w m r ( l 9 9 4 J &Sf (19DJ)

ESl(1BPQ

ESI (1902) ESt (t992) SMS (1908)

SMS ( M ~ I ) ' SMS (1980)

OAI (1960)

RE!, Kwmrr( lPV4)

REI. KMm+t(lO@l)

SMS ( r m o

RE1

2

Thkkmsr Rohnncr

CAI (1989. ~ D P O , ESl(fS93) GAl (1949, lDQlJ, ESl(l99JJ

Kava lodrn @I rl. 199s ~ r v r z r ~ r f i n r l of, 1996

OM PA. 19dM9), ESI (1900) D4A P A . i * I IJ . ESl(1990)

ES111980) EMCON (19611)

DM (1089 WA (1989)

~ s r (rP90) SMS f1988J OAl (1#8$ €51 (19901

cIr*: IMII W s t a OprmblD~ Sdl L a p r

Q.o(rxUh F/Mr (12 o m spunband mmrovln m d n I I42 pSCR

Prlmr~/ LCRS UmnulrrLryrr

O m k l k C w h ~ n ( fa o m y ~pwlbandiwnvmvan, f m ~ r a 1153 F(SCI)

PdnUry HDPE Geonwmbnne (DDubfa T e ~ l u q d FlSCDl

Pdmrry C h y U w r

Geokrab Flker (12 or&y spwnb0ndnan~ve0. Tmvlm I ~ S S PSCfl

S r w n d r q LCRS Clnwi r r Layer

Q w b x U h C W (11 a d ~ y / J I W M ~ ~ ~ oeowonn, T ~ H * t 155 W C D

( i rwn l ORInrpr L r p r flrr.Ur1 TN 3002, QeosompasIta PN 3000, pSCD

S u u n d r y HOPE Qoomrmbnne (Oaubl* Smalh pSC8

S r w r y G t w Urnr V ldosr Zonr Monbr lnp Syrr*m ( I i ~ b o t ~ w M . bp t.6-loocda*p lmnCh ')

(7 rnneh nd a r b r u b p r r l Oaohr#f# FlMr (16 o w cpvrdmd nonwov#n, T n W i 1156 WSCJ

D n m r p . R W n w r Lawr

UObhxa* CLUhhU (18 o t n y d p ~ n & n d i w m w l m , 1155 WSCD

HOPE O w m m b n n r (&&lo Smwm PunaBD

Phaor U S i d a s b p d U o s r / ~ r f n c r

On11 W ~ / p h l &I)

115

5

130 I30

I25

125

125

Ch: IUll WIIN

ShbrrS l rh#h FrkW

idaomrr)

31 27 3J 0

40 36

30 I t 21 33 J g 0 0 0 20

P P

r

P

P

P

P

E P E

E

E

E

E

E

E

E

E '

E

t feel

o.faainch

80 W l

3.5 toel

2 Re1

2tonm1

1 loo1

2jOnirs

0.2lmh

SO d l

1.5 1011

110 WI;

11wr

2100d11

60 W l

3.5 leal

? I O w r

I fool

2101Ws

ao HIS

? k@l 4 0 M

tfOnw*

0.2lneh

60 nYI

? I 0 mirr

0.2 mch

dOmN

1.8 h* l

1010 13 reel 15 /eel

40 WIS

VIII.IR

2 he1

0.3OSImh

60 M i

2 l r a l ?ha1

2.5 Ire1

165 d l 8

P P

P

P

E E

E

E

E

E

E

E

E

E

E

E

E

E

E

E

E

E

E E

E E E E

E

E

E

E

E

E E

w P P

P

P

P P

P

P

P P E

P P

P

o p . m m S d l L l l r r

O r b m w l r onkr rga~ryor ( rar&cr l TNSW2 M C D

Sfnvlr laxhmd WDPE G w m m b m n r pSC] ( l r r lund rlda Dam)

I

2 1101

165 Ox&

1 foal

? f o r n u

SO d l

I.5 hof L O h r l 165 f n h

1401

2 t o /HIS

0.305lmh

60 IWl

3.5 h r l

2 l o W I ~

1 locl

2fOOxIs

00 nW$

- - - - - - - - -

- - - - - - - - - - -

- -

- -

- - - - - - -

- -

-. -

-

-

- bas* rutwmd HOPE Gbommbnn* WSCl

~ r w # ~ P O V K k ~ Sdl L.yvr glru Wi WaM I )WJ rmd Claar I ( l o r )

vpOullr,mr*c

6 n Flguns 6 b 12 brlnlwfaw CWonsnl

- -

J

4

a

:

:

6

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

--. -

23

6

la 7 9 0 I? 26 10

J I

8

%JD

.JO

r t 2

a s

0 6

24

.50

r 3 0

- 4 0

o - 8 0

2

' 3 0

l a 0

- 8 0

4

L P O

8 5

9

r 20

0.3

0

- 8 0

2s

25

Chy War (AW-, lllh d w b a n ~ l a s m p d In tmthr ovor s b w )

Pharr/8n&lll eanom L lnr rb l r t tb t * C h l r I W r $ h

O ~ ~ U M I &I ~ b p r

Olohrb7. kNhr (10 4-y ~ p u n b o n d n o ~ v m Tmvln 1 195 flSCB

PIInuW LCRS Q n n J 8 r L 1 y r

~ ~ * n r r y OmhxY* Cv&n ( fa ot*y spunbond mmugwo. ~ m d n 1 155 NSCD

P d n Y 0-1 Ipp?mrl PN10M. PSCD

P#WW HW ~ m m b r m w ~ u b h snag8 ~ l i ~ r ~

Pdmn Chy Unrr tAddx)

S m W y Owbath Fl#er (I0 o m spunbondnoevmwn. ~ m d m 1 155 p s C p

Srcvndrfy LCRS Qmnulrr Lryrr

Sowmury OWtxUb Cushion ( I 4 o ~ 4 y s+wnbqndiwmwwn. Tmnm 1155 l W C #

S u o h r ) . HOPE O w m m b n n e ( h b k SrtvoL? p W a J

Ereondry C b v U w r (Adnbd

Vsdor* Zonm Yvnmdflg 9ralmm ( r l . l a o r ~ l d o Oy ?.&kolderp imnch 'I (7 Tmnch wl brlow rubgnda

OaollrUlr F l h r (18 orhy ¶Punbond mmnown, hn'n 1133 PSCD

h h r p . Roclvr)mwlL4y.r

Oeohrrh CuJhlM ( f a ~ L h y x p u n b o n d n o n ~ r m , r n b i n 1155 WSCd

rmpr o m - lmvbk smwm PWWOD SuWRdO

Phrcr la4MIf Sldallopr Llnrr lnrrr l rcr mu 1 W.rk O ~ U W S M I * ~ H mu- HDPP a~mswmn (awbie smoom~ wmq Gwla*ah (16 ornrtpunbond m w n . mr(~ 115s pscj

Pdnuy owmr P J l y m f PNJWO. lNScp Wmry UWle G m m b n n m (=oa2ln 8mwn PWbD

8-ryQ.o(~dh ( I8 ~Lhvxwnbondnenwawn, T m ~ m 1755 FISCD

s ~ b ~ b r l y a m ( P & ~ I PNJOOQ. INSCD

SrcMdrty HOPE O w m m b n n e (Douhlr ~mrn f f v n d b

C ~ Y * Ph4sa IBnMIIPrrImrtmr Berm (0.25H:lV Butrrra FNV LlnarfCov*r

Ch** 1 Walk Srhot Fowwrdon Sd l L.yor Srh& FlI COW

HOPE &)oUbkTb#hmd Cowr (NSC)

P

P P

I

- I

'I<

,'

I

for%

f loo1

31 27

25 .Id

2d . ~ r

I 5 14 Id

9 o 27 26 20

21

25 * 1 4

25 , I4

19

11 9

8.5

0

- 4 0 H O

25

13

- 1 0

11

0

0

0 100 400

3,600 0 0

1,1*

0

0

0

0

0

o

900 0

b

0

0

900

0

0

0

0

o

0

0

0

0

900

#

IW

IW

25 32

1 Ffl S M Phrsr lMMl l - HWlYSW Seprr8llon Lln~rlnlmrlOtr

~ 1 1 1 b l w l r W r r h . Opmucdt S o l l b y r r

13- OnmrvaAayr r ( l * l -Ne l THlbd2 iNSC8

Doua* TawhmdHaPE OromrmbnrH p S C I

ConlplUKI LoWrmmrWSCSdlL syvr F w W SOU L 4 9 r C k u ~ r k

HWmSW Unl18.10 Nn11 Closure Coverlnrrdsce C h U IYlll wasla V W t r l u r SW C4Wr

Q.ohrvh Onlnapr L.ybt(12 o m y spnbond nonwovso. T m ~ m 1142 NSCJ

Raaldunf 106 0

0 3w

0 0

0 o

f h ) 0 0

4W 3.aw

0 0

1,150

0

0 0

(1

0

I S

IW 605 0

OW .

0

0

0

REI GAI (109OJ

RsrlduaI

R ~ l d u a l MI coodruon (onrbu.den r 600 psO RUldy* WOI conduon (avoauden r 600 PSI)

0 s tosf$ (Oundh HOPE), Shon Term TrVU k f ls , 8hOn Ann b r d n a o r ) o w c o n R n i ~ ~ s s u m

Tx-CU t*sLI, Long Term

Ganeric avakteUon ol KHF IanMll cbsums

R ~ l ~ r ~ wet ~ I I o o

Rw:ldubl. mlcone9bion

Rorlh4l. 8 1 h k d C l l y eondi~on Resldunl, dry c o ~ U o n (Wml mnd. hW * 56 bell

Reslbunl, w l Combon

Rmsldvel. un vancution

Rerldurl, $ a m f e d clay c o n a l ~ n (HW r $8 taeu Rol#Uwrl. dry cantWon for ml Cond. hW * 54 Ieey

Resldvrl, -1 M B o n

RsaWavrI. ml condUon

~ s d ~ s r , WI eondidon

Rauuual, rby w o n

Abddu.1 dycenol'Yoo

Rosi&rl. &y ~ w d m

RrdoUal, cly conMUon

, Rmsldvrl, ~y o r m r mndiuon

Rd(Iu*l, rrhmfsdclevccrr6'Uon

ReJldvrl, dry coWtion (of wrr mnd.. HN * 68 h a 0

23

75

23

22

24

A s ~ u n m d ~ u m 6 . n s 6 CI&WY srnd

D I r p SYp Sulfacar snrtmw slip s ~ r c r r s .

AssumdhlOhsrlhra waohvUWey

~ssunmd h l p n a r ~ l m p . o r r ~ u ~ e i r y

Rrsldurl Ta Trait. G u m HOPLgmdad GeoIexUh

Tx T r s B G w W HwWnDonddd GeomxUlo

DSMSh (GvndhHOPE), ShDnTerm huu lasts, shod fern b r a n o orbw canfining omsruro

?x.CU hsls. Long f e n

Aasumd M r r Inon peolrrBIeh-fey

Assumvd hlgnermrn p o ~ e ~ n l w a y

OS 10~1s Mael W e d p~olexUIn)

as 14Sb l~vnme HDPE) DS @sf$ (C iudr H O P ~ b I e . b l d s d 9 b 0 ~ 3 i l 8 J

Rbdrdual

Rssldual, w l canbU00 (W hickrr Lhan 58 lesfJ Resldusl, dry m M l b n (of wvl mnd., HW 58 /beg

Rrsldurl. m l mndVon

Realdurl. m l cuncUtian

E----.5-

RE1

SMS (1984)

OFH (IOVP GFW(10B6) ESI 11992) ESI (t09OJ

Kornur(lO8S) G v d (fPlW

ESl(190)

GAI (1988)

SMS (1988)

SMS (1OII). ESI (IPPOJ'

SMS (1ar81, €31 (lQDOI*

SM* (1Dda) SMS (198s)

SMS (ID88J

SMS (198al

SMS f1988~ SMSflDUEJ

SMS (1968)

SMS (1Q84J

SMS rfona)

SMS f1944J

SMS (TO@&

SWS ( l V I I l

SMS (188S)

.$I&? (1088)

SMS (lldQ)

SMS (1900~

RE1 Korrnlrlr994)

RE/, U O ~ m r ( t 9 0 4 ) .

ReUdual

Rrlldual

Re W m l

M C- 0 8nU 30 l b r d ~ O P mMSh~Ilow 1Yp sur0cIS1 mSpcWwly

0

100

0

rbd

0 ID

RE/

RE!

RE1

OAl(l900)

GAI (i990), ESI (19901

F~p-eu~ , : : L - 1S-r Gem PrelitirL~ury S~rrhiliry E~~ulurr~iorr. AdSII' Latrd/ill Ur,if B- 19, Kenlernan Hills Faciliy, Kings Counly. Calfornia e a 3 , 6.0 REFERENCES

Abrahamson, N.A. and W.J. Silva (1997), Empirical Response Spectral Attenuation Relationsfor Shalloiv Cr~r.s/al Earthquakes, Seismological Research Letters, Vol. 68, Number 1 JanuarylFebruary.

Achilleos, E. (I 988). User's Guidejor PCSTABL 5M, Purdue University, West Lafayette, Indiana, - pp. 132.

Blake, Thomas, F. (1 996), Eqseurch-A Computer Program for the Estimation of Peak Horizontal Acccleratio17 Fro177 Calfor-nia Historical Earthquake Catalogs, January.

Bray, J.D., A.J. Augello, G.A. Leoiiards, P.C. Repetto, and R.J. Byme (1995) Seismic Stability Proc~.dt~r~~..s,fi~r Solid M/u.~te Landjills, Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, ASCE, Vol. 121, No.2, February.

California Division of Mines and Geology (1975), Recommended Guidelines for Determining the Maxin7111n C~.edihle und M U X ~ I I ~ U I I I Probable Earthquakts, Note 43.

California Strong Motion instrumentation Program, CSMIP (1994a,b,c,d,e'), First through Fifih' Quick Rcporls on CSA4IP Slrong-Motion Data from the Sun Fernando Valley Earthquake of Janualy 17. 199%

Caltech Blue Book Series (1969-74), Volume 2: Strong Motion Earthquake Accelerograms - Correc/ed Accclerogra177s, Earthquake Engineering Research Laboratory, California Institute of Technolog)/, Pasadena, California, (25 reports).

Campbell, Kenneth W. (1 997), E~l~j?irical Near-Source Attenuation Relationships for Horizontal and I'erlical Coml~onents of Peak Ground Acceleration, Peak Ground Velocity, and Pseudo- Absolu~e Accelero/iort Response Spectra, Seismological Research Letters, Vo1.68, Number 1, Januar)dFebruary.

Carey, P.J., N. Koragappa and J.J. Gurda (1993), A Case Study of the Brookhaven Landfill-Long Island, A'eil~ J'ork, Wasle Tech'93, pp. 15, Marina Del Rey, California.

CHZM I-Iill (1985). Final Environnrental Itnpact Report, CWM, Inc., for Kings County Planning Agency, Hat?/brd, Cal~forr7ia. October

Dames & Moore (1 986), Faultirrg/Seisnziciiy Report, Kettleman Hills Facility for CWM, Inc., November 19.

Duncan (1 992), Slate-of-the-Art: Static Stability and Deformation Analysis, ASCE Geotechnical Special Publication No. 3 1, Stability and Performance of Slopes and Embankments-11, pp. 222- 266.

g: Irw~asfciker~le1i1a17I200444Iklrfseis4. wpd 6-1 July, 1997

Preli1rii17ar)~ Slubililjr Elralua~iorr, A4SM' Lo17djill Unit 0-19, Kellleman Hills Focilily. Kings Caunfy. California

Earth Technology (1988), In-Place Stability of Landfill Slopes, Puente Hills, Los Angeles, California, Rep011 No. 88-614-1, Long Beach, California.

Environmental Solutions, Inc. (1994), Unpublished Resultsfiom the Drive Tube Density Tests in 011 ReJiuse. Technical Meluorandum No. 7, January.

Franklin, A. G. and F. K. Chang (1977), Permanent Displacements of Earth Embankments by Neu1nzar.k Sliding Block Analysis, Earthquake Resistance of Earth and Rock-Fill Dams, Report 5, U. S. Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Waterways Experiment Station, November.

GeoSyntec Consultants (1996), Seisntic Exposure Evaluation, 011 Landfill, Monterey Park, Cal(foro,.r?ia, Report No. SWP-1, Iluntington Beach, California.

Hall, J.F. (Editor, 1995). Norlhridge Earthquah ofJanuary 17, 1994 Reconnaissance Report, Volurile 1." Earthquake Spectra, Supplement C to Volume 11, April 1995.

Hart, E. (1992), Falilt Ru1~lur.e Hazard Zone in California, Revised 1992, California Division of Mines and Geology.

Hudson, M., I.M. Idriss, and M. Beikae (1994), A Computer Program To Evaluate the Seismic Respon.re qf Soil Slruclurcs Using Finite Element Procedures and Incorporating A Compliant Base, Report from the Center for Geotechnical Modeling, Department of Civil and Environ~nental Engineering, University of California, Davis.

Hushmand Associates (1994), Landfill Response to Seismic Events, Report Prepared for EPA- Region IX, Irvine, California.

Hynes-Griffin, M.A. and A.G. Franklin (1 984), Rationalizing the Seismic Coeficient, Miscellaneous Pal~er GL-84-13, Geotecllnical Laboratory, U.S. Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Waterways Experiment Station, pp. 37, July.

Idriss, I.M. ( I 993), Procedures for Selecting Earthquake Ground Motions at Rock Sites, National Institute of Standards and Technology, NIST GCR 93-65, pp. 7.

ldriss, I.M., et al. (1973), QUAD-4, A Computer Program for Evaluating the Seismic Response of . Soil Structures bj) i/ariable Danzping Finite Elements, Report No. EERC 73 16, Earthquake Engineering Research Center, University of California, Berkeley, California, June.

Idriss, I.M. and Sun, (1991), A Computer Program for Conducting Equivalent Linear Seismic Response AI?U/J~.YCS of Horizontally Layered Soil Deposits- Program modified based on the Original SHAKEprogram published in December 1972 by Schnabel, Lysmer and Seed.

Idriss, I.M., Fiegel, G.L, Hudson, M.B., Mundy, P.K., and Herzig, R. (1995), Seismic Response of the Operating 11idu.vtries Landfill. ASCE Special Technical Publication No. 54, edited by M.K.

Preli~lti~ra,)~ Slubililj~ Evul~ia~io~r, Ad.7lI' Lu~,dJll Uiril B-19, Kellleisan Hills Faciliy, Kings Counfy, Calijornia

Yegian and W.D. Liani Finn. Proceeding of the ASCE Convention in San Diego, California of October 23-27, 1995.

Kavazanjian E., Jr., Matasovic, N., Bonaparte, R., and Schmertman, G.R. (1995), Evaluation of MSW Proj~criies for Seis~nic Analyses, Proceedings of the Geoenvironrnent 2000 Specialty Conference, ASCE, Vol. 2, pp. 1126-1 141, New Orleans, Louisiana, 24-26 February 1995.

Lin, J.S. and Whitman, R.V. (1983), Decoupling Approximation to the Evaluation of Earthquake Induced Plastic Slip in Earilz Dams, J. Earthquake Engineering Structural Dynamics, Vol. 11, pp.667-678.

Makdisi, F. I . and H. B. Seed (1978), Simplified Procedurefor Estimating Dam and Embankment Earil7cluake-l17d11ced Dcforn~aiion. Journal of the Geotechnical Engineering Division, ASCE, Vol. 104. No. GT7. July. 1q1. 849-868.

Morochnik, V., Bardet, J.P., and Huslimand, B. (1996), ldentrjication of the Dynamic Properties of rhe 011 L~/ldfi/l , Submitted for publication in tlle Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, ASCE.

Mualchin, L. and Jones, A.L. (1 992), Peak Accelerationfrom Maximum Credible Earthquakes in Cal~fornia (Rock and S~iff-Soil Siies), Prepared for Internal Use by Caltrans, California Department of Conservation, Division of Mines and Geology, DMG Open-File Report 92-1.

Newark , N. M. (1 965), Effecls of Earthquakes on Danzs and Embanhents, 5th Rankine Lecture, Geotechnique, Vol. 15, No. 2, pp. 139-160.

Sadigh, K., Chang C.-Y., Egan, J.A., Youngs, R.R. (1997), Attenuation Relationships for Shallow Crus/ol Eurihquakes Based 0 1 1 California Strong Motion Data, Seismological Research Letters, Vol. 68, Number 1, January/February.

Sadigh, K., Chang, C.-Y., Abrahamson, N.A., Chiou, S.J., and Power, M.S. (1993), Specification of Long-period ground Motio~ts: Updated Attenuation Relationships for Rock Site Conditions and Aciiusirneni Faciors Near-Fault Efects: Proceedings of ATC-I 7-1 Seminar on Seismic lsola/ion, Passii~e Energy Dissipation, andActive Control, San Francisco, Califomia, pp. 59-70.

Schnabel, P.B., 1. Lysme~. and H.B. Seed (1972), SHAKE: A Computer Program for Earthquake Respor7se Analysis of Horisonially Layered Sites. Report No. EERC 72-12, Earthquake Engineering Research Center. University of California, Berkeley.

Seed, H.B. and Bonaparte, R. (1992), Seismic Analysis and Design of Lined Waste Fills: Current Praclice. Proceeding of S/abiIi@ and Performance of Slopes and Embankments-11. Vol, 2, ASCE Geoteclinical Special; Publication No.3 1, Berkeley, California, pp. 1521-1545.

Seed, H. B. and Idriss, I. M. (1970), Soil Moduli and Damping Factors for Dynamic Response . Analyses, Report No. EERC 70-10, Earthquake Engineering Research Center, University of California, Berkeley, CA.

o~lrwn~r~lkn/ / l~rnn11l700444IkI1f~ni .~4 wnd 6-1 h l v . 1997

Preli~r7i~7arj~ S10hililjz El~aluo1io~7, AtS1.l' La17dfill Unit B-19, Keltleman Hills Faciliry. Kings Counly. Cali jonia

Seed, H.B., Mal-tin, G,R. (1966), The Seisnzic Coefjicient In Earth Dam Design, ASCE, Vol. 92, No. SM3, Proc. Paper 4824, May 1966, pp. 25-58.

Seed, N. B., Wong, R.T., Idriss, 1. M., and Tokimatsu, K. (1984), Moduli and Damping Factorsfor Dynamic Analyses ofCol7esionless Soils, Report No. EERC 84-14, Earthquake Engineering Research Center, University of Califomia, Berkeley, CA, September.

Shanna, H.D., M.T. Dukes, and D.M. Olsen. (1990), Field Measurements ofDynamic Moduli and Poissor7 's Ra/io ofRefuse arid Underlying Soils at a Landfill Site, Geotechnics of Waste Fill- Theory and Practice, ASTM STP 1070, pp. 57-70.

Silva, W.S. and I<. Lee, (1987), Stale of tile Art for Assessing Earthquake Hazards in the United S/a/es, M'ES RASCAL Code for Synthesizing Earthquake Ground Motions, Report 24, Prepared by Woodward-Clyde Consultants for Department ofthe Army, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers under Contract No. DACW39-85-M-1585.

Southern California Earthquake Center, SCEC, Working Group on Califomia Earthquake Probabilities (1995), Seisn7ic Hazards in Southern California: Probable Earthquakes, 1994 to 2021, Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, Vol. 85, No. 2, pp. 379-439, April.

Stewart, J.P., Bray, J.D., Seed, R.B. and Sitar, N. (Editors, 1994), Preliminary Report on the Priricij?rrl Gcotccl7~7ical Asj~ecls of the January 17, 1994 Northridge Earthquake. Report No. UCIEERC-94108, June.

Sun, J.I., Golesorkhi, R., and Seed, H.B. (1988), Dynamic ModuliandDamping Ratios for Cohesive Soils, Report No. EERC 88-15, Earthquake Engineering Research Center, University of California, Berkeley, CA, August.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), RCRA Subtitle D (258) (1995), Seismic Design Guidance For A4u1~icij~al Solid Cl'asle Facilities, April.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) (1987), Seisniic Stabiliw Evaluation for the Toe Butlress Cor?struc/ion-Oj~eming Industries, lnc. Site, Monterey Park, Woodward-Clyde Consultants.

U. S. Geological Su~vey (1 988), Digitized Strong-Motion Accelerograms ofNorth America Through 1986, Open-File Report 89-83, December.

Vucetic. M. and Dobry, R. (1991), Effect of Soil Plasticity on Cyclic Response, Journal of the Geotechnical Engineering, ASCE, Vol. 117, No. 1, pps. 89-107.

Wesnouski, S.G. (1 986), E~rrtl7quakes, Qua~ernary Faults, and Seisnric Hazard in California, Journal of Geophysical Research, Vol. 91, No. B12, pp. 12,587-12,631, November.

Yegian, M.K. and W.D. Finn (1995), Earthquake Design andPer/omance ofSolid Waste L a n d ' , Geotechnical Special Publication No. 54, American Society of Civil Engineers, December.

Prcli~~linor)~ Slahilil)r Ei~allmiio17, II6W Landjill Unil B-19, Kelrlcman Hills Facilify, Kings County, Caiifornia

7.0 PARTIAL LIST OF DOCUMENTATION REPORTS ON KETTLEMAN HILLS FACILITY

Donohue 8( Associates, Inc. (1 988), "Engineering Report, Kettleman Hills Facility, LandfiNB- 19, PI7~.ses I l und 111, Kirigs County, California': Donohue Project No. 16149, dated October. 1988.

EBA Wastechnologies (1 995), "Kings County Integrated Waste Management Plan," adopted by the Kings County Board of Supervisors, dated April 1995.

Einarson, Fowler & Watson ( 1 996), "Site-Sl~ecific Groundwater Monitoring Plan, Kettleman Hi1l.s fi~cilil)~. Ki17g.~ Counl~l, California, Project No. KHF 102. " Report prepared for Chemical Waste Management, Inc. (Revised October, 1996).

Emcon (1 999, "Rc]~orl of l4'~ale Discliurge, Mustang Hills Landfill, Kings County, California, 1~ol~111ie 2, Prqjecl A1o. -70390-010.001. " Appendix A: Seismicity Report by Norman A. Abral~a~nson. RWD prepared for Kings Waste and Recycling Authority, dated October 25, 1995.

Environmental Solutions, Inc. (1990), "EngineeringandDesign Report, Landfill Unit B-18, phase.^ I and I1 ulid Final Closure, Kcttlenzan Hills Facility, Kings County, California, h7cludir7g Al~l1o7dices A lhrough F." Report prepared for Chemical Waste Management, Inc. (CWMI), Pro.jecl No. 89-977, dated August, 1990.

Environmental Solutions, Inc. (1993), "Revised Intermediate Waste Fill Plan, Landfill Unit B-18, Pliuscs 1, Ke//lernu17 Hills Facilify, Kings County, California. " Report prepared for Chemical Waste Management, Inc. (CWMI), Project No. 92-222, dated August, 1993.

GeoSyntec Consultants (1991), "Final Report, Landjil B-19 Phase IA Investigation, Kettleman Hills Fc~clci/ilj~, Kelllernan City, California." Report prepared for Chemical Waste Management, Inc., dated 25 March 1991. Volume I: Main Test and Appendices A tluough E Volunle 11: Appendices F tllluugh K

Golder Associates lnc. ( I 987), "Tesl Fill and lnfilrronzeter Test Results, Kettleman Hills Facility, Ke//lc177crn Cil)~. Col(fornia, Projecl No. 863-1092. " Report prepared for Chemical Waste Management Inc., dated January, 1987.

Golder Associates Inc. (1 988), "Updated Evaluation ofsite Design Ground Motions for the Ke~~lo~~rrr i Hills Facilil)~, Kettleman City. California, Project No. 883-7010. " Report prepared for Chemical Waste Management Inc., dated September, 1988.

Golder Associates Inc. (1989), "Geologic Conditions of the Subgrade, Landfill B-19, Phase N and 111 ~vi /h Sumniary of Geology and Engineering Properties of Landfill B-19, Ketileman Hills Focili/)i Ket/lcntar7 City, California. " Report prepared for Chemical Waste Management Inc., Project No. 883-1462, dated February, 1989.

Preliff~ifiafy S~ohililj~ Eimlualiorr, MSW Landfill Unit 8-19, Kertlman Hills Facility. Kings County, California

Golder Associates Inc. (1 990), "Direct Shear Testing Program for Landfill Cover Design, Ke/tlo~lu~i Hills Facilit)]; " Project No. 893-7015.340. Report prepared for Chemical Waste Management Inc., dated June 29, 1990. Included is also a laboratory test data report dated April 1990, I'roject No. 892-2078.

Colder Associates Inc. (1 99 I), "LundjN B-19, Phase IA Redesign and Closure, Kettleman Hills Fucilit)~. K~'//le111un Cirj~, Cali$ornia, Project No. 903-1343.610. " Report prepared for Chemical M'asle Management Inc., dated April 15, 1991. Volume 1: Design Report and Design Drawings, Revision 0. Volunie 11: Materials Specifications and Construction Requirements, Revision 0. Volume 111: Appendices Supporting Calculations and Laboratory Testing Summary.

Apj~endices A-l through A-14, Revision 0. Volulne 1V: Appendices Supporting Calculations and Laboratory Testing Summary.

Appendices A-15 through A-26, Revision 0.

Seed, R.B.; .I.I<. Mitchell and H.B.Seed (1988), "Slope Stability Failure Investigation: Landfill Uhi/ 8-19. /'hu.re /-A, Ckc~nical JVasre Management, Inc. Facility, Kettleman Hills, C~fll/o~,ni(~." Rel~ort dated June 29,1988.

Volume I: Report of Investigation Volumc 11: Appe~idix A: Result of Direct Shear Interface Tests.

Wahler Associales (1 988). "Gco/cch~~icai inl~cstigation, Kettleman ifills Facility, Landfill Unit 0-19 - Phuses I1 and 111, Kings Co~inry, California." Report prepared for Donohue and Associates, Project DAA-IOSH, dated January 16, 1989.

Wahler Associates (1 988), " S ~ r / ~ ~ ~ l e ~ ~ i e ~ i ~ a l Geotec/inical Investigation, Kettleman Hills Facility, Lund/ill Uni/ B- 19 - Phases I1 uttd III, Kings Couniy, California." Report prepared for Donohue and Associates, Project DAA-103H, dated January 31, 1989.

Wahler Associates (1988), "As-Built Sections, Landfill Unit B-19 - Phases IIandIIl, Kettleman Hills Focililj), Kings County, Cal@r77ia." Report prepared for Donohue and Associates, Prqject DAA-104H, dated February 2, 1989.

Wahler Associates (I 989), "Georechnical bz\~estigation for Confirmation of Design, Kettleman Hills Fucilil)~, Landfill Unit B-19 - Phases II and 111, Kings County, California." Project DAA-I 0 11-1; Report dated August 5 , 1988.

Documents

Chem Waste Kettleman Closure Plan Appendices Vol 2 … - rbiliw Evaltrofion. Kettleman Hills Faciliiy. MSlV Landfill L'nir B-19, Kin~s Cr Coifinria - Table 2b - Summary of Pseudo-Static