Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
Appendix J - Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan
Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan For: WPT - Live Oak at Santa Ana Industrial APN: 0236-141-05, -06, -20 Prepared for: Live Oak Land, LLC 150 South 5th St, #2675 Minneapolis, MN 55402 (310) 977-2857 Prepared by: Huitt-Zollars, Inc. 3990 Concours, Suite 330 Ontario, CA 91764 (909) 941-7799 Submittal Date: 02-24-2022 Revision Date: TBD Preliminary for Entitlements Complete Date: TBD Construction WQMP Complete Date: TBD Final WQMP Approved Date: TBD Approval Date:_____________________ Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) Owner’s Certification Project Owner’s Certification This Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) has been prepared for Live Oak Land, LLC by Huitt-Zollars, Inc. The WQMP is intended to comply with the requirements of the City of Fontana and the NPDES Areawide Stormwater Program requiring the preparation of a WQMP. The undersigned, while it owns the subject property, is responsible for the implementation of the provisions of this plan and will ensure that this plan is amended as appropriate to reflect up-to-date conditions on the site consistent with San Bernardino County’s Municipal Storm Water Management Program and the intent of the NPDES Permit for San Bernardino County and the incorporated cities of San Bernardino County within the Santa Ana Region. Once the undersigned transfers its interest in the property, its successors in interest and the city/county shall be notified of the transfer. The new owner will be informed of its responsibility under this WQMP. A copy of the approved WQMP shall be available on the subject site in perpetuity. “I certify under a penalty of law that the provisions (implementation, operation, maintenance, and funding) of the WQMP have been accepted and that the plan will be transferred to future successors.” Project Data Permit/Application Number(s): TBD Grading Permit Number(s): TBD Tract/Parcel Map Number(s): TBD Building Permit Number(s): TBD CUP, SUP, and/or APN (Specify Lot Numbers if Portions of Tract): 0236-141-05, -06, -20 Owner’s Signature Owner Name: Jonah Chodosh Title Director, Investments Company Live Oak Land, LLC Address 150 South 5th St, #2675 Minneapolis, MN 55402 Email jchodosh@wptreit.com Telephone # (310) 977-2857 Signature Date Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) Contents Preparer’s Certification Project Data Permit/Application Number(s): TBD Grading Permit Number(s): TBD Tract/Parcel Map Number(s): TBD Building Permit Number(s): TBD CUP, SUP, and/or APN (Specify Lot Numbers if Portions of Tract): 0236-141-05, -06, -20 “The selection, sizing and design of stormwater treatment and other stormwater quality and quantity control measures in this plan were prepared under my oversight and meet the requirements of Regional Water Quality Control Board Order No. R8-2010-0036.” Engineer: Ryan Peng, PE, QSD PE Stamp Below Title Project Manager Company Huitt-Zollars, Inc. Address 3990 Concours, Suite 330 Ontario, CA 91764 Email rpeng@Huitt-Zollars.com Telephone # (909) 941-7799 x 11410 Signature Date 23 02/22/2022 Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) Contents iv Table of Contents Section 1 Discretionary Permits ......................................................................................... 1-1 Section 2 Project Description ............................................................................................... 2-1 2.1 Project Information ........................................................................................ 2-1 2.2 Property Ownership / Management .............................................................. 2-2 2.3 Potential Stormwater Pollutants ................................................................... 2-3 2.4 Water Quality Credits ........ ……………………………………………………………………………. 2-4 Section 3 Site and Watershed Description ......................................................................... 3-1 Section 4 Best Management Practices ................................................................................ 4-1 4.1 Source Control BMP ....................................................................................... 4-1 4.1.1 Pollution Prevention ................................................................................... 4-1 4.1.2 Preventative LID Site Design Practices ....................................................... 4-6 4.2 Project Performance Criteria......................................................................... 4-7 4.3 Project Conformance Analysis ....................................................................... 4-12 4.3.1 Site Design Hydrologic Source Control BMP .............................................. 4-14 4.3.2 Infiltration BMP .......................................................................................... 4-16 4.3.3 Harvest and Use BMP .................................................................................. 4-18 4.3.4 Biotreatment BMP....................................................................................... 4.19 4.3.5 Conformance Summary ............................................................................... 4-23 4.3.6 Hydromodification Control BMP ............................................................... 4-24 4.4 Alternative Compliance Plan (if applicable) ................................................. 4-25 Section 5 Inspection & Maintenance Responsibility Post Construction BMPs ................. 5-1 Section 6 Site Plan and Drainage Plan ................................................................................ 6-1 6.1. Site Plan and Drainage Plan.......................................................................... 6-1 6.2 Electronic Data Submittal ............................................................................. 6-1 Forms Form 1-1 Project Information ............................................................................................... 1-1 Form 2.1-1 Description of Proposed Project ......................................................................... 2-1 Form 2.2-1 Property Ownership/Management ..................................................................... 2-2 Form 2.3-1 Pollutants of Concern ......................................................................................... 2-3 Form 2.4-1 Water Quality Credits ......................................................................................... 2-4 Form 3-1 Site Location and Hydrologic Features ................................................................. 3-1 Form 3-2 Hydrologic Characteristics .................................................................................... 3-2 Form 3-3 Watershed Description .......................................................................................... 3-3 Form 4.1-1 Non-Structural Source Control BMP ................................................................... 4-2 Form 4.1-2 Structural Source Control BMP .......................................................................... 4-4 Form 4.1-3 Site Design Practices Checklist ........................................................................... 4-6 Form 4.2-1 LID BMP Performance Criteria for Design Capture Volume ............................. 4-7 Form 4.2-2 Summary of HCOC Assessment .......................................................................... 4-8 Form 4.2-3 HCOC Assessment for Runoff Volume ............................................................... 4-9 Form 4.2-4 HCOC Assessment for Time of Concentration .................................................. 4-10 Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) Contents v Form 4.2-5 HCOC Assessment for Peak Runoff .................................................................... 4-11 Form 4.3-1 Infiltration BMP Feasibility ................................................................................ 4-13 Form 4.3-2 Site Design Hydrologic Source Control BMP ..................................................... 4-14 Form 4.3-3 Infiltration LID BMP ........................................................................................... 4-17 Form 4.3-4 Harvest and Use BMP ......................................................................................... 4-18 Form 4.3-5 Selection and Evaluation of Biotreatment BMP ................................................ 4-19 Form 4.3-6 Volume Based Biotreatment – Bioretention and Planter Boxes w/Underdrains 4-20 Form 4.3-7 Volume Based Biotreatment- Constructed Wetlands and Extended Detention 4-21 Form 4.3-8 Flow Based Biotreatment ................................................................................... 4-22 Form 4.3-9 Conformance Summary and Alternative Compliance Volume Estimate .......... 4-23 Form 4.3-10 Hydromodification Control BMP ..................................................................... 4-24 Form 5-1 BMP Inspection and Maintenance ........................................................................ 5-1 Attachment A: WQMP Site Plan Attachment B: BMP Details and Calculations Attachment C: Educational Materials Attachment D: Infiltration Report Attachment E: Rainfall Data (NOAA Atlas 14) & Worksheet H Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) 2-1 Section 1 Discretionary Permit(s) Form 1-1 Project Information Project Name WPT - Live Oak at Santa Ana Industrial Project Owner Contact Name: Jonah Chodosh Mailing Address: 150 South 5th St, #2675 Minneapolis, MN 55402 E-mail Address: jchodosh@wptreit.com Telephone: (310) 977-2857 Permit/Application Number(s): TBD Tract/Parcel Map Number(s): TBD Additional Information/ Comments: N/A Description of Project: This project is a new development of an industrial facility located at the northwest corner of Live Oak Avenue & Santa Ana Avenue, Fontana, California. Proposed industrial building footprint is approximately 319,956 square feet on approximately 13.80 acres of partially developed land. Post-development surface runoff will be collected by catch basins and conveyed to the on- site underground infiltration system, which is sized to detain 100-year storm event water for flood control, on the west side of the project site for treatment. A hydrodynamic separator (Contech CDS or approved equal) unit will be added to the site’s storm drain system as a pre- treatment unit. Infiltration system overflow will discharge onto Santa Ana Avenue via 2 proposed 4’ parkway drains (Outlet) on the southwest corner of the site. Runoff will flow on Santa Ana Ave towards Redwood Ave where runoff will be directed to the public storm drain on Jurupa Ave. Ultimately, runoff will be conveyed to the San Sevaine Channel, Declez Basin, Santa Ana River, and Prado Flood Control Basin. Provide summary of Conceptual WQMP conditions (if previously submitted and approved). Attach complete copy. N/A Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) 2-2 Section 2 Project Description 2.1 Project Information This section of the WQMP should provide the information listed below. The information provided for Conceptual/ Preliminary WQMP should give sufficient detail to identify the major proposed site design and LID BMPs and other anticipated water quality features that impact site planning. Final Project WQMP must specifically identify all BMP incorporated into the final site design and provide other detailed information as described herein. The purpose of this information is to help determine the applicable development category, pollutants of concern, watershed description, and long term maintenance responsibilities for the project, and any applicable water quality credits. This information will be used in conjunction with the information in Section 3, Site Description, to establish the performance criteria and to select the LID BMP or other BMP for the project or other alternative programs that the project will participate in, which are described in Section 4. Form 2.1-1 Description of Proposed Project 1 Development Category (Select all that apply): Significant re-development involving the addition or replacement of 5,000 ft2 or more of impervious surface on an already developed site New development involving the creation of 10,000 ft2 or more of impervious surface collectively over entire site Automotive repair shops with standard industrial classification (SIC) codes 5013, 5014, 5541, 7532- 7534, 7536-7539 Restaurants (with SIC code 5812) where the land area of development is 5,000 ft2 or more Hillside developments of 5,000 ft2 or more which are located on areas with known erosive soil conditions or where the natural slope is 25 percent or more Developments of 2,500 ft2 of impervious surface or more adjacent to (within 200 ft) or discharging directly into environmentally sensitive areas or waterbodies listed on the CWA Section 303(d) list of impaired waters. Parking lots of 5,000 ft2 or more exposed to storm water Retail gasoline outlets that are either 5,000 ft2 or more, or have a projected average daily traffic of 100 or more vehicles per day Non-Priority / Non-Category Project May require source control LID BMPs and other LIP requirements. Please consult with local jurisdiction on specific requirements. 2 Project Area (ft2): 601,010 3 Number of Dwelling Units: 1 4 SIC Code: 4213-4215, 4225 5 Is Project going to be phased? Yes No If yes, ensure that the WQMP evaluates each phase as a distinct DA, requiring LID BMPs to address runoff at time of completion. 6 Does Project include roads? Yes No If yes, ensure that applicable requirements for transportation projects are addressed (see Appendix A of TGD for WQMP) Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) 2-3 2.2 Property Ownership/Management Describe the ownership/management of all portions of the project and site. State whether any infrastructure will transfer to public agencies (City, County, Caltrans, etc.) after project completion. State if a homeowners or property owners association will be formed and be responsible for the long-term maintenance of project stormwater facilities. Describe any lot-level stormwater features that will be the responsibility of individual property owners. Form 2.2-1 Property Ownership/Management Describe property ownership/management responsible for long-term maintenance of WQMP stormwater facilities: The property is being developed by Live Oak Land, LLC. Live Oak Land, LLC will be the entity responsible for long term maintenance of project stormwater facilities throughout the site. Ownership: Live Oak Land, LLC Address: 150 South 5th St, #2675 Minneapolis, MN 55402 Point of Contact: Jonah Chodosh Phone: (310) 977-2857 Email: jchodosh@wptreit.com Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) 2-4 2.3 Potential Stormwater Pollutants Determine and describe expected stormwater pollutants of concern based on land uses and site activities (refer to Table 3-3 in the TGD for WQMP). Form 2.3-1 Pollutants of Concern Pollutant Please check: E=Expected, N=Not Expected Additional Information and Comments Pathogens (Bacterial / Virus) E N Pathogens are typically caused by the transport of animal or human fecal wastes from the watershed. Nutrients - Phosphorous E N Primary sources of nutrients in urban runoff are fertilizers and eroded soils. Nutrients - Nitrogen E N Primary sources of nutrients in urban runoff are fertilizers and eroded soils. Noxious Aquatic Plants E N Noxious aquatic plants are typically from animals or vehicle transport that grow aggressively, multiply quickly without natural controls (native herbivores, soil chemistry, etc.), and adversely affect native habitats. Sediment E N Sediments are solid materials that are eroded from the land surface. Metals E N The primary source of metal pollution in stormwater is typically commercially available metals and metal products, as well as emissions from brake pad and tire tread wear associated with driving. Oil and Grease E N Primary sources of oil and grease are petroleum hydrocarbon products, motor products from leaking vehicles, esters, oils, fats, waxes, and high molecular-weight fatty acids. Trash/Debris E N Trash (such as paper, plastic, polystyrene packing foam, and aluminum materials) and biodegradable organic matter (such as leaves, grass cuttings, and food waste) are general waste from human or animals Pesticides / Herbicides E N Pesticides and herbicides can be washed off urban landscapes during storm events. Organic Compounds E N Sources of organic compounds may include waste handling areas and vehicle or landscape maintenance areas. Other: E N Other: E N Other: E N Other: E N Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) 2-5 2.4 Water Quality Credits (N/A) A water quality credit program is applicable for certain types of development projects if it is not feasible to meet the requirements for on-site LID. Proponents for eligible projects, as described below, can apply for water quality credits that would reduce project obligations for selecting and sizing other treatment BMP or participating in other alternative compliance programs. Refer to Section 6.2 in the TGD for WQMP to determine if water quality credits are applicable for the project. Form 2.4-1 Water Quality Credits 1 Project Types that Qualify for Water Quality Credits: Select all that apply Redevelopment projects that reduce the overall impervious footprint of the project site. [Credit = % impervious reduced] Higher density development projects Vertical density [20%] 7 units/ acre [5%] Mixed use development, (combination of residential, commercial, industrial, office, institutional, or other land uses which incorporate design principles that demonstrate environmental benefits not realized through single use projects) [20%] Brownfield redevelopment (redevelop real property complicated by presence or potential of hazardous contaminants) [25%] Redevelopment projects in established historic district, historic preservation area, or similar significant core city center areas [10%] Transit-oriented developments (mixed use residential or commercial area designed to maximize access to public transportation) [20%] In-fill projects (conversion of empty lots & other underused spaces < 5 acres, substantially surrounded by urban land uses, into more beneficially used spaces, such as residential or commercial areas) [10%] Live-Work developments (variety of developments designed to support residential and vocational needs) [20%] 2 Total Credit % 0 (Total all credit percentages up to a maximum allowable credit of 50 percent) Description of Water Quality Credit Eligibility (if applicable) Not applicable Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) 3-6 Section 3 Site and Watershed Description Describe the project site conditions that will facilitate the selection of BMP through an analysis of the physical conditions and limitations of the site and its receiving waters. Identify distinct drainage areas (DA) that collect flow from a portion of the site and describe how runoff from each DA (and sub-watershed DMAs) is conveyed to the site outlet(s). Refer to Section 3.2 in the TGD for WQMP. The form below is provided as an example. Then complete Forms 3.2 and 3.3 for each DA on the project site. If the project has more than one drainage area for stormwater management, then complete additional versions of these forms for each DA / outlet. Form 3-1 Site Location and Hydrologic Features Site coordinates take GPS measurement at approximate center of site Latitude 34° 3'17.71"N Longitude 117°29'41.89"W Thomas Bros Map page 644 1 San Bernardino County climatic region: Valley Mountain 2 Does the site have more than one drainage area (DA): Yes No If no, proceed to Form 3-2. If yes, then use this form to show a conceptual schematic describing DMAs and hydrologic feature connecting DMAs to the site outlet(s). An example is provided below that can be modified for proposed project or a drawing clearly showing DMA and flow routing may be attached Conveyance Briefly describe on-site drainage features to convey runoff that is not retained within a DMA DA1 DMA A to Outlet 1 Post-development surface runoff will be collected by catch basins#1-2 (CB#1-2) and conveyed by storm drain lateral A-1 and A-2 to line A. Storm drain Line A will convey runoff to the underground infiltration/detention system on the west side of the project. Runoff from the building’s east roof area and east landscape area will be collected by planter drains and conveyed by storm drain line A to the underground system. Infiltration system overflow will discharge onto Santa Ana Avenue via 2 proposed 4’ parkway drains (Outlet) on the southwest corner of the site. DA1 DMA B to Outlet 1 N/A DA2 to Outlet 2 N/A Outlet 1 DA1 DMA A Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) 3-7 Form 3-2 Existing Hydrologic Characteristics for Drainage Area 1 For Drainage Area 1’s sub-watershed DMA, provide the following characteristics DMA A DMA B DMA C DMA D 1 DMA drainage area (ft2) 601,010 N/A N/A N/A 2 Existing site impervious area (ft2) 0 N/A N/A N/A 3 Antecedent moisture condition For desert areas, use http://www.sbcounty.gov/dpw/floodcontrol/pdf/2 0100412_map.pdf AMC III N/A N/A N/A 4 Hydrologic soil group Refer to Watershed Mapping Tool – http://permitrack.sbcounty.gov/wap/ A N/A N/A N/A 5 Longest flowpath length (ft) 612 N/A N/A N/A 6 Longest flowpath slope (ft/ft) ~0.016 N/A N/A N/A 7 Current land cover type(s) Select from Fig C-3 of Hydrology Manual Undeveloped N/A N/A N/A 8 Pre-developed pervious area condition: Based on the extent of wet season vegetated cover good >75%; Fair 50-75%; Poor <50% Attach photos of site to support rating Poor N/A N/A N/A Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) 3-8 Form 3-3 Watershed Description for Drainage Area Receiving waters Refer to Watershed Mapping Tool - http://permitrack.sbcounty.gov/wap/ See ‘Drainage Facilities” link at this website Jurupa Ave Storm Drain, San Sevaine Channel, Declez Basin, Santa Ana Reach 3, 2, and 1, Prado Control basin, and Pacific Ocean. Applicable TMDLs Refer to Local Implementation Plan Santa Ana River Reach 3: TMDL still required Prado Flood Control Basin: TMDL still required 303(d) listed impairments Refer to Local Implementation Plan and Watershed Mapping Tool – http://permitrack.sbcounty.gov/wap/ and State Water Resources Control Board website – http://www.waterboards.ca.gov/santaana/water_iss ues/programs/tmdl/index.shtml Santa Ana Reach 2: bacteria indicator Santa Ana Reach 3: copper, lead, pathogens Prado Control Basin: nutrients, pathogens, TSS Environmentally Sensitive Areas (ESA) Refer to Watershed Mapping Tool – http://permitrack.sbcounty.gov/wap/ None Unlined Downstream Water Bodies Refer to Watershed Mapping Tool – http://permitrack.sbcounty.gov/wap/ Santa Ana River Hydrologic Conditions of Concern Yes Complete Hydrologic Conditions of Concern (HCOC) Assessment. Include Forms 4.2-2 through Form 4.2-5 and Hydromodification BMP Form 4.3-10 in submittal No Watershed–based BMP included in a RWQCB approved WAP Yes Attach verification of regional BMP evaluation criteria in WAP • More Effective than On-site LID • Remaining Capacity for Project DCV • Upstream of any Water of the US • Operational at Project Completion • Long-Term Maintenance Plan No Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) 4-1 Section 4 Best Management Practices (BMP) 4.1 Source Control BMP 4.1.1 Pollution Prevention Non-structural and structural source control BMP are required to be incorporated into all new development and significant redevelopment projects. Form 4.1-1 and 4.1-2 are used to describe specific source control BMPs used in the WQMP or to explain why a certain BMP is not applicable. Table 7-3 of the TGD for WQMP provides a list of applicable source control BMP for projects with specific types of potential pollutant sources or activities. The source control BMP in this table must be implemented for projects with these specific types of potential pollutant sources or activities. The preparers of this WQMP have reviewed the source control BMP requirements for new development and significant redevelopment projects. The preparers have also reviewed the specific BMP required for project as specified in Forms 4.1-1 and 4.1-2. All applicable non-structural and structural source control BMP shall be implemented in the project. Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) 4-2 Form 4.1-1 Non-Structural Source Control BMPs Identifier Name Check One Describe BMP Implementation OR, if not applicable, state reason Included Not Applicable N1 Education of Property Owners, Tenants and Occupants on Stormwater BMPs Property owners shall review and become familiar with the site specific WQMP. Additional educational materials for day to day operations are contained in Attachment C. Additional materials can be obtained from the local water pollution prevention program. Education of property owners begin with the review/preparation of the site specific WQMP and continues through the review of additional educational material as it applies to the project. N2 Activity Restrictions Activity restriction shall be stated in the owners lease terms prior to occupancy: • Fuelling areas, air/water supply areas, maintenance bays, vehicle washing areas, outdoor material storage areas, outdoor work areas, outdoor processing areas, wash water from food preparation areas within the project site will not be allowed on the project site. • Storage of hazardous materials will not be allowed on the project site. • All pesticide applications shall be performed by a licensed contractor certified by the California Department of Pesticide Regulation. • All dumpster lids shall be kept closed at all times. • Blowing, sweeping or hosing of debris (leaf, litter, grass clippings, trash or debris) into the streets, underground stormdrain facilities or other storm water conveyance areas shall be strictly prohibited N3 Landscape Management BMPs A landscape architect will provide design plans for the on-site landscaping and irrigation system. The design shall incorporate the use of native and drought tolerant trees and shrubs throughout the project site. N4 BMP Maintenance Property owners shall maintain the designated onsite BMPs, see Section 5 for self inspection and maintenance form. N5 Title 22 CCR Compliance (How development will comply) Title 22 CCR does not apply to industrial warehouse developments. Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) 4-3 Form 4.1-1 Non-Structural Source Control BMPs N6 Local Water Quality Ordinances Local Water Quality Ordinances will be addressed by implementation of stormwater BMPs: catch basin filters, hydrodynamic seperators, and underground infiltration system. N7 Spill Contingency Plan Industrial warehouse buildings and truck dock areas have potential for spills and therefore each tenant shall be required to prepare a spill contingency plan and it shall be implemented in accordance with section 6.95 of the California Health and Safety Code. The spill contingency plan shall identify responsible personnel in the event of a spill, an action item list identifying how the spill should be contained and cleaned up, and who should be contacted in the event of a spill. Documentation of any spill event and cleanup process shall be kept on site in perpetuity. N8 Underground Storage Tank Compliance No underground storage tanks are proposed for this site. N9 Hazardous Materials Disclosure Compliance No hazardous materials are planned to be stored or used at this site. Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) 4-4 Form 4.1-1 Non-Structural Source Control BMPs Identifier Name Check One Describe BMP Implementation OR, if not applicable, state reason Included Not Applicable N10 Uniform Fire Code Implementation Underground fire protection service and fire sprinklers will be provided per the uniform fire code and the requirements of the County of San Bernardino Fire Department. N11 Litter/Debris Control Program Trash storage areas will be designed to have adjacent areas drain away from the trash storage areas. The trash storage areas shall be inspected and maintained on a monthly basis. Collection of trash from the trash storage areas shall occur on a regular basis to ensure that the trash receptacles are not overflowing. Documentation of such inspection/maintenance and trash collection shall be kept by the owner in perpetuity. See the WQMP site map in Attachment A for anticipated location of trash storage areas. N12 Employee Training The following requirements shall be stated in the owners lease terms; an Employee Training/Education program shall be provided annually to help educate employees about storm water quality management and practices that help prevent storm water pollution. Documentation of such training/education program implementation shall be kept by the owner for a minimum of ten years. Sample education materials have been provided in Attachment C. Additional educational materials can be obtained from the City of Fontana or the County of San Bernardino storm water program. N13 Housekeeping of Loading Docks The development will have loading docks. The loading docks shall be inspected on a weekly basis to help ensure that any trash and debris are collected prior to being washed into the underground storm drain system. All stormwater runoff from the loading dock areas will be collected by the underground infiltration system prior to conveyance to the public storm drain system. Documentation of such inspection/maintenance shall be kept by the owner in perpetuity. N14 Catch Basin Inspection Program The onsite catch basins shall be inspected on a quarterly basis. Inspection of the on-site catch basins shall consist of visual inspection of any sediment, trash or debris collected in the bottom of each catch basin. Any sediment, trash or debris found shall be removed from the catch basins and disposed of in a legal manner. Documentation of such inspection/maintenance shall be kept by the owner in perpetuity. Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) 4-5 N15 Vacuum Sweeping of Private Streets and Parking Lots The onsite parking lots, drive aisles, and loading dock areas shall be swept on a monthly basis. Documentation of such sweeping shall be kept by the owner in perpetuity. Frequency of sweeping shall be adjusted as needed to maintain a clean site. N16 Other Non-structural Measures for Public Agency Projects Not Applicable N17 Comply with all other applicable NPDES permits General construction permit "SWRCB Orders No. 2009-009-DWQ as amended by Order 2010-0014-DWQ" Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) 4-6 Form 4.1-2 Structural Source Control BMPs Identifier Name Check One Describe BMP Implementation OR, If not applicable, state reason Included Not Applicable S1 Provide storm drain system stencilling and signage (CASQA New Development BMP Handbook SD-13) Onsite storm drain catch basins shall be stenciled with the phrase “Drains to River” or other approved language. The signage shall be inspected on an annual basis. Missing or faded signage shall be replaced. Documentation of such inspection/maintenance shall be kept by the owner in perpetuity. S2 Design and construct outdoor material storage areas to reduce pollution introduction (CASQA New Development BMP Handbook SD-34) No outdoor material storage areas are proposed for this site. S3 Design and construct trash and waste storage areas to reduce pollution introduction (CASQA New Development BMP Handbook SD-32) Trash storage areas will be designed to have adjacent areas drain away from the trash storage areas as well as have a permanent roof over them. The trash storage areas shall be inspected and maintained on a monthly basis. Collection of trash from the trash storage areas shall occur on a regular basis to ensure that the trash receptacles are not overflowing. Documentation of such inspection/maintenance and trash collection shall be kept by the owner in perpetuity. See the WQMP site map in Attachment A for anticipated location of trash storage areas. S4 Use efficient irrigation systems & landscape design, water conservation, smart controllers, and source control (Statewide Model Landscape Ordinance; CASQA New Development BMP Handbook SD-12) The landscape architect will provide design plans for the on-site irrigation system. The irrigation system shall be inspected on a monthly basis to ensure proper operation. Any broken sprinkler heads shall be repaired immediately to ensure that the system continues to operate efficiently. Documentation of such inspection/maintenance shall be kept by the owner in perpetuity. S5 Finish grade of landscaped areas at a minimum of 1-2 inches below top of curb, sidewalk, or pavement The landscape architect will provide design plans for the on-site landscaping and irrigation system. The design shall incorporate a finish grade of landscaping areas at a minimum of 1-2 inches below top of curb, sidewalk, or pavement throughout the project site. S6 Protect slopes and channels and provide energy dissipation (CASQA New Development BMP Handbook SD-10) No designed slope and channel are planned for this site. S7 Covered dock areas (CASQA New Development BMP Handbook SD-31) No covered dock areas are planned for this site. Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) 4-7 Form 4.1-2 Structural Source Control BMPs Identifier Name Check One Describe BMP Implementation OR, If not applicable, state reason Included Not Applicable S8 Covered maintenance bays with spill containment plans (CASQA New Development BMP Handbook SD-31) No maintenance bays are planned for this site. S9 Vehicle wash areas with spill containment plans (CASQA New Development BMP Handbook SD-33) No vehicle wash areas are planned for this site. S10 Covered outdoor processing areas (CASQA New Development BMP Handbook SD-36) No outdoor processing areas are planned for this site. S11 Equipment wash areas with spill containment plans (CASQA New Development BMP Handbook SD-33) No equipment wash areas are planned for this site. S12 Fueling areas (CASQA New Development BMP Handbook SD-30) No fueling planned for this site. S13 Hillside landscaping (CASQA New Development BMP Handbook SD-10) No hillside landscaping planned in this area. S14 Wash water control for food preparation areas Food preparation is not planned for this site. S15 Community car wash racks (CASQA New Development BMP Handbook SD-33) No community car wash racks are planned for this site. Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) 4-8 4.1.2 Preventative LID Site Design Practices Site design practices associated with new LID requirements in the MS4 Permit should be considered in the earliest phases of a project. Preventative site design practices can result in smaller DCV for LID BMP and hydromodification control BMP by reducing runoff generation. Describe site design and drainage plan including: Refer to Section 5.2 of the TGD for WQMP for more details. Form 4.1-3 Preventative LID Site Design Practices Checklist Site Design Practices If yes, explain how preventative site design practice is addressed in project site plan. If no, other LID BMPs must be selected to meet targets Site Design Practices If yes, explain how preventative site design practice is addressed in project site plan. If no, other LID BMPs must be selected to meet targets Minimize impervious areas: Yes No Explanation: The developer has chosen to maximize the building and parking footprint. Underground infiltration system is sized accordingly to meet the WQMP DCV requirements and mitigate peak stormwater runoff from the proposed development. Maximize natural infiltration capacity: Yes No Explanation: The entire development is designed to drain to the underground infiltration system thereby maximizing the natural infiltration capacity. Preserve existing drainage patterns and time of concentration: Yes No Explanation: Post-development drainage pattern will closely mimic the pre-development condition, and stormwater will be detained in the proposed onsite infiltration system, which will increase the site’s time of concentration. Disconnect impervious areas: Yes No Explanation: Roof drains are dirrectly connected to the storm drain system. As a result, roof runoff will receive treatment in the proposed pre-treatment and main treatment units. Protect existing vegetation and sensitive areas: Yes No Explanation: Site has no existing vegetation or sensitive areas to protect. Planting of new vegetation will occur throughout the development. Re-vegetate disturbed areas: Yes No Explanation: All landscape areas will be vegetated for stabilization. Landscape areas may also provide an area for stormwater infiltration. Minimize unnecessary compaction in stormwater retention/infiltration basin/trench areas: Yes No Explanation: The soils at the bottom of proposed infiltration/detention system will be leveled but not compacted. Utilize vegetated drainage swales in place of underground piping or imperviously lined swales: Yes No Explanation: Due to the site layout and designed grades, vegetated drainage swales will not be utilized in this development. Stake off areas that will be used for landscaping to minimize compaction during construction : Yes No Explanation: Landscaped areas will be staked off during grading operation throughout the project site. ▪ A narrative of site design practices utilized or rationale for not using practices ▪ A narrative of how site plan incorporates preventive site design practices ▪ Include an attached Site Plan layout which shows how preventative site design practices are included in WQMP Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) 4-9 4.2 Project Performance Criteria The purpose of this section of the Project WQMP is to establish targets for post-development hydrology based on performance criteria specified in the MS4 Permit. These targets include runoff volume for water quality control (referred to as LID design capture volume), and runoff volume, time of concentration, and peak runoff for protection of any downstream waterbody segments with a HCOC. If the project has more than one outlet for stormwater runoff, then complete additional versions of these forms for each DA / outlet. Methods applied in the following forms include: ▪ For LID BMP Design Capture Volume (DCV), the San Bernardino County Stormwater Program requires use of the P6 method (MS4 Permit Section XI.D.6a.ii) – Form 4.2-1 ▪ For HCOC pre- and post-development hydrologic calculation, the San Bernardino County Stormwater Program requires the use of the Rational Method (San Bernardino County Hydrology Manual Section D). Forms 4.2-2 through Form 4.2-5 calculate hydrologic variables including runoff volume, time of concentration, and peak runoff from the project site pre- and post-development using the Hydrology Manual Rational Method approach. For projects greater than 640 acres (1.0 mi2), the Rational Method and these forms should not be used. For such projects, the Unit Hydrograph Method (San Bernardino County Hydrology Manual Section E) shall be applied for hydrologic calculations for HCOC performance criteria. Refer to Section 4 in the TGD for WQMP for detailed guidance and instructions. Form 4.2-1 LID BMP Performance Criteria for Design Capture Volume (DA 1) 1 Project area DA 1 (ft2): 601,010 2 Imperviousness after applying preventative site design practices (Imp%): 90% 3 Runoff Coefficient (Rc): 0.73 Rc = 0.858(Imp%)^3-0.78(Imp%)^2+0.774(Imp%)+0.04 4 Determine 1-hour rainfall depth for a 2-year return period P2yr-1hr (in): 0.518 (See Attachment E) http://hdsc.nws.noaa.gov/hdsc/pfds/sa/sca_pfds.html 5 Compute P6, Mean 6-hr Precipitation (inches): 0.77 P6 = Item 4 *C1, where C1 is a function of site climatic region specified in Form 3-1 Item 1 (Valley = 1.4807; Mountain = 1.909; Desert = 1.2371) 6 Drawdown Rate Use 48 hours as the default condition. Selection and use of the 24 hour drawdown time condition is subject to approval by the local jurisdiction. The necessary BMP footprint is a function of drawdown time. While shorter drawdown times reduce the performance criteria for LID BMP design capture volume, the depth of water that can be stored is also reduced. 24-hrs 48-hrs 7 Compute design capture volume, DCV (ft3): 55,263 DCV = 1/12 * [Item 1* Item 3 *Item 5 * C2], where C2 is a function of drawdown rate (24-hr = 1.582; 48-hr = 1.963) Compute separate DCV for each outlet from the project site per schematic drawn in Form 3-1 Item 2 Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) 4-10 Form 4.2-2 Summary of HCOC Assessment (DA 1) Does project have the potential to cause or contribute to an HCOC in a downstream channel: Yes No Go to: http://permitrack.sbcounty.gov/wap/ If “Yes”, then complete HCOC assessment of site hydrology for 2yr storm event using Forms 4.2-3 through 4.2-5 and insert results below (Forms 4.2-3 through 4.2-5 may be replaced by computer software analysis based on the San Bernardino County Hydrology Manual) If “No,” then proceed to Section 4.3 Project Conformance Analysis Condition Runoff Volume (ft3) Time of Concentration (min) Peak Runoff (cfs) Pre-developed 1 N/A Form 4.2-3 Item 12 2 N/A Form 4.2-4 Item 13 3 N/A Form 4.2-5 Item 10 Post-developed 4 N/A Form 4.2-3 Item 13 5 N/A Form 4.2-4 Item 14 6 N/A Form 4.2-5 Item 14 Difference 7 N/A Item 4 – Item 1 8 N/A Item 2 – Item 5 9 N/A Item 6 – Item 3 Difference (as % of pre-developed) 10 N/A Item 7 / Item 1 11 N/A Item 8 / Item 2 12 N/A Item 9 / Item 3 H04 I H02 A U H12 H09 III V H11IV H08 H07 X H05 H03 H06 J VII F H01 VI VIII B E W H10 IX XIII II G C H02BH02A II H12 II I 15I 10 STATE HWY 60 I 215 STATE 91STATE HWY 210 STATE HWY 71 I 10 - I 15 STATE HWY 259STATE 91 I 15STATE HWY 210 STATE HWY 60 S T A TE H W Y 71 STATE H W Y 71 Seven Oaks Dam, COE San Antonio Basin #9 Seven Oaks Dam, COE San Antonio Dam Seven Oaks Dam, COE [DSOD] Seven Oaks Dam, COE Waterman Spreading Grounds Seven Oaks Dam, COE Wineville Basin San Sevaine Basin #5 [DSOD] Prado Dam Twin Creek Spreading Grounds Riverside Basin Jurupa Basin [DSOD] Waterman Basin #1 San Antonio Basin #5San Antonio Basin #2 Cucamonga Basin #6 Plunge Creek Spreading Grounds Victoria Basin City Creek Spreading GroundsSan Antonio Basin #8 Devil Basin #7 Rich Basin Potato Creek Spreading Grounds Patton Basin Lytle Creek Gatehouse, COE Cactus Basin #3bCactus Basin #5 Brooks Basin 8th Street Basin #1 Mojave River Forks Dam; COE [DSOD] Linden Basin Wiggins Basin #1 Ely Basin #2 Cactus Basin #2 Declez Basin [DSOD] Turner Basin #1 Banana Basin Day Creek Dam [DSOD] Grove Avenue Basin Etiwanda Conservation Basin Bledsoe Basin Montclair Basin #2 Sycamore Basin Devil Basin #4 Church Street Basin Lower Cucamonga Sprdg Grnds Warm Creek Conservation Basin #4 Ranchero Basin Montclair Basin #1College Heights Basin #4College Heights Basin #1 Bailey Basin Montclair Basin #4 Mountain View Basin Wilson Creek Basin #3San Timoteo Sediment Basin #3 Hillside Basin, COE Wildwood Basin #2 Demens Basin #2 Dynamite Basin San Timoteo Sediment Basin #18 Sand Canyon Basin San Timoteo Sediment Basin #13 Perris Hill Basin 13th Street Basin Cook Canyon Basin Deep Creek M ill CreekCajon Creek Wash Zanja Creek Lytle Creek Wash Santa Ana RiverSheep CreekOak Glen CreekMojave RiverCypr ess Channel Sawpit CanyonHorse CanyonL iv e O a k C re e k Grout CreekY u c a ip a C r e e k Horsethief Canyon Seel ey Cr eekCleghorn Canyon Morrey Arroyo Arrowbear Creek Sand Canyon CreekSawpit CanyonLegend Regional Board Boundary County BoundaryDrainageCourse <all other values> Hydromodification EHM Low Medium High High (Default) Government Land State of California Land United States of America Land City Boundary Freeways Basins and Dams HCOC Exempt Areas None ExemptHCOC Exempt A B C E F G H01 H02 H02A H02B H03 H04 H05 H06 H07 H08 H09 H10 H11 H12 I II III IV IX J U V VI VII VIII W X XIII Figure F-1 1 Hydromodification A.1 Hydrologic Conditions of Concern (HCOC) Analysis HCOC Exemption: 1. Sump Condition: All downstream conveyance channel to an adequate sump (for example, Prado Dam, Santa Ana River, or other Lake, Reservoir or naturally erosion resistant feature) that will receive runoff from the project are engineered and regularly maintained to ensure design flow capacity; no sensitive stream habitat areas will be adversely affected; or are not identified on the Co-Permittees Hydromodification Sensitivity Maps. 2. Pre = Post: The runoff flow rate, volume and velocity for the post-development condition of the Priority Development Project do not exceed the pre-development (i.e, naturally occurring condition for the 2-year, 24-hour rainfall event utilizing latest San Bernardino County Hydrology Manual. a. Submit a substantiated hydrologic analysis to justify your request. 3. Diversion to Storage Area: The drainage areas that divert to water storage areas which are considered as control/release point and utilized for water conservation. a. See Appendix F for the HCOC Exemption Map and the on-line Watershed Geodatabase (http://sbcounty.permitrack.com/wap) for reference. 4. Less than One Acre: The Priority Development Project disturbs less than one acre. The Co-permittee has the discretion to require a Project Specific WQMP to address HCOCs on projects less than one acre on a case by case basis. The project disturbs less than one acre and is not part of a common plan of development. 5. Built Out Area: The contributing watershed area to which the project discharges has a developed area percentage greater than 90 percent. a. See Appendix F for the HCOC Exemption Map and the on-line Watershed Geodatabase (http://sbcounty.permitrack.com/wap) for reference. 2 Summary of HCOC Exempted Area HCOC Exemption reasoning 1 2 3 4 5 Area A X X B X C X E X F X G X X H01 X X H02 X X H02A X X H02B X H03 X H04 X X H05 X H06 X H07 X H08 X X H09 X H10 X X H11 X X H12 X J X U X W X I X II X III X IV X X V X* VI X VII X VIII X IX X X X XIII X *Detention/Conservation Basin Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) 4-11 Form 4.2-3 HCOC Assessment for Runoff Volume (DA 1) Weighted Curve Number Determination for: Pre-developed DA DMA A DMA B DMA C DMA D DMA E DMA F DMA G DMA H 1a Land Cover type N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 2a Hydrologic Soil Group (HSG) N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 3a DMA Area, ft2 sum of areas of DMA should equal area of DA N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 4a Curve Number (CN) use Items 1 and 2 to select the appropriate CN from Appendix C-2 of the TGD for WQMP N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Weighted Curve Number Determination for: Post-developed DA DMA A DMA B DMA C DMA D DMA E DMA F DMA G DMA H 1b Land Cover type N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 2b Hydrologic Soil Group (HSG) N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 3b DMA Area, ft2 sum of areas of DMA should equal area of DA N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 4b Curve Number (CN) use Items 5 and 6 to select the appropriate CN from Appendix C-2 of the TGD for WQMP N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 5 Pre-Developed area-weighted CN: N/A 7 Pre-developed soil storage capacity, S (in): N/A S = (1000 / Item 5) - 10 9 Initial abstraction, Ia (in): N/A Ia = 0.2 * Item 7 6 Post-Developed area-weighted CN: N/A 8 Post-developed soil storage capacity, S (in): N/A S = (1000 / Item 6) - 10 10 Initial abstraction, Ia (in): N/A Ia = 0.2 * Item 8 11 Precipitation for 2 yr, 24 hr storm (in): N/A Go to: http://hdsc.nws.noaa.gov/hdsc/pfds/sa/sca_pfds.html 12 Pre-developed Volume (ft3): N/A Vpre =(1 / 12) * (Item sum of Item 3) * [(Item 11 – Item 9)^2 / ((Item 11 – Item 9 + Item 7) 13 Post-developed Volume (ft3): N/A Vpre =(1 / 12) * (Item sum of Item 3) * [(Item 11 – Item 10)^2 / ((Item 11 – Item 10 + Item 8) 14 Volume Reduction needed to meet HCOC Requirement, (ft3): N/A VHCOC = (Item 13 * 0.95) – Item 12 Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) 4-12 Form 4.2-4 HCOC Assessment for Time of Concentration (DA 1) Compute time of concentration for pre and post developed conditions for each DA (For projects using the Hydrology Manual complete the form below) Variables Pre-developed DA1 Use additional forms if there are more than 4 DMA Post-developed DA1 Use additional forms if there are more than 4 DMA DMA A DMA B DMA C DMA D DMA A DMA B DMA C DMA D 1 Length of flowpath (ft) Use Form 3-2 Item 5 for pre-developed condition N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 2 Change in elevation (ft) N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 3 Slope (ft/ft), So = Item 2 / Item 1 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 4 Land cover N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 5 Initial DMA Time of Concentration (min) Appendix C-1 of the TGD for WQMP N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 6 Length of conveyance from DMA outlet to project site outlet (ft) May be zero if DMA outlet is at project site outlet N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 7 Cross-sectional area of channel (ft2) N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 8 Wetted perimeter of channel (ft) N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 9 Manning’s roughness of channel (n) N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 10 Channel flow velocity (ft/sec) Vfps = (1.49 / Item 9) * (Item 7/Item 8)^0.67 * (Item 3)^0.5 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 11 Travel time to outlet (min) Tt = Item 6 / (Item 10 * 60) N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 12 Total time of concentration (min) Tc = Item 5 + Item 11 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 13 Pre-developed time of concentration (min): N/A Minimum of Item 12 pre-developed DMA 14 Post-developed time of concentration (min): N/A Minimum of Item 12 post-developed DMA 15 Additional time of concentration needed to meet HCOC requirement (min): N/A TC-HCOC = (Item 13 * 0.95) – Item 14 Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) 4-13 Form 4.2-5 HCOC Assessment for Peak Runoff (DA 1) Compute peak runoff for pre- and post-developed conditions Variables Pre-developed DA to Project Outlet (Use additional forms if more than 3 DMA) Post-developed DA to Project Outlet (Use additional forms if more than 3 DMA) DMA A DMA B DMA C DMA A DMA B DMA C 1 Rainfall Intensity for storm duration equal to time of concentration Ipeak = 10^(LOG Form 4.2-1 Item 4 - 0.6 LOG Form 4.2-4 Item 5 /60) N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 2 Drainage Area of each DMA (Acres) For DMA with outlet at project site outlet, include upstream DMA (Using example schematic in Form 3-1, DMA A will include drainage from DMA C) N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 3 Ratio of pervious area to total area For DMA with outlet at project site outlet, include upstream DMA (Using example schematic in Form 3-1, DMA A will include drainage from DMA C) N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 4 Pervious area infiltration rate (in/hr) Use pervious area CN and antecedent moisture condition with Appendix C-3 of the TGD for WQMP N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 5 Maximum loss rate (in/hr) Fm = Item 3 * Item 4 Use area-weighted Fm from DMA with outlet at project site outlet, include upstream DMA (Using example schematic in Form 3-1, DMA A will include drainage from DMA C) N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 6 Peak Flow from DMA (cfs) Qp =Item 2 * 0.9 * (Item 1 - Item 5) N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 7 Time of concentration adjustment factor for other DMA to site discharge point Form 4.2-4 Item 12 DMA / Other DMA upstream of site discharge point (If ratio is greater than 1.0, then use maximum value of 1.0) DMA A n/a N/A N/A n/a N/A N/A DMA B N/A n/a N/A N/A n/a N/A DMA C N/A N/A n/a N/A N/A n/a 8 Pre-developed Qp at Tc for DMA A: N/A Qp = Item 6DMAA + [Item 6DMAB * (Item 1DMAA - Item 5DMAB)/(Item 1DMAB - Item 5DMAB)* Item 7DMAA/2] + [Item 6DMAC * (Item 1DMAA - Item 5DMAC)/(Item 1DMAC - Item 5DMAC)* Item 7DMAA/3] 9 Pre-developed Qp at Tc for DMA B: N/A Qp = Item 6DMAB + [Item 6DMAA * (Item 1DMAB - Item 5DMAA)/(Item 1DMAA - Item 5DMAA)* Item 7DMAB/1] + [Item 6DMAC * (Item 1DMAB - Item 5DMAC)/(Item 1DMAC - Item 5DMAC)* Item 7DMAB/3] 10 Pre-developed Qp at Tc for DMA C: N/A Qp = Item 6DMAC + [Item 6DMAA * (Item 1DMAC - Item 5DMAA)/(Item 1DMAA - Item 5DMAA)* Item 7DMAC/1] + [Item 6DMAB * (Item 1DMAC - Item 5DMAB)/(Item 1DMAB - Item 5DMAB)* Item 7DMAC/2] 10 Peak runoff from pre-developed condition confluence analysis (cfs): N/A Maximum of Item 8, 9, and 10 (including additional forms as needed) 11 Post-developed Qp at Tc for DMA A: N/A Same as Item 8 for post-developed values 12 Post-developed Qp at Tc for DMA B: N/A Same as Item 9 for post-developed values 13 Post-developed Qp at Tc for DMA C: N/A Same as Item 10 for post-developed values 14 Peak runoff from post-developed condition confluence analysis (cfs): N/A Maximum of Item 11, 12, and 13 (including additional forms as needed) 15 Peak runoff reduction needed to meet HCOC Requirement (cfs): N/A Qp-HCOC = (Item 14 * 0.95) – Item 10 Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) 4-14 4.3 Project Conformance Analysis Complete the following forms for each project site DA to document that the proposed LID BMPs conform to the project DCV developed to meet performance criteria specified in the MS4 Permit (WQMP Template Section 4.2). For the LID DCV, the forms are ordered according to hierarchy of BMP selection as required by the MS4 Permit (see Section 5.3.1 in the TGD for WQMP). The forms compute the following for on-site LID BMP: ▪ Site Design and Hydrologic Source Controls (Form 4.3-2) ▪ Retention and Infiltration (Form 4.3-3) ▪ Harvested and Use (Form 4.3-4) or ▪ Biotreatment (Form 4.3-5). At the end of each form, additional fields facilitate the determination of the extent of mitigation provided by the specific BMP category, allowing for use of the next category of BMP in the hierarchy, if necessary. The first step in the analysis, using Section 5.3.2.1 of the TGD for WQMP, is to complete Forms 4.3-1 and 4.3-3) to determine if retention and infiltration BMPs are infeasible for the project. For each feasibility criterion in Form 4.3-1, if the answer is “Yes,” provide all study findings that includes relevant calculations, maps, data sources, etc. used to make the determination of infeasibility. Next, complete Forms 4.3-2 and 4.3-4 to determine the feasibility of applicable HSC and harvest and use BMPs, and, if their implementation is feasible, the extent of mitigation of the DCV. If no site constraints exist that would limit the type of BMP to be implemented in a DA, evaluate the use of combinations of LID BMPs, including all applicable HSC BMPs to maximize on-site retention of the DCV. If no combination of BMP can mitigate the entire DCV, implement the single BMP type, or combination of BMP types, that maximizes on-site retention of the DCV within the minimum effective area. If the combination of LID HSC, retention and infiltration, and harvest and use BMPs are unable to mitigate the entire DCV, then biotreatment BMPs may be implemented by the project proponent. If biotreatment BMPs are used, then they must be sized to provide sufficient capacity for effective treatment of the remainder of the volume-based performance criteria that cannot be achieved with LID BMPs (TGD for WQMP Section 5.4.4.2). Under no circumstances shall any portion of the DCV be released from the site without effective mitigation and/or treatment. Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) 4-15 Form 4.3-1 Infiltration BMP Feasibility (DA 1) Feasibility Criterion – Complete evaluation for each DA on the Project Site 1 Would infiltration BMP pose significant risk for groundwater related concerns? Yes No Refer to Section 5.3.2.1 of the TGD for WQMP If Yes, Provide basis: (attach) 2 Would installation of infiltration BMP significantly increase the risk of geotechnical hazards? Yes No (Yes, if the answer to any of the following questions is yes, as established by a geotechnical expert): • The location is less than 50 feet away from slopes steeper than 15 percent • The location is less than eight feet from building foundations or an alternative setback. • A study certified by a geotechnical professional or an available watershed study determines that stormwater infiltration would result in significantly increased risks of geotechnical hazards. If Yes, Provide basis: (attach) 3 Would infiltration of runoff on a Project site violate downstream water rights? Yes No If Yes, Provide basis: (attach) 4 Is proposed infiltration facility located on hydrologic soil group (HSG) D soils or does the site geotechnical investigation indicate presence of soil characteristics, which support categorization as D soils? Yes No If Yes, Provide basis: (attach) 5 Is the design infiltration rate, after accounting for safety factor of 2.0, below proposed facility less than 0.3 in/hr (accounting for soil amendments)? Yes No If Yes, Provide basis: (attach) 6 Would on-site infiltration or reduction of runoff over pre-developed conditions be partially or fully inconsistent with watershed management strategies as defined in the WAP, or impair beneficial uses? Yes No See Section 3.5 of the TGD for WQMP and WAP If Yes, Provide basis: (attach) 7 Any answer from Item 1 through Item 3 is “Yes”: Yes No If yes, infiltration of any volume is not feasible onsite. Proceed to Form 4.3-4, Harvest and Use BMP. If no, then proceed to Item 8 below. 8 Any answer from Item 4 through Item 6 is “Yes”: Yes No If yes, infiltration is permissible but is not required to be considered. Proceed to Form 4.3-2, Hydrologic Source Control BMP. If no, then proceed to Item 9, below. 9 All answers to Item 1 through Item 6 are “No”: Infiltration of the full DCV is potentially feasible, LID infiltration BMP must be designed to infiltrate the full DCV to the MEP. Proceed to Form 4.3-2, Hydrologic Source Control BMP. Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) 4-16 4.3.1 Site Design Hydrologic Source Control BMP (N/A) Section XI.E. of the Permit emphasizes the use of LID preventative measures; and the use of LID HSC BMPs reduces the portion of the DCV that must be addressed in downstream BMPs. Therefore, all applicable HSC shall be provided except where they are mutually exclusive with each other, or with other BMPs. Mutual exclusivity may result from overlapping BMP footprints such that either would be potentially feasible by itself, but both could not be implemented. Please note that while there are no numeric standards regarding the use of HSC, if a project cannot feasibly meet BMP sizing requirements or cannot fully address HCOCs, feasibility of all applicable HSC must be part of demonstrating that the BMP system has been designed to retain the maximum feasible portion of the DCV. Complete Form 4.3-2 to identify and calculate estimated retention volume from implementing site design HSC BMP. Refer to Section 5.4.1 in the TGD for more detailed guidance. Form 4.3-2 Site Design Hydrologic Source Control BMPs (DA 1) 1 Implementation of Impervious Area Dispersion BMP (i.e. routing runoff from impervious to pervious areas), excluding impervious areas planned for routing to on-lot infiltration BMP: Yes No If yes, complete Items 2-5; If no, proceed to Item 6 DA DMA BMP Type DA DMA BMP Type DA DMA BMP Type (Use additional forms for more BMPs) 2 Total impervious area draining to pervious area (ft2) N/A N/A N/A 3 Ratio of pervious area receiving runoff to impervious area N/A N/A N/A 4 Retention volume achieved from impervious area dispersion (ft3) V = Item2 * Item 3 * (0.5/12), assuming retention of 0.5 inches of runoff N/A N/A N/A 5 Sum of retention volume achieved from impervious area dispersion (ft3): 0 Vretention =Sum of Item 4 for all BMPs 6 Implementation of Localized On-lot Infiltration BMPs (e.g. on-lot rain gardens): Yes No If yes, complete Items 7- 13 for aggregate of all on-lot infiltration BMP in each DA; If no, proceed to Item 14 DA DMA BMP Type DA DMA BMP Type DA DMA BMP Type (Use additional forms for more BMPs) 7 Ponding surface area (ft2) N/A N/A N/A 8 Ponding depth (ft) N/A N/A N/A 9 Surface area of amended soil/gravel (ft2) N/A N/A N/A 10 Average depth of amended soil/gravel (ft) N/A N/A N/A 11 Average porosity of amended soil/gravel N/A N/A N/A 12 Retention volume achieved from on-lot infiltration (ft3) Vretention = (Item 7 *Item 8) + (Item 9 * Item 10 * Item 11) N/A N/A N/A 13 Runoff volume retention from on-lot infiltration (ft3): 0 Vretention =Sum of Item 12 for all BMPs Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) 4-17 Form 4.3-2 cont. Site Design Hydrologic Source Control BMPs (DA 1) 14 Implementation of evapotranspiration BMP (green, brown, or blue roofs): Yes No If yes, complete Items 15-20. If no, proceed to Item 21 DA DMA BMP Type DA DMA BMP Type DA DMA BMP Type (Use additional forms for more BMPs) 15 Rooftop area planned for ET BMP (ft2) N/A N/A N/A 16 Average wet season ET demand (in/day) Use local values, typical ~ 0.1 N/A N/A N/A 17 Daily ET demand (ft3/day) Item 15 * (Item 16 / 12) N/A N/A N/A 18 Drawdown time (hrs) Copy Item 6 in Form 4.2-1 N/A N/A N/A 19 Retention Volume (ft3) Vretention = Item 17 * (Item 18 / 24) N/A N/A N/A 20 Runoff volume retention from evapotranspiration BMPs (ft3): 0 Vretention =Sum of Item 19 for all BMPs 21 Implementation of Street Trees: Yes No If yes, complete Items 22-25. If no, proceed to Item 26 DA DMA BMP Type DA DMA BMP Type DA DMA BMP Type (Use additional forms for more BMPs) 22 Number of Street Trees N/A N/A N/A 23 Average canopy cover over impervious area (ft2) N/A N/A N/A 24 Runoff volume retention from street trees (ft3) Vretention = Item 22 * Item 23 * (0.05/12) assume runoff retention of 0.05 inches N/A N/A N/A 25 Runoff volume retention from street tree BMPs (ft3): 0 Vretention = Sum of Item 24 for all BMPs 26 Implementation of residential rain barrel/cisterns: Yes No If yes, complete Items 27-29; If no, proceed to Item 30 DA DMA BMP Type DA DMA BMP Type DA DMA BMP Type (Use additional forms for more BMPs) 27 Number of rain barrels/cisterns N/A N/A N/A 28 Runoff volume retention from rain barrels/cisterns (ft3) Vretention = Item 27 * 3 N/A N/A N/A 29 Runoff volume retention from residential rain barrels/Cisterns (ft3): 0 Vretention =Sum of Item 28 for all BMPs 30 Total Retention Volume from Site Design Hydrologic Source Control BMPs: 0 Sum of Items 5, 13, 20, 25 and 29 Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) 4-18 4.3.2 Infiltration BMPs Use Form 4.3-3 to compute on-site retention of runoff from proposed retention and infiltration BMPs. Volume retention estimates are sensitive to the percolation rate used, which determines the amount of runoff that can be infiltrated within the specified drawdown time. The infiltration safety factor reduces field measured percolation to account for potential inaccuracy associated with field measurements, declining BMP performance over time, and compaction during construction. Appendix D of the TGD for WQMP provides guidance on estimating an appropriate safety factor to use in Form 4.3-3. If site constraints limit the use of BMPs to a single type and implementation of retention and infiltration BMPs mitigate no more than 40% of the DCV, then they are considered infeasible and the Project Proponent may evaluate the effectiveness of BMPs lower in the LID hierarchy of use (Section 5.5.1 of the TGD for WQMP) If implementation of infiltrations BMPs is feasible as determined using Form 4.3-1, then LID infiltration BMPs shall be implemented to the MEP (section 4.1 of the TGD for WQMP). . Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) 4-19 Form 4.3-3 Infiltration LID BMP - including underground BMPs (DA 1) 1 Remaining LID DCV not met by site design HSC BMP (ft3): 55,263 Vunmet = Form 4.2-1 Item 7 - Form 4.3-2 Item 30 BMP Type Use columns to the right to compute runoff volume retention from proposed infiltration BMP (select BMP from Table 5-4 in TGD for WQMP) - Use additional forms for more BMPs DA 1 DMA A BMP Type Infiltration BMP DA DMA BMP Type DA DMA BMP Type (Use additional forms for more BMPs) 2 Infiltration rate of underlying soils (in/hr) See Section 5.4.2 and Appendix D of the TGD for WQMP for minimum requirements for assessment methods 3.5 N/A N/A 3 Infiltration safety factor See TGD Section 5.4.2 and Appendix D 2.75 N/A N/A 4 Design percolation rate (in/hr) Pdesign = Item 2 / Item 3 1.27 N/A N/A 5 Ponded water drawdown time (hr) Copy Item 6 in Form 4.2-1 48 N/A N/A 6 Maximum ponding depth (ft) BMP specific, see Table 5-4 of the TGD for WQMP for BMP design details 5 N/A N/A 7 Ponding Depth (ft) dBMP = Minimum of (1/12*Item 4*Item 5) or Item 6 5 N/A N/A 8 Infiltrating surface area, SABMP (ft2) the lesser of the area needed for infiltration of full DCV or minimum space requirements from Table 5.7 of the TGD for WQMP 30,537 (351’x87’) N/A N/A 9 Amended soil depth, dmedia (ft) Only included in certain BMP types, see Table 5-4 in the TGD for WQMP for reference to BMP design details N/A N/A N/A 10 Amended soil porosity N/A N/A N/A 11 Gravel depth, dmedia (ft) Only included in certain BMP types, see Table 5-4 of the TGD for WQMP for BMP design details N/A N/A N/A 12 Gravel porosity N/A N/A N/A 13 Duration of storm as basin is filling (hrs) Typical ~ 3hrs N/A N/A N/A 14 Above Ground Retention Volume (ft3) Vretention = Item 8 * [Item7 + (Item 9 * Item 10) + (Item 11 * Item 12) + (Item 13 * (Item 4 / 12))] 0 N/A N/A 15 Underground Retention Volume (ft3) Volume determined using manufacturer’s specifications and calculations 142,101 (See Attachment B) N/A N/A 16 Total Retention Volume from LID Infiltration BMPs: 142,101 (Sum of Items 14 and 15 for all infiltration BMP included in plan) 17 Fraction of DCV achieved with infiltration BMP: 354% Retention% = Item 16 / Form 4.2-1 Item 7 18 Is full LID DCV retained onsite with combination of hydrologic source control and LID retention/infiltration BMPs? Yes No If yes, demonstrate conformance using Form 4.3-10; If no, then reduce Item 3, Factor of Safety to 2.0 and increase Item 8, Infiltrating Surface Area, such that the portion of the site area used for retention and infiltration BMPs equals or exceeds the minimum effective area thresholds (Table 5-7 of the TGD for WQMP) for the applicable category of development and repeat all above calculations. Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) 4-20 4.3.3 Harvest and Use BMP (N/A) Harvest and use BMP may be considered if the full LID DCV cannot be met by maximizing infiltration BMPs. Use Form 4.3-4 to compute on-site retention of runoff from proposed harvest and use BMPs. Volume retention estimates for harvest and use BMPs are sensitive to the on-site demand for captured stormwater. Since irrigation water demand is low in the wet season, when most rainfall events occur in San Bernardino County, the volume of water that can be used within a specified drawdown period is relatively low. The bottom portion of Form 4.3-4 facilitates the necessary computations to show infeasibility if a minimum incremental benefit of 40 percent of the LID DCV would not be achievable with MEP implementation of on-site harvest and use of stormwater (Section 5.5.4 of the TGD for WQMP). Form 4.3-4 Harvest and Use BMPs (DA 1) 1 Remaining LID DCV not met by site design HSC or infiltration BMP (ft3): 0 Vunmet = Form 4.2-1 Item 7 - Form 4.3-2 Item 30 – Form 4.3-3 Item 16 BMP Type(s) Compute runoff volume retention from proposed harvest and use BMP (Select BMPs from Table 5-4 of the TGD for WQMP) - Use additional forms for more BMPs DA DMA BMP Type N/A DA DMA BMP Type N/A DA DMA BMP Type N/A (Use additional forms for more BMPs) 2 Describe cistern or runoff detention facility N/A N/A N/A 3 Storage volume for proposed detention type (ft3) Volume of cistern N/A N/A N/A 4 Landscaped area planned for use of harvested stormwater (ft2) N/A N/A N/A 5 Average wet season daily irrigation demand (in/day) Use local values, typical ~ 0.1 in/day N/A N/A N/A 6 Daily water demand (ft3/day) Item 4 * (Item 5 / 12) N/A N/A N/A 7 Drawdown time (hrs) Copy Item 6 from Form 4.2-1 N/A N/A N/A 8Retention Volume (ft3) Vretention = Minimum of (Item 3) or (Item 6 * (Item 7 / 24)) N/A N/A N/A 9 Total Retention Volume (ft3) from Harvest and Use BMP = 0 Sum of Item 8 for all harvest and use BMP included in plan 10 Is the full DCV retained with a combination of LID HSC, retention and infiltration, and harvest & use BMPs? Yes No If yes, demonstrate conformance using Form 4.3-10. If no, then re-evaluate combinations of all LID BMP and optimize their implementation such that the maximum portion of the DCV is retained on-site (using a single BMP type or combination of BMP types). If the full DCV cannot be mitigated after this optimization process, proceed to Section 4.3.4. Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) 4-21 4.3.4 Biotreatment BMP (N/A) Biotreatment BMPs may be considered if the full LID DCV cannot be met by maximizing retention and infiltration, and harvest and use BMPs. A key consideration when using biotreatment BMP is the effectiveness of the proposed BMP in addressing the pollutants of concern for the project (see Table 5-5 of the TGD for WQMP). Use Form 4.3-5 to summarize the potential for volume based and/or flow based biotreatment options to biotreat the remaining unmet LID DCV w. Biotreatment computations are included as follows: • Use Form 4.3-6 to compute biotreatment in small volume based biotreatment BMP (e.g. bioretention w/underdrains); • Use Form 4.3-7 to compute biotreatment in large volume based biotreatment BMP (e.g. constructed wetlands); • Use Form 4.3-8 to compute sizing criteria for flow-based biotreatment BMP (e.g. bioswales) Form 4.3-5 Selection and Evaluation of Biotreatment BMP (DA 1) 1 Remaining LID DCV not met by site design HSC, infiltration, or harvest and use BMP for potential biotreatment (ft3): 0 Form 4.2-1 Item 7 - Form 4.3-2 Item 30 – Form 4.3-3 Item 16- Form 4.3-4 Item 9 List pollutants of concern Copy from Form 2.3-1. N/A 2 Biotreatment BMP Selected (Select biotreatment BMP(s) necessary to ensure all pollutants of concern are addressed through Unit Operations and Processes, described in Table 5-5 of the TGD for WQMP) Volume-based biotreatment Use Forms 4.3-6 and 4.3-7 to compute treated volume Flow-based biotreatment Use Form 4.3-8 to compute treated volume Bioretention with underdrain Planter box with underdrain Constructed wetlands Wet extended detention Dry extended detention Vegetated swale Vegetated filter strip Proprietary biotreatment 3 Volume biotreated in volume based biotreatment BMP (ft3): 0 Form 4.3-6 Item 15 + Form 4.3-7 Item 13 4 Compute remaining LID DCV with implementation of volume based biotreatment BMP (ft3): 0 Item 1 – Item 3 5 Remaining fraction of LID DCV for sizing flow based biotreatment BMP: 0% Item 4 / Item 1 6 Flow-based biotreatment BMP capacity provided (cfs): Use Figure 5-2 of the TGD for WQMP to determine flow capacity required to provide biotreatment of remaining percentage of unmet LID DCV (Item 5), for the project’s precipitation zone (Form 3-1 Item 1) 7 Metrics for MEP determination: • Provided a WQMP with the portion of site area used for suite of LID BMP equal to minimum thresholds in Table 5-7 of the TGD for WQMP for the proposed category of development: If maximized on-site retention BMPs is feasible for partial capture, then LID BMP implementation must be optimized to retain and infiltrate the maximum portion of the DCV possible within the prescribed minimum effective area. The remaining portion of the DCV shall then be mitigated using biotreatment BMP. Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) 4-22 Form 4.3-6 Volume Based Biotreatment (DA 1) – Bioretention and Planter Boxes with Underdrains Biotreatment BMP Type (Bioretention w/underdrain, planter box w/underdrain, other comparable BMP) DA 1 DMA BMP Type N/A DA DMA BMP Type N/A DA DMA BMP Type N/A (Use additional forms for more BMPs) 1 Pollutants addressed with BMP List all pollutant of concern that will be effectively reduced through specific Unit Operations and Processes described in Table 5-5 of the TGD for WQMP N/A N/A N/A 2 Amended soil infiltration rate Typical ~ 5.0 N/A N/A N/A 3 Amended soil infiltration safety factor Typical ~ 2.0 N/A N/A N/A 4 Amended soil design percolation rate (in/hr) Pdesign = Item 2 / Item 3 N/A N/A N/A 5 Ponded water drawdown time (hr) Copy Item 6 from Form 4.2-1 N/A N/A N/A 6 Maximum ponding depth (ft) see Table 5-6 of the TGD for WQMP for reference to BMP design details N/A N/A N/A 7 Ponding Depth (ft) dBMP = Minimum of (1/12 * Item 4 * Item 5) or Item 6 N/A N/A N/A 8 Amended soil surface area (ft2) N/A N/A N/A 9 Amended soil depth (ft) see Table 5-6 of the TGD for WQMP for reference to BMP design details N/A N/A N/A 10 Amended soil porosity, n N/A N/A N/A 11 Gravel depth (ft) see Table 5-6 of the TGD for WQMP for reference to BMP design details N/A N/A N/A 12 Gravel porosity, n N/A N/A N/A 13 Duration of storm as basin is filling (hrs) Typical ~ 3hrs N/A N/A N/A 14 Biotreated Volume (ft3) Vbiotreated = Item 8 * [(Item 7/2) + (Item 9 * Item 10) +(Item 11 * Item 12) + (Item 13 * (Item 4 / 12))] N/A N/A N/A 15 Total biotreated volume from bioretention and/or planter box with underdrains BMP: 0 Sum of Item 14 for all volume-based BMPs included in this form Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) 4-23 Form 4.3-7 Volume Based Biotreatment (DA 1) – Constructed Wetlands and Extended Detention Biotreatment BMP Type Constructed wetlands, extended wet detention, extended dry detention, or other comparable proprietary BMP. If BMP includes multiple modules (e.g. forebay and main basin), provide separate estimates for storage and pollutants treated in each module. DA DMA BMP Type N/A DA DMA BMP Type N/A (Use additional forms for more BMPs) Forebay Basin Forebay Basin 1 Pollutants addressed with BMP forebay and basin List all pollutant of concern that will be effectively reduced through specific Unit Operations and Processes described in Table 5-5 of the TGD for WQMP N/A N/A N/A N/A 2 Bottom width (ft) N/A N/A N/A N/A 3 Bottom length (ft) N/A N/A N/A N/A 4 Bottom area (ft2) Abottom = Item 2 * Item 3 N/A N/A N/A N/A 5 Side slope (ft/ft) N/A N/A N/A N/A 6 Depth of storage (ft) N/A N/A N/A N/A 7 Water surface area (ft2) Asurface =(Item 2 + (2 * Item 5 * Item 6)) * (Item 3 + (2 * Item 5 * Item 6)) N/A N/A N/A N/A 8 Storage volume (ft3) For BMP with a forebay, ensure fraction of total storage is within ranges specified in BMP specific fact sheets, see Table 5-6 of the TGD for WQMP for reference to BMP design details V =Item 6 / 3 * [Item 4 + Item 7 + (Item 4 * Item 7)^0.5] N/A N/A N/A N/A 9 Drawdown Time (hrs) Copy Item 6 from Form 2.1 N/A N/A 10 Outflow rate (cfs) QBMP = (Item 8forebay + Item 8basin) / (Item 9 * 3600) N/A N/A 11 Duration of design storm event (hrs) N/A N/A 12 Biotreated Volume (ft3) Vbiotreated = (Item 8forebay + Item 8basin) +( Item 10 * Item 11 * 3600) N/A N/A 13 Total biotreated volume from constructed wetlands, extended dry detention, or extended wet detention : 0 (Sum of Item 12 for all BMP included in plan) Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) 4-24 Form 4.3-8 Flow Based Biotreatment (DA 1) Biotreatment BMP Type Vegetated swale, vegetated filter strip, or other comparable proprietary BMP DA DMA BMP Type N/A DA DMA BMP Type N/A DA DMA BMP Type (Use additional forms for more BMPs) 1 Pollutants addressed with BMP List all pollutant of concern that will be effectively reduced through specific Unit Operations and Processes described in TGD Table 5-5 N/A N/A N/A 2 Flow depth for water quality treatment (ft) BMP specific, see Table 5-6 of the TGD for WQMP for reference to BMP design details N/A N/A N/A 3 Bed slope (ft/ft) BMP specific, see Table 5-6 of the TGD for WQMP for reference to BMP design details N/A N/A N/A 4 Manning's roughness coefficient N/A N/A N/A 5 Bottom width (ft) bw = (Form 4.3-5 Item 6 * Item 4) / (1.49 * Item 2^1.67 * Item 3^0.5) N/A N/A N/A 6 Side Slope (ft/ft) BMP specific, see Table 5-6 of the TGD for WQMP for reference to BMP design details N/A N/A N/A 7 Cross sectional area (ft2) A = (Item 5 * Item 2) + (Item 6 * Item 2^2) N/A N/A N/A 8 Water quality flow velocity (ft/sec) V = Form 4.3-5 Item 6 / Item 7 N/A N/A N/A 9 Hydraulic residence time (min) Pollutant specific, see Table 5-6 of the TGD for WQMP for reference to BMP design details N/A N/A N/A 10 Length of flow based BMP (ft) L = Item 8 * Item 9 * 60 N/A N/A N/A 11 Water surface area at water quality flow depth (ft2) SAtop = (Item 5 + (2 * Item 2 * Item 6)) * Item 10 N/A N/A N/A Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) 4-25 4.3.5 Conformance Summary Complete Form 4.3-9 to demonstrate how on-site LID DCV is met with proposed site design hydrologic source control, infiltration, harvest and use, and/or biotreatment BMP. The bottom line of the form is used to describe the basis for infeasibility determination for on-site LID BMP to achieve full LID DCV, and provides methods for computing remaining volume to be addressed in an alternative compliance plan. If the project has more than one outlet, then complete additional versions of this form for each outlet. Form 4.3-9 Conformance Summary and Alternative Compliance Volume Estimate (DA 1) 1 Total LID DCV for the Project DA-1 (ft3): 55,263 Copy Item 7 in Form 4.2-1 2 On-site retention with site design hydrologic source control LID BMP (ft3): 0 Copy Item 30 in Form 4.3-2 3 On-site retention with LID infiltration BMP (ft3): 142,101 Copy Item 16 in Form 4.3-3 4 On-site retention with LID harvest and use BMP (ft3): 0 Copy Item 9 in Form 4.3-4 5 On-site biotreatment with volume based biotreatment BMP (ft3): 0 Copy Item 3 in Form 4.3-5 6 Flow capacity provided by flow based biotreatment BMP (cfs): 0 Copy Item 6 in Form 4.3-5 7 LID BMP performance criteria are achieved if answer to any of the following is “Yes”: • Full retention of LID DCV with site design HSC, infiltration, or harvest and use BMP: Yes No If yes, sum of Items 2, 3, and 4 is greater than Item 1 • Combination of on-site retention BMPs for a portion of the LID DCV and volume-based biotreatment BMP that address all pollutants of concern for the remaining LID DCV: Yes No If yes, a) sum of Items 2, 3, 4, and 5 is greater than Item 1, and Items 2, 3 and 4 are maximized; or b) Item 6 is greater than Form 4.3--5 Item 6 and Items 2, 3 and 4 are maximized ▪ On-site retention and infiltration is determined to be infeasible and biotreatment BMP provide biotreatment for all pollutants of concern for full LID DCV: Yes No If yes, Form 4.3-1 Items 7 and 8 were both checked yes 8 If the LID DCV is not achieved by any of these means, then the project may be allowed to develop an alternative compliance plan. Check box that describes the scenario which caused the need for alternative compliance: • Combination of HSC, retention and infiltration, harvest and use, and biotreatment BMPs provide less than full LID DCV capture: Checked yes for Form 4.3-5 Item 7, Item 6 is zero, and sum of Items 2, 3, 4, and 5 is less than Item 1. If so, apply water quality credits and calculate volume for alternative compliance, Valt = (Item 1 – Item 2 – Item 3 – Item 4 – Item 5) * (100 - Form 2.4-1 Item 2)% • An approved Watershed Action Plan (WAP) demonstrates that water quality and hydrologic impacts of urbanization are more effective when managed in at an off-site facility: Attach appropriate WAP section, including technical documentation, showing effectiveness comparisons for the project site and regional watershed Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) 4-26 4.3.6 Hydromodification Control BMP (N/A) Use Form 4.3-10 to compute the remaining runoff volume retention, after LID BMP are implemented, needed to address HCOC, and the increase in time of concentration and decrease in peak runoff necessary to meet targets for protection of waterbodies with a potential HCOC. Describe hydromodification control BMP that address HCOC, which may include off-site BMP and/or in-stream controls. Section 5.6 of the TGD for WQMP provides additional details on selection and evaluation of hydromodification control BMP. Form 4.3-10 Hydromodification Control BMPs (DA 1) 1 Volume reduction needed for HCOC performance criteria (ft3): 0 (Form 4.2-2 Item 4 * 0.95) – Form 4.2-2 Item 1 2 On-site retention with site design hydrologic source control, infiltration, and harvest and use LID BMP (ft3): 142,101 Sum of Form 4.3-9 Items 2, 3, and 4 Evaluate option to increase implementation of on-site retention in Forms 4.3-2, 4.3-3, and 4.3-4 in excess of LID DCV toward achieving HCOC volume reduction 3 Remaining volume for HCOC volume capture (ft3): 0 Item 1 – Item 2 4 Volume capture provided by incorporating additional on-site or off-site retention BMPs (ft3): 0 Existing downstream BMP may be used to demonstrate additional volume capture (if so, attach to this WQMP a hydrologic analysis showing how the additional volume would be retained during a 2-yr storm event for the regional watershed) 5 If Item 4 is less than Item 3, incorporate in-stream controls on downstream waterbody segment to prevent impacts due to hydromodification Attach in-stream control BMP selection and evaluation to this WQMP 6 Is Form 4.2-2 Item 11 less than or equal to 5%: Yes No If yes, HCOC performance criteria is achieved. If no, select one or more mitigation options below: • Demonstrate increase in time of concentration achieved by proposed LID site design, LID BMP, and additional on-site or off-site retention BMP BMP upstream of a waterbody segment with a potential HCOC may be used to demonstrate increased time of concentration through hydrograph attenuation (if so, show that the hydraulic residence time provided in BMP for a 2-year storm event is equal or greater than the addition time of concentration requirement in Form 4.2-4 Item 15) • Increase time of concentration by preserving pre-developed flow path and/or increase travel time by reducing slope and increasing cross-sectional area and roughness for proposed on-site conveyance facilities • Incorporate appropriate in-stream controls for downstream waterbody segment to prevent impacts due to hydromodification, in a plan approved and signed by a licensed engineer in the State of California 7 Form 4.2-2 Item 12 less than or equal to 5%: Yes No If yes, HCOC performance criteria is achieved. If no, select one or more mitigation options below: • Demonstrate reduction in peak runoff achieved by proposed LID site design, LID BMPs, and additional on-site or off- site retention BMPs BMPs upstream of a waterbody segment with a potential HCOC may be used to demonstrate additional peak runoff reduction through hydrograph attenuation (if so, attach to this WQMP, a hydrograph analysis showing how the peak runoff would be reduced during a 2-yr storm event) • Incorporate appropriate in-stream controls for downstream waterbody segment to prevent impacts due to hydromodification, in a plan approved and signed by a licensed engineer in the State of California Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) 4-27 4.4 Alternative Compliance Plan (if applicable) Describe an alternative compliance plan (if applicable) for projects not fully able to infiltrate, harvest and use, or biotreat the DCV via on-site LID practices. A project proponent must develop an alternative compliance plan to address the remainder of the LID DCV. Depending on project type some projects may qualify for water quality credits that can be applied to reduce the DCV that must be treated prior to development of an alternative compliance plan (see Form 2.4-1, Water Quality Credits). Form 4.3-9 Item 8 includes instructions on how to apply water quality credits when computing the DCV that must be met through alternative compliance. Alternative compliance plans may include one or more of the following elements: • On-site structural treatment control BMP - All treatment control BMP should be located as close to possible to the pollutant sources and should not be located within receiving waters; • Off-site structural treatment control BMP - Pollutant removal should occur prior to discharge of runoff to receiving waters; • Urban runoff fund or In-lieu program, if available Depending upon the proposed alternative compliance plan, approval by the executive officer may or may not be required (see Section 6 of the TGD for WQMP). Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) 5-1 Section 5 Inspection and Maintenance Responsibility for Post Construction BMP All BMP included as part of the project WQMP are required to be maintained through regular scheduled inspection and maintenance (refer to Section 8, Post Construction BMP Requirements, in the TGD for WQMP). Fully complete Form 5-1 summarizing all BMP included in the WQMP. Attach additional forms as needed. The WQMP shall also include a detailed Operation and Maintenance Plan for all BMP and may require a Maintenance Agreement (consult the jurisdiction’s LIP). If a Maintenance Agreement is required, it must also be attached to the WQMP. Form 5-1 BMP Inspection and Maintenance (use additional forms as necessary) BMP Reponsible Party(s) Inspection/ Maintenance Activities Required Minimum Frequency of Activities Underground Infiltration System Owner - Inspect/maintain underground infiltration systems - Isolator row for collected trash, sediments and/or debris. Remove trash, sediments and debris by jet-vac and pump and dispose of trash, sediments and debris in a legal manner - Inspect system for standing water. If system has standing water, perform re-inspection within 48 hours. If system still has standing water then the system shall be jet-vacuumed and pumped and removed debris shall be disposed of in a legal manner Bi-monthly and prior to storm event and 48 hours after storm has passed Loading Dock and Parking Lot Sweeping Owner Sweep loading dock, parking lot, and truck courts Monthly / As needed. Loading Dock Owner - Inspect loading dock for trash debris and sediments - Inspect loading dock for evidence of spills and broken containers - Clean up spills and dispose of collected material in a legal manner Weekly Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) 5-2 Planting Owner - Inspect health of planting and erosion of landscape area - Trimming trees and bushes when needed Monthly Efficient Irrigation Owner - Inspect irrigation system general operation and durations - Repair damaged sprinkler and drip irrigation lines as needed - Reduce durations during the winter season to prevent over irrigation Monthly Trash Storage Areas and Litter Control (SD-32) Owner - Inspect trash container, lids, screens, and clean trash storage areas Weekly Employee Training / Education Program Owner - Building tenants to provide BMP training and hand out educational materials. Annually or upon hire Roof Runoff Controls (SD-11) Owner - Inspect/repair roof drains Quarterly CDS Unit Owner -Inspect system for sediment, floating trash, and debris Monthly and prior to storm event and 48 hours after storm has passed Storm Drain Signage Owner - Inspect storm drain signage for faded or lost signs - Repair or replace signage as needed Annually 6-1 Section 6 WQMP Attachments 6.1. Site Plan and Drainage Plan Include a site plan and drainage plan sheet set containing the following minimum information: 6.2 Electronic Data Submittal Minimum requirements include submittal of PDF exhibits in addition to hard copies. Format must not require specialized software to open. If the local jurisdiction requires specialized electronic document formats (as described in their local Local Implementation Plan), this section will describe the contents (e.g., layering, nomenclature, geo-referencing, etc.) of these documents so that they may be interpreted efficiently and accurately. 6.3 Post Construction Attach all O&M Plans and Maintenance Agreements for BMP to the WQMP. 6.4 Other Supporting Documentation ▪ BMP Educational Materials ▪ Activity Restriction – C, C&R’s & Lease Agreements ▪ Project location ▪ Site boundary ▪ Land uses and land covers, as applicable ▪ Suitability/feasibility constraints ▪ Structural Source Control BMP locations ▪ Site Design Hydrologic Source Control BMP locations ▪ LID BMP details ▪ Drainage delineations and flow information ▪ Drainage connections Attachment A WQMP Site Plan 221WPT - LIVE OAK AT SANTA ANA INDUSTRIALCITY OF FONTANASOUTH OF SANTA ANA AVE. BETWEEN BANANA AVE. AND ALMOND AVE.PRELIMINARY WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT PLANFOR 221WPT - LIVE OAK AT SANTA ANA INDUSTRIALCITY OF FONTANASOUTH OF SANTA ANA AVE. BETWEEN BANANA AVE. AND ALMOND AVE.PRELIMINARY WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT PLANFOR Attachment B BMP Details and Calculations Date:1/27/2022 Project Name:Infiltration System - 12430 (1-27-2022 22-42-37) City / County:Fontana State:California Designed By:Steve Diaz Company:Huitt-Zollars, Inc. =Adjustable Input Cells Telephone:(909) 941-7799 Out-to-out length (ft):349.0 Backfill Porosity (%):40% System Diameter (in):96 Out-to-out width (ft):85.0 Depth Above Pipe (in):6.0 Pipe Spacing (in):36 Number of Manifolds (ea):2.0 Depth Below Pipe (in):6.0 Incremental Analysis (in):6 Number of Barrels (ea):8.0 Width At Ends (ft):1.0 System Invert (Elevation):980 Width At Sides (ft):1.0 Depth (ft)Elevation (ft)Incremental Storage (cf) Cumulative Storage (cf) Incremental Storage (cf) Cumulative Storage (cf) Incremental Storage (cf) Cumulative Storage (cf) Percent Open Storage (%) Ave. Surface Area (sf) 0.00 980.00 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%12,214.8 0.50 980.50 0.0 0.0 6,107.4 6,107.4 6,107.4 6,107.4 0.0%12,214.8 1.00 981.00 3,707.0 3,707.0 4,624.6 10,732.0 8,331.6 14,439.0 25.7%18,800.4 1.50 981.50 6,570.5 10,277.5 3,479.2 14,211.2 10,049.7 24,488.7 42.0%21,212.5 2.00 982.00 8,212.6 18,490.1 2,822.3 17,033.6 11,035.0 35,523.7 52.1%22,833.8 2.50 982.50 9,359.5 27,849.6 2,363.6 19,397.2 11,723.1 47,246.8 58.9%23,995.5 3.00 983.00 10,183.4 38,033.0 2,034.1 21,431.2 12,217.4 59,464.2 64.0%24,825.3 3.50 983.50 10,759.6 48,792.6 1,803.5 23,234.8 12,563.2 72,027.4 67.7%25,386.0 4.00 984.00 11,127.2 59,919.8 1,656.5 24,891.3 12,783.7 84,811.1 70.7%25,711.3 4.50 984.50 11,306.4 71,226.2 1,584.8 26,476.1 12,891.2 97,702.3 72.9%25,818.0 5.00 985.00 11,306.4 82,532.6 1,584.8 28,061.0 12,891.2 110,593.6 74.6%25,711.3 5.50 985.50 11,127.2 93,659.8 1,656.5 29,717.5 12,783.7 123,377.3 75.9%25,386.0 6.00 986.00 10,759.6 104,419.4 1,803.5 31,521.0 12,563.2 135,940.4 76.8%24,825.3 6.50 986.50 10,183.4 114,602.8 2,034.1 33,555.1 12,217.4 148,157.9 77.4%23,995.5 7.00 987.00 9,359.5 123,962.3 2,363.6 35,918.7 11,723.1 159,881.0 77.5%22,833.8 7.50 987.50 8,212.6 132,174.9 2,822.3 38,741.0 11,035.0 170,915.9 77.3%21,212.5 8.00 988.00 6,570.5 138,745.4 3,479.2 42,220.3 10,049.7 180,965.6 76.7%18,800.4 8.50 988.50 3,707.0 142,452.4 4,624.6 46,844.8 8,331.6 189,297.2 75.3%12,214.8 9.00 989.00 0.0 142,452.4 6,107.4 52,952.2 6,107.4 195,404.6 72.9%12,214.8 Pipe Stone Total SystemSystem Storage Volume Estimation Miscellaneous Contech Engineered Solutions, LLC is pleased to offer the following estimate of storage volume for the above named project. The results are submitted as an estimate only, without liability on the part of Contech Engineered Solutions, LLC for accuracy or suitability to any particular applicaton and are subject to verification of the Engineer of Record. This tool is only applicable for rectangular shaped systems. CMP: Underground Detention System Storage Volume Estimation Summary of Inputs Pipe & Analysis InformationSystem Information Backfill Information These results are submitted to you as a guideline only, without liability on the part of CONTECH Engineered Solutions, LLC for accuracy or suitability to any particular application, and are subject to your verification. Corrugated Metal Pipe Design Guide ENGINEERED SOLUTIONS 22 Drainage Pipe Selection Introduction ...................................................................................................................3 Environment and Abrasion Guidelines ............................................................................4 Usage Guide for Drainage Products ................................................................................4 Product Dimensions and Hydraulics ................................................................................5 Reference Specifications .................................................................................................6 Corrugated Steel Pipe Height of Cover Tables ...................................................................................................7 Handling Weights ........................................................................................................10 Corrugated Aluminum Pipe Height of Cover Tables .................................................................................................11 Handling Weights ........................................................................................................12 ULTRA-FLO Height of Cover Tables .................................................................................................13 Handling Weight ..........................................................................................................14 Installation for CMP ..............................................................................................15 Miscellaneous SmoothCor ..................................................................................................................16 QUICK STAB Joint ........................................................................................................17 End Sections ................................................................................................................18 Table of Contents ENGINEERED SOLUTIONS 3 Durability Design Guide for Drainage Products Proper design of culverts and storm sewers requires structural, hydraulic and durability considerations. While most designers are comfortable with structural and hydraulic design, the mechanics of evaluating abrasion, corrosion and water chemistry to perform a durability design are not commonly found in most civil engineering handbooks. The durability and service life of a drainage pipe installation is directly related to the environmental conditions encountered at the site and the type of materials and coatings from which the culvert is fabricated. Two principle causes of early failure in drainage pipe materials are corrosion and abrasion. Service life can be affected by the corrosive action of the backfill in contact with the outside of a drainage pipe or more commonly by the corrosive and abrasive action of the flow in the invert of the drainage pipe. The design life analysis should include a check for both the water side and soil side environments to determine which is more critical— or which governs service life. The potential for metal loss in the invert of a drainage pipe due to abrasive flows is often overlooked by designers and its effects are often mistaken for corrosion. An estimate for potential abrasion is required at each pipe location in order to determine the appropriate material and gage. This manual is intended to guide specifiers through the mechanics of selecting appropriate drainage products to meet service life requirements. The information contained in the following pages is a composite of several national guidelines. Using the Design Guide The choice of material, gage and product type can be extremely important to service life. The following steps describe the procedure for selecting the appropriate drainage product, material and gage to meet a specific service life requirement. Design Sequence 1. Select pipe or structure based on hydraulic and clearance requirements. Use Tables 4 and 5 as reference for size limits and hydraulic properties of all drainage products. 2. Use Height of Cover tables for the chosen pipe or structure to determine the material gage required for the specific loading condition. 3. Use Table 1 to select the appropriate material for the site-specific environmental conditions. Whenever possible, existing installations of drainage structures along the same water course offer the most reliable estimate of long- term performance for specific environment conditions. In many cases, there will be more than one material that is appropriate for the project environmental conditions. Generally speaking, the metal material types increase in price as you move from top down on Table 1. Please contact your local CONTECH Sales Representative for pricing. 4. Use Table 2 to determine which abrasion level most accurately describes the typical storm event (2 year storm). The expected stream velocity and associated abrasion conditions should be based on a typical flow and not a 10 or 50-year design flood. 5. Use Table 3 to determine whether the structural gage for the selected material is sufficient for the design service life. If the structural gage is greater than or equal to the gage required for a particular abrasion condition and service life, use the structural gage. Conversely, if the structural gage is less than the gage required for a particular abrasion condition and service life, use the gage required by Table 3. Note: Both Contech round pipe and pipe-arch are available with either helical or an- nular corrugations. Contech HEL-COR® pipe (helical corrugations) is furnished with continuous lock seams and annular re-rolled ends. Contech riveted pipe is furnished with annular corrugations only. The height of cover tables in this guide are helical corrugations only. Consult your Contech representative for Height of Cover tables on riveted pipe. 4 Table 2 — FHWA Abrasion Guidelines Abrasion Abrasion Bed Load Flow Velocity Level Condition (fps) 1 Non- Abrasive None Minimal 2 Low Abrasion Minor < 5 3 Moderate Abrasion Moderate 5 - 15 4 Severe Abrasion Heavy > 15“Interim Direct Guidelines on Drainage Pipe Alternative Selection.” FHWA, 2005.Table 1 — Recommended Environments Material Type Soil* and Water pH Resistivity (ohm-cm) 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Minimum Maximum Galvanized Steel* 2000 8000Aluminized Steel Type 2 1500 N/APolymer Coated 250 N/AAluminum Alloy 500 N/A*Appropriate pH range for Galvanized Steel is 6.0 to 10 CMP (1/2” & 1” deep corrugations, ULTRA FLO 3 & Smooth Cor 2,3) Minimum gage required to meet design service life, assuming that structural design has been met. Galvanized (2 oz.) 16 12 10 84 14 10 8 N/A 145 105 85 N/A Galvanized and Asphalt Coated 16 14 10 8 14 12 8 N/A 145 125 85 N/A Galv., Asphalt Coated and Paved Invert 16 16 14 10 16 14 12 8 14 12 10 N/A Aluminized Type 2 16 16 16 14 14 14 14 12 146 146 146 126 Polymer Coated 16 16 168 169 16 16 168 169 147 147 147,8 147,9 Aluminum Alloy 16 16 16 16 14 14 14 14 145 145 145 145 Rural Minor Major Urban Rural Minor Major Urban Rural Minor Major Urban 25 50 75 100 25 50 75 100 25 50 75 100 Table 3 — Drainage Product Usage Guide1ApplicationRoadway ClassificationDesign Service LifeAbrasion LevelAbrasion Level 1 & 2Abrasion Level 4Abrasion Level 3Culverts, Storm Drain, Cross Drain, Median Drain, Side Drain1. Based on Table 1 - Recommended Environments.2. SmoothCor™ Steel Pipe combines a corrugated steel exterior shell with a hydraulically smooth interior liner. 3. Service life estimates for ULTRA FLO® and SmoothCor Pipe assume a storm sewer application. Storm sewers rarely achieve abrasion levels 3 or 4. For applications other than storm sewers or abrasion conditions above Abrasion Level 2, please contact your Contech Sales Representative for gage and coating recommendations.4. Design service life for 8 gage galvanized is 97 years.5. Invert protection to consist of velocity reduction structures.6. Asphalt coated and paved invert or velocity reduction structures are needed.7. Requires a field applied concrete paved invert with minimum thickness 1” above corrugation crests.8. 75 year service life for polymer coated is based on a pH range of 4-9 and resistivity greater than 750 ohm-cm.9. 100 year service life for polymer coated is based on a pH range of 5-9 and resistivity greater than 1500 ohm-cm. 5 Table 4 - Product Dimensions Drainage Product Common Uses Size Limits*Manning’s “n” ValueMinimumMaximum Round PipeCorrugated Steel (1/2” deep corrugation) Culverts, smallbridges, storm water detention/retention systems, conduits, tunnels, storm sewers. 12”84”0.011 - 0.021 Corrugated Steel with Paved Invert (1/2” deep corrugation)12”84”0.014 - 0.020 Corrugated Steel (1” deep corrugation)54”144”0.022 - 0.027 Corrugated Steel with Paved Invert (1” deep corrugation)54”144”0.019 - 0.023 Corrugated Aluminum (1/2” deep corrugation)12”72”0.011 - 0.021 Corrugated Aluminum (1” deep corrugation)30”120”0.023 - 0.027 ULTRA FLO® Steel Storm sewers, culverts, storm water detention/retention systems. 18”102”0.012 ULTRA FLO Aluminum 18”84”0.012 SmoothCor™ Steel (1/2” deep corrugation)18”66”0.012 SmoothCor Steel (1” deep corrugation)48”126”0.012 Pipe-ArchCorrugated Steel (1/2” deep corrugation) Culverts, smallbridges, storm water detention/retention systems, conduits, tunnels, storm sewers. 17” x 13” 83” x 57”0.011 - 0.021 Corrugated Steel with Paved Invert (1/2” deep corrugation)17” x 13” 83” x 57”0.014 - 0.019 Corrugated Steel (1” deep corrugation)53” x 41”142” x 91”0.023 - 0.027 Corrugated Steel with Paved Invert (1” deep corrugation)53” x 41”142” x 91”0.019 - 0.022 Corrugated Aluminum (1/2” deep corrugation)17” x 13” 71” x 47”0.011 - 0.021 Corrugated Aluminum (1” deep corrugation)60” x 46”112” x 75”0.023 - 0.027 ULTRA FLO Steel Storm sewers, culverts, storm water detention/retention systems. 20” x 16”66” x 51”0.012 ULTRA FLO Aluminum 20” x 16”66” x 51”0.012 SmoothCor Steel (1/2” deep corrugation)21” x 15”77” x 52”0.012 SmoothCor Steel (1” deep corrugation)53” x 41”137” x 87”0.012 * For sizes outside of these limits, please contact your Contech representative. Table 5 — Corrugated Steel Pipe—Values of Coefficient of Roughness (n) All Diameters 1-1/2” x 1/4” Helical* Corrugation Helical—2-2/3” x 1/2” 2-2/3” x 1/2”Annular 8 in.10 in.12 in.15 in.18 in.24 in.36 in.48 in.60 in. + Unpaved 0.024 0.012 0.014 0.011 0.012 0.013 0.015 0.018 0.020 0.021 PAVED-INVERT 0.021 0.014 0.017 0.020 0.019 SmoothCor N/A 0.012 0.012 0.012 0.012 0.012 Annular Helical*—3” x 1” 3” x 1”36 in.42 in.48 in.54 in.60 in.66 in.72 in.78 in. + Unpaved 0.027 0.022 0.022 0.023 0.023 0.024 0.025 0.026 0.027 PAVED-INVERT 0.023 0.019 0.019 0.020 0.020 0.021 0.022 0.022 0.023 SmoothCor N/A 0.012 0.012 0.012 0.012 0.012 0.012 Annular Helical*—5” x 1” 5” x 1”48 in.54 in.60 in.66 in.72 in.78 in. + Unpaved N/A 0.022 0.022 0.023 0.024 0.024 0.025 PAVED-INVERT N/A 0.019 0.019 0.020 0.021 0.021 0.022 ULTRA FLO N/A 3/4” x 3/4” x 7-1/2” All diameters n = 0.012 * Tests on helically corrugated pipe demonstrate a lower coefficient of roughness than for annularly corrugated steel pipe. Pipe-arches approximately have the same roughness characteristics as their equivalent round pipes. 6 Pipe & Pipe-ArchTable 6 - AASHTO Reference Specifications Material Type Material Pipe Design* Installation* CMP (1/2” or 1” deep corrugations) Galvanized (2 oz.) M218 M36 Section 12 Section 26 Asphalt Coated M190 M36 Section 12 Section 26 Asphalt Coated and Paved Invert M190 M36 Section 12 Section 26 Aluminized Type 2 M274 M36 Section 12 Section 26 Polymer Coated M246 M36 & M245 Section 12 Section 26 Aluminum Alloy M197 M196 Section 12 Section 26 ULTRA FLO (3/4” x 3/4” x 7-1/2” corrugation) Galvanized (2 oz.) M218 M36 Section 12 Section 26 Aluminized Type 2 M274 M36 Section 12 Section 26 Polymer Coated M246 M36 & M245 Section 12 Section 26 Aluminum Alloy M197 M196 Section 12 Section 26 SmoothCor Polymer Coated M246 M36 & M245 Section 12 Section 26 * AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specification and AASHTO Standard Specification for Highway Bridges 7 Heights of Cover 2-2/3” x 1/2” Height of Cover Limits for Corrugated Steel Pipe Heights of Cover Notes: 1. These tables are for lock-seam or welded-seam construction. They are not for riveted construction. Consult your Contech Sales Representative for Height of Cover tables on riveted pipe. 2. These values, where applicable, were calculated using a load factor of K=0.86 as adopted in the NCSPA CSP Design Manual, 2008. 3. The haunch areas of a pipe-arch are the most critical zone for backfilling. Extra care should be taken to provide good material and compaction to a point above the spring line. 4. E 80 minimum cover is measured from top of pipe to bottom of tie. 5. H 20 and H 25 minimum cover is measured from top of pipe to bottom of flexible pavement or top of rigid pavement. 6. The H 20 and H 25 pipe-arch tables are based on 2 tons per square foot corner bearing pressures. 7. The E 80 pipe-arch tables minimum and maximum covers are based on the corner bearing pressures shown. These values may increase or decrease with changes in allowable corner bearing pressures. 8. 0.052” is 18 gage. 0.064” is 16 gage. 0.079” is 14 gage. 0.109” is 12 gage. 0.138” is 10 gage. 0.168” is 8 gage. 9. For construction loads, see Page 15. 10. 1-1/2” x 1/4” corrugation. H20, H25 and E80 loading. 11. SmoothCor has same Height of Cover properties as corrugated steel pipe. The exterior shell of SmoothCor is manufactured in either 2-2/3” x 1/2” or 3" x 1" corrugations; maximum exterior shell gage is 12. 12. Sewer gage (trench conditions) tables for corrugated steel pipe can be found in the AISI book “Modern Sewer Design,” 4th Edition, 1999. These tables may reduce the minimum gage due to a higher flexibility factor allowed for a trench condition. Corrugated Steel Pipe H 20 and H 25 Live Loads, Pipe-Arch Minimum Round Structural Minimum Equivalent, Span x Rise, Thickness, Cover, Inches Inches Inches Inches 15 17 x 13 0.064 12 16 18 21 x 15 0.064 15 21 24 x 18 0.064 24 28 x 20 0.064 30 35x 24 0.064 36 42 x 29 0.064 42 49 x 33 0.064* 48 57 x 38 0.064* 54 64 x 43 0.079* 60 71 x 47 0.109* 66 77 x 52 0.109* 72 83 x 57 0.138* 12 15 Maximum(7) Cover, Feet Size 2 Tons/Ft.2 Corner Bearing Pressure Maximum Cover, Feet 3 Tons/Ft.2 Corner Bearing Pressure Size E 80 Live Loads, Pipe-Arch Minimum Round Structural Minimum Equivalent, Span x Rise, Thickness, Cover, Inches Inches Inches Inches 15 17 x 13 0.079 24 22 18 21 x 15 0.079 21 24 x 18 0.109 24 28 x 20 0.109 30 35 x 24 0.138 36 42 x 29 0.138 42 49 x 33 0.138* 48 57 x 38 0.138* 54 64 x 43 0.138* 60 71 x 47 0.138* 24 22 * These values are based on the AISI Flexibility Factor limit (0.0433 x 1.5) for pipe-arch. (8) H 20 and H 25 Live Loads Diameter or Span, Inches Minimum Cover, Inches Maximum Cover, Feet(2) Specified Thickness, Inches 0.052 0.064 0.079 0.109 0.138 0.168 610 12 388 486 810 291 365 1010 233 392 12 197 248 310 15 158 198 248 18 131 165 206 21 113 141 177 248 24 98 124 155 217 30 99 124 173 36 83 103 145 186 42 71 88 124 159 195 48 62 77 108 139 171 54 67 94 122 150 60 80 104 128 66 68 88 109 72 75 93 78 79 84 12 66 E 80 Live Loads Diameter or Span, Inches Minimum Cover, Inches Maximum Cover, Feet(2) Specified Thickness, Inches 0.052 0.064 0.079 0.109 0.138 0.168 12 12 197 248 310 15 158 198 248 18 131 165 206 21 113 141 177 248 24 98 124 155 217 30 99 124 173 36 83 103 145 186 42 71 88 124 159 195 48 12 62 77 108 139 171 54 18 67 94 122 150 60 80 104 128 66 68 88 109 72 18 75 93 78 24 79 84 24 66 8 Heights of Cover Notes: 1. These tables are for lock-seam or welded-seam construction. They are not for riveted construction. Consult your Contech Sales Representative for Height of Cover tables on riveted pipe. 2. These values, where applicable, were calculated using a load factor of K=0.86 as adopted in the NCSPA CSP Design Manual, 2008. 3. The span and rise shown in these tables are nominal. Typically the actual rise that forms is greater than the specified nominal. This actual rise is within the tolerances as allowed by the AASHTO & ASTM specifications. The minimum covers shown are more conservative than required by the AASHTO and ASTM specifications to account for this anticipated increase in rise. Less cover height may be tolerated depending upon actual rise of supplied pipe arch. 4. The haunch areas of a pipe-arch are the most critical zone for backfilling. Extra care should be taken to provide good material and compaction to a point above the spring line. 5. E 80 minimum cover is measured from top of pipe to bottom of tie. 6. H 20 and H 25 minimum cover is measured from top of pipe to bottom of flexible pavement or top of rigid pavement. 7. The H 20 and H 25 pipe-arch tables are based on 2 tons per square foot corner bearing pressures. 8. The E 80 pipe-arch tables minimum and maximum covers are based on the corner bearing pressures shown. These values may increase or decrease with changes in allowable corner bearing pressures. 9. 0.052” is 18 gage. 0.064” is 16 gage. 0.079” is 14 gage. 0.109” is 12 gage. 0.138” is 10 gage. 0.168” is 8 gage. 10. For construction loads, see Page 15. 11. SmoothCor has same Height of Cover properties as corrugated steel pipe. The exterior shell of SmoothCor is manufactured in either 2-2/3” x 1/2” or 3”x1” corrugations; maximum exterior shell gage is 12. 12. Sewer gage (trench conditions) tables for corrugated steel pipe can be found in the AISI book “Modern Sewer Design,” 4th Edition, 1999. These tables may reduce the minimum gage due to a higher flexibility factor allowed for a trench condition. Heights of Cover 5” x 1” or 3” x 1” Height of Cover Limits for Corrugated Steel Pipe H 20 and H 25 Live Loads Diameter Minimum or Span, Cover Inches Inches 0.064 0.079 0.109 0.138 0.168 54 12 56 70 98 127 155 60 50 63 88 114 139 66 46 57 80 103 127 72 42 52 74 95 116 78 39 48 68 87 107 84 36 45 63 81 99 90 33 42 59 76 93 96 12 31 39 55 71 87 102 18 29 37 52 67 82 108 35 49 63 77 114 32 45 58 72 120 30 42 54 66 126 39 50 61 132 36 46 58 138 33 43 53 144 18 39 49 Maximum cover heights shown are for 5” x 1”. To obtain maximum cover for 3” x 1”, increase these values by 12% E 80 Live Loads Diameter Minimum or Span, Cover Inches Inches 0.064 0.079 0.109 0.138 0.168 54 18 56 70 98 127 155 60 50 63 88 114 139 66 46 57 80 103 127 72 18 42 52 74 95 116 78 24 39 48 68 87 107 84 36 45 63 81 99 90 33(1) 42 59 76 93 96 24 31(1) 39 55 71 87 102 30 29(1) 37 52 67 82 108 35 49 63 77 114 32(1) 45 58 72 120 30 30(1) 42 54 66 126 36 39 50 61 132 36 46 58 138 33(1) 43 53 144 36 39 49 Maximum cover heights shown are for 5” x 1”. To obtain maximum cover for 3” x 1”, increase these values by 12%. (1) These diameters in these gages require additional minimum cover. Maximum Cover, Feet(2) Specified Thickness, Inches Maximum Cover, Feet(2) Specified Thickness, Inches 5” x 1” Pipe-Arch Height of Cover Limits for Corrugated Steel Pipe H 20 and H 25 Live Loads Minimum Equivalent Specified Minimum Pipe Span x Rise Thickness, Cover 2 Tons/Ft.2 Corner Diameter Inches(3) Inches* Inches Bearing Pressure 72 81 x 59 0.109 18 21 78 87 x 63 0.109 18 20 84 95 x 67 0.109 18 20 90 103 x 71 0.109 18 20 96 112 x 75 0.109 21 20 102 117 x 79 0.109 21 19 108 128 x 83 0.109 24 19 114 137 x 87 0.109 24 19 120 142 x 91 0.138 24 19 Larger sizes are available in some areas of the United States. Check with your local Contech representative . Some minimum heights-of-cover for pipe-arches have been increased to take into account allowable "plus" tolerances on the manufactured rise. E 80 Live Loads Minimum Equivalent Specified Minimum Pipe Span x Rise Thickness, Cover 2 Tons/Ft.2 Cover Diameter Inches(3) Inches* Inches Bearing Pressure 72 81 x 59 0.109 30 21 78 87 x 63 0.109 30 18 84 95 x 67 0.109 30 18 90 103 x 71 0.109 36 18 96 112 x 75 0.109 36 18 102 117 x 79 0.109 36 17 108 128 x 83 0.109 42 17 114 137 x 87 0.109 42 17 120 142 x 91 0.138 42 17 * Some 3” x 1” and 5” x 1” minimum gages shown for pipe-arch are due to manufacturing limitations. Maximum(7) Cover, FeetSize Maximum(8) Cover, FeetSize 9 Heights of Cover Notes: 1. These tables are for lock-seam or welded-seam construction. They are not for riveted construction. Consult your Contech Sales Representative for Height of Cover tables on riveted pipe. 2. These values, where applicable, were calculated using K=0.86 as adopted in the NCSPA CSP Design Manual, 2008. 3. The span and rise shown in these tables are nominal. Typically the actual rise that forms is greater than the specified nominal. This actual rise is within the tolerances as allowed by the AASHTO & ASTM specifications. The minimum covers shown are more conservative than required by the AASHTO and ASTM specifications to account for this anticipated increase in rise. Less cover height may be tolerated depending upon actual rise of supplied pipe arch. 4. The haunch areas of a pipe-arch are the most critical zone for backfilling. Extra care should be taken to provide good material and compaction to a point above the spring line. 5. E 80 minimum cover is measured from top of pipe to bottom of tie. 6. H 20 and H 25 minimum cover is measured from top of pipe to bottom of flexible pavement or top of rigid pavement. 7. The H 20 and H 25 pipe-arch tables are based on 2 tons per square foot corner bearing pressures. 8. The E 80 pipe-arch tables minimum and maximum covers are based on the corner bearing pressures shown. These values may increase or decrease with changes in allowable corner bearing pressures. 9. 0.052” is 18 gage. 0.064” is 16 gage. 0.079” is 14 gage. 0.109” is 12 gage. 0.138” is 10 gage. 0.168” is 8 gage. 10. For construction loads, see Page 15. 11. SmoothCor has same Height of Cover properties as corrugated steel pipe. The exterior shell of SmoothCor is manufactured in either 2-2/3” x 1/2” or 3" x 1" corrugations; maximum exterior shell gage is 15. 12. Sewer gage (trench conditions) tables for corrugated steel pipe can be found in the AISI book “Modern Sewer Design,” 4th Edition, 1999. These tables may reduce the minimum gage due to a higher flexibility factor allowed for a trench condition. 3” x 1” Pipe-Arch Height of Cover Limits for Corrugated Steel Pipe-Arch H 20 and H 25 Live Loads Minimum Equivalent Specified Minimum Pipe Span x Rise Thickness, Cover 2 Tons/Ft.2 Corner Diameter Inches Inches* Inches Bearing Pressure 48 53 x 41 0.079 12 25 54 60 x 46 0.079 15 25 60 66 x 51 0.079 15 25 66 73 x 55 0.079 18 24 72 81 x 59 0.079 18 21 78 87 x 63 0.079 18 20 84 95 x 67 0.079 18 20 90 103 x 71 0.079 18 20 96 112 x 75 0.079 21 20 102 117 x 79 0.109 21 19 108 128 x 83 0.109 24 19 114 137 x 87 0.109 24 19 120 142 x 91 0.138 24 19 Larger sizes are available in some areas of the United States. Check with your local Contech Sales Representative. Some minimum heights-of-cover for pipe-arches have been increased to take into account allowable “plus” tolerances on the manufactured rise. E 80 Live Loads Minimum Equivalent Specified Minimum Pipe Span x Rise Thickness, Cover 2 Tons/Ft.2 Corner Diameter Inches Inches* Inches Bearing Pressure 48 53 x 41 0.079 24 25 54 60 x 46 0.079 24 25 60 66 x 51 0.079 24 25 66 73 x 55 0.079 30 24 72 81 x 59 0.079 30 21 78 87 x 63 0.079 30 18 84 95 x 67 0.079 30 18 90 103 x 71 0.079 36 18 96 112 x 75 0.079 36 18 102 117 x 79 0.109 36 17 108 128 x 83 0.109 42 17 114 137 x 87 0.109 42 17 120 142 x 91 0.138 42 17 * Some 3” x 1” and 5” x 1” minimum gages shown for pipe-arch are due to manufacturing limitations. Maximum(7) Cover, FeetSize Size Maximum(8) Cover, Feet Heights of Cover 10 Approximate Weight (Pounds/Foot) Contech Corrugated Steel Pipe (Estimated Average Weights—Not for Specification Use) 1-1/2” x 1/4” Corrugation Inside Specified Diameter, Thickness, Galvanized & Full in. in. ALUMINIZED Coated 6 0.052 4 5 0.064 5 6 8 0.052 5 6 0.064 6 7 10 0.052 6 7 0.064 7 8 3” x 1” or 5” x 1” Corrugation Inside Diameter, in.Specified Thickness Galvanized & ALUMINIZED Full Coated Coated & PAVED-INVERT SmoothCor 54 0.064 50 66 84 84 0.079 61 77 95 95 0.109 83 100 118 118 0.138 106 123 140 0.168 129 146 163 60 0.064 55 73 93 93 0.079 67 86 105 1050.109 92 110 130 130 0.138 118 136 156 0.168 143 161 181 66 0.064 60 80 102 102 0.079 74 94 116 116 0.109 101 121 143 145 0.138 129 149 171 0.168 157 177 199 72 0.064 66 88 111 1120.079 81 102 126 127 0.109 110 132 156 157 0.138 140 162 186 0.168 171 193 217 78 0.064 71 95 121 120 0.079 87 111 137 136 0.109 119 143 169 1680.138 152 176 202 0.168 185 209 235840.064 77 102 130 130 0.079 94 119 147 147 0.109 128 154 182 181 0.138 164 189 217 0.168 199 224 253 90 0.064 82 109 140 139 0.079 100 127 158 1570.109 137 164 195 194 0.138 175 202 233 0.168 213 240 271 96 0.064 87 116 149 148 0.079 107 136 169 168 0.109 147 176 209 208 0.138 188 217 2500.168 228 257 290 102 0.064 93 124 158 1580.079 114 145 179 179 0.109 155 186 220 222 0.138 198 229 263 0.168 241 272 306 108 0.079 120 153 188 189 0.109 165 198 233 235 0.138 211 244 2790.168 256 289 324 114 0.079 127 162 199 200 0.109 174 209 246 248 0.138 222 257 294 0.168 271 306 343 120 0.079 134 171 210 211 0.109 183 220 259 260 0.138 234 271 310 0.168 284 321 3601260.109 195 233 274 276 0.138 247 285 326 0.168 299 338 378 132 0.109 204 244 287 289 0.138 259 299 342 0.168 314 354 397 138 0.109 213 255 300 3000.138 270 312 357 0.168 328 370 4151440.138 282 326 373 0.168 344 388 435 (2) 1. Weights for polymer coated pipe are 1% to 4% higher, varying by gage. 2. Please contact your Contech Sales Representative. 3. Weights listed in the 3” x 1” or 5” x 1” table are for 3” x 1” pipe. Weights for 5” x 1” are approximately 12% less than those used in this table, for metallic coated pipe. 2-2/3” x 1/2” Corrugation Inside Diameter, in.Specified Thickness Galvanized & ALUMINIZED Full Coated Coated & PAVED-INVERT SmoothCor 12 0.052 8 10 13 0.064 10 12 15 0.079 12 14 17 15 0.052 10 13 16 0.064 12 15 18 0.079 15 18 21 18 0.052 12 16 190.064 15 19 22 25 0.079 18 22 25 28 21 0.052 14 18 23 0.064 17 21 26 29 0.079 21 25 30 33 0.109 29 33 33 41 24 0.052 15 20 26 0.064 19 24 30 30 0.079 24 29 35 380.109 33 38 44 47 30 0.064 24 30 36 42 0.079 30 36 42 48 0.109 41 47 53 59 36 0.064 29 36 44 51 0.079 36 43 51 58 0.109 49 56 64 71 0.138 62 69 77420.064 34 42 51 60 0.079 42 50 59 68 0.109 57 65 74 82 0.138 72 80 89 0.168 88 96 105 48 0.064 38 48 57 67 0.079 48 58 67 770.109 65 75 84 94 0.138 82 92 1010.168 100 110 119 54 0.079 54 65 76 87 0.109 73 84 95 106 0.138 92 103 114 0.168 112 123 134 60 0.109 81 92 106 117 0.138 103 114 1280.168 124 135 149 66 0.109 89 101 117 129 0.138 113 125 141 0.168 137 149 165 72 0.138 123 137 154 (2) 0.168 149 163 180 78 0.168 161 177 194 (2)84 0.168 173 190 208 (2) Steel Thicknesses by Gage Gage 18 16 14 12 10 8 Thickness .052 .064 .079 .109 .138 .168 11 Diameter Minimum or Span Cover (In.) (In.) 18 16 14 12 10 8(5) 6 (4) 12 197 247 8 (4) 147 185 10 (4) 119 148 12 125 157 15 100 125 18 83 104 21 71 89 24 62 78 109 27 69 97 30 62 87 36 51 73 94 42 62 80 48 12 54 70 85 54 15 48 62 76 60 15 52 64 66 18 52 72 18 43 Equiv. Standard Gage 2-2/3” X 1/2” Height of Cover Limits for Corrugated Aluminum Pipe HL 93 Live Load Maximum Cover, (Ft.)(2) Corrugated Aluminum Pipe Heights of Cover Heights of Cover 3” x 1” Height of Cover Limits for Corrugated Aluminum Pipe HL 93 Live Load Diameter Minimum(3) or Span Cover (In.) (In.) 16 14 12 10 8(6) 30 12 57 72 101 135 159 36 47 60 84 112 132 42 40 51 72 96 113 48 12 35 44 62 84 99 54 15 31 39 55 74 88 60 15 28 35 50 67 79 66 18 25 32 45 61 72 72 18 23 29 41 56 66 78 21 27 38 51 61 84 21 35 48 56 90 24 33 44 52 96 24 31 41 49 102 24 39 46 108 24 37 43 114 24 39 120 24 36 Equiv. Standard Gage Maximum Cover, (Ft.) (2) 3” x 1” Height of Cover Limits for Corrugated Aluminum Pipe-Arch 2 2/3" x 1/2" Height of Cover Limits for Corrugated Aluminum Pipe-Arch Notes: 1. Height-of-cover is measured to top of rigid pavement or to bottom of flexible pavement. 2. Maximum cover meets AASHTO LRFD design criteria. 3. Minimum cover meets AASHTO and ASTM B 790 design criteria. 4. 1 1/2” x 1/4” corrugation. 5. 8-gage pipe has limited availability. 6. For construction loads, see page 15. Notes: 1. Height-of-cover is measured to top of rigid pavement or to bottom of flexible pavement. 2. Maximum cover meets AASHTO LRFD design criteria. 3. Minimum cover meets ASTM B 790 design criteria. 4. Limited availability on these sizes. 5. 8-gage pipe has limited availability. 6. For construction loads, see page 15. HL 93 Live Load Round Pipe Dia. (Inches) Size, (In.) Span x Rise Minimum Gage Minimum(3) Cover (Inches) Maximum Cover, (Ft.)Aluminum Pipe-Arch(2) 2 Tons/Ft.2 for Corner Bearing Pressures 15 17x13 16 12 13 18 21x15 16 12 12 21 24x18 16 12 12 24 28x20 14 12 12 30 35x24 14 12 12 36 42x29 12 12 12 42 49x33 12 15 12 48 57x38 10 15 12 54 64x43 10 18 12 60 71x47 8(5)18 12 HL 93 Live Load Round Pipe Dia. (Inches) Size, (In.) Span x Rise Minimum Gage Minimum(3) Cover (Inches) Maximum Cover, (Ft.)Aluminum Pipe-Arch(2) 2 Tons/Ft.2 for Corner Bearing Pressures 54 60x46 14 15 20 60 66x51 14 18 20 66 73x55 14 21 20 72 81x59 12 21 16 78(4)87x63 12 24 16 84(4)95x67 12 24 16 90(4)103x71 10 24 16 96(4)112x75 8(5)24 16 12 3” x 1” Corrugation Aluminum Pipe Diameter or Span (Inches) (.060) (.075) (.105) (.135) (.164) 16 14 12 10 8(3) 30 9.3 11.5 15.8 20.2 36 11.1 13.7 18.9 24.1 42 12.9 16.0 22.0 28.0 48 14.7 18.2 25.1 32.0 38.8 54 16.5 20.5 28.2 35.9 43.6 60 18.3 22.7 31.3 40.0 48.3 66 20.2 24.9 34.3 43.7 53.0 72 22.0 27.1 37.4 47.6 57.8 78 29.3 40.4 51.5 62.5 84 43.5 55.4 67.2 90 46.6 59.3 71.9 96 49.6 63.2 76.7 102 66.6 80.8 108 71.0 86.1 114 90.9 120 95.6 Notes: 1. Helical lockseam pipe only. Annular riveted pipe weights will be higher. 2. 1 ½” x ¼” Corrugation. 3. 8-gage pipe has limited availability. Approximate Weight/Foot Contech Corrugated Aluminum Pipe (Estimated Average Weights—Not for Specification Use) Weight (Lb./Lineal Ft.) Equiv. Standard Gage 2 2/3” x 1/2” Corrugation Aluminum Pipe Diameter or Span (Inches) (.048) (.060) (.075) (.105) (.135) (.164) 18 16 14 12 10 8(3) 6 (2) 1.3 1.6 8 (2) 1.7 2.1 10 (2) 2.1 2.6 12 3.2 4.0 15 4.0 4.9 18 4.8 5.9 21 5.6 6.9 24 6.3 7.9 10.8 27 8.8 12.2 30 9.8 13.5 36 11.8 16.3 20.7 42 19.0 24.2 48 21.7 27.6 33.5 54 24.4 31.1 37.7 60 34.6 41.9 66 46.0 72 50.1 Weight (Lb./Lineal Ft.) Equiv. Standard Gage 13 Heights of Cover ULTRA FLO® ULTRA FLO can be manufactured from polymer coated steel for added durability. Galvanized, ALUMINIZED STEEL Type 2 or Polymer Coated** Steel ULTRA FLO H 20 and H 25 Live Load Minimum/Maximum Cover (Feet) Specified Thickness and Gage Diameter (Inches) (0.064) 16 (0.079) 14 (0.109) 12 (0.138) 10 18 1.0/108 1.0/151211.0/93 1.0/130 1.0/216 24 1.0/81 1.0/113 1.0/189 30 1.0/65 1.0/91 1.0/151 36 1.0/54 1.0/75 1.0/126 42 1.0/46 1.0/65 1.0/108 48 1.0/40 1.0/56 1.0/94 1.0/137 54 1.25/36 1.25/50 1.0/84 1.0/122 60 1.25*/32* 1.25/45 1.0/75 1.0/109 66 1.5/41 1.25/68 1.25/99 72 1.5*/37*1.25/63 1.25/91 78 1.75*/34*1.5/58 1.5/84841.75/54 1.75/78 90 2.0*/50*2.0/73 96 2.0*/47*2.0/68 102 2.5*/43*2.5/61 108 2.5*/54* 114 2.5*/49* 120 2.5*/43* Galvanized, ALUMINIZED STEEL Type 2 or Polymer Coated** Steel ULTRA FLO Pipe-Arch H 20 and H 25 Live Load Minimum/Maximum Cover (Feet) Specified Thickness and Gage Equiv. Pipe Dia. (Inches) Span (Inches) Rise (Inches) (0.064) 16 (0.079) 14 (0.109) 12 18 20 16 1.0/16 21 23 19 1.0/15 24 27 21 1.0/133033261.0/13 1.0/13 36 40 31 1.0/13 1.0/13 42 46 36 M.L.8 M.L.8 1.0/13 48 53 41 M.L.8 M.L.8 1.25/13 54 60 46 M.L.8 M.L.8 1.25/13 60 66 51 M.L.8 M.L.8 1.25/13 11. All heights of cover are based on trench conditions. If embankment conditions exist, there may be restriction on gages for the large diameters. Your Contech Sales Representative can provide further guidance for a project in embankment conditions.12. All steel ULTRA FLO is installed in accordance with ASTM A798 “Installing Factory-Made Corrugated Steel Pipe for Sewers and Other Applications.” * These sizes and gage combinations are installed in accordance with ASTM A796 paragraphs 18.2.3 and ASTM A798. For aluminum ULTRA FLO refer to ASTM B790 and B788. ** Contact your local Contech representative for more specific information on Polymer Coated ULTRA FLO for gages 12 and 10. Notes:1. The tables for Steel H 20 and H 25 loading are based on the NCSPA CSP Design Manual, 2008 and were calculated using a load factor of K=0.86. The tables for Steel E 80 loading are based on the AREMA Manual. The tables for Aluminum HL 93 loading are based on AAS-HTO LRFD Design Criteria.2. The haunch areas of a pipe-arch are the most critical zone for backfilling. Extra care should be taken to provide good material and compaction to a point above the spring line.3. E 80 minimum cover is measured from top of pipe to bottom of tie.4. H 20, H 25 and HL 93 minimum cover is measured from top of pipe to bottom of flexible pavement or top of rigid pavement.5. The H 20, H 25 and HL 93 pipe-arch tables are based on 2 tons per square foot corner bearing pressures.6. The E 80 pipe-arch tables minimum and maximum covers are based on 3 tons per square foot corner bearing pressures shown.7. Larger size pipe-arches may be available on special order.8. M.L. (Heavier gage is required to prevent crimping at the haunches.)9. For construction loads, see Page 15.10. Sewer gage (trench conditions) tables for corrugated steel pipe can be found in the AISI book “Modern Sewer Design,” 4th Edition, 1999. These tables may reduce the minimum gage due to a higher flexibility factor allowed for a trench condition. Galvanized, ALUMINIZED STEEL Type 2 or Polymer Coated** Steel ULTRA FLO Pipe-Arch E 80 Live Load Span x Rise (Inches) Round Equivalent Minimum Cover (Inches) Minimum Gage Max Cover (Feet) 20x16 18 24 16 22 23x19 21 24 16 21 27x21 24 24 16 18 33x26 30 24 16 18 40x31 36 24 16 17 46x36 42 24 12 18 53x41 48 24 12 18 60x46 54 24 12 18 66x51 60 24 12 18 Galvanized, ALUMINIZED STEEL Type 2 or Polymer Coated** Steel ULTRA FLO E 80 Live Load Diameter (Inches) (0.064) 16 (0.079) 14 (0.109) 12 (0.138) 10 18 1.0 / 93 1.0 / 130 21 1.0 / 79 1.0 / 111 1.0 / 186 24 1.0 / 69 1.0 / 97 1.0 / 162 30 1.0 / 55 1.0 / 78 1.0 / 130 36 1.5 / 46 1.25 / 65 1.0 / 108 42 1.5 / 39 1.5 / 55 1.25 / 93 48 2.0 / 34 1.75 / 48 1.5 / 81 1.5 / 118 54 3.0* / 28*2.0 / 43 1.5 / 72 1.5 / 104 60 2.0 / 39 1.75 / 65 1.75 / 94662.5* / 35*2.0 / 58 2.0 / 85 72 2.0 / 49 2.0 / 78 78 2.5 / 42 2.5 / 72 84 2.75* / 35*2.5 / 67 90 2.5 / 62 96 2.5* / 58* 102 3.0* / 52* 14 Aluminum ULTRA FLO Pipe-Arch HL 93 Live Load Minimum/Maximum Cover (Feet) Specified Thickness and Gage Equiv. Pipe Dia. (Inches) Span (Inches) Rise (Inches) (0.060) 16 (0.075) 14 (0.105) 12 (0.135) 10 18 20 16 1.0/16 21 23 19 1.0/15 24 27 21 1.25/13 1.25/13 30 33 26 1.5/13 1.5/13 1.5/13 36 40 31 1.75/13 1.75/13 42 46 36 2.0/13 2.0/13 48 53 41 2.0/13 2.0/135460462.0*/13*2.0/13 60 66 51 2.0/13 Heights of Cover ULTRA FLO is available in long lengths. And, its light weight allows it to be unloaded and handled with small equipment. Reduced excavation because of ULTRA FLO’s smaller outside diameter. Approximate Weight/Foot Contech ULTRA FLO Pipe Handling Weight for ALUMINIZED STEEL Type 2 or Galvanized Steel ULTRA FLO Weight (Pounds/Lineal Foot) Specified Thickness and Gage Diameter (Inches) (0.064) 16 (0.079) 14 (0.109) 12 (0.138) 10 18 15 18 21 17 21 29 24 19 24 36 30 24 30 42 36 29 36 5042334258 48 38 48 66 80 54 45 54 75 90 60 48 60 83 99 66 66 91 109 72 72 99 119 78 78 108 129 84 116 13990124149 96 132 158 102 141 168 108 175 114 196 120 206 Handling Weight for ALUMINUM ULTRA FLO Weight (Pounds/Lineal Foot) Specified Thickness and Gage Diameter (Inches) (0.060) 16 (0.075) 14 (0.105) 12 (0.135) 10 18 5 6 21 6 8 11 24 7 9 13 30 9 11 15 36 11 13 18 23 42 12 15 21 26 48 17 24 30 54 19 27 34 60 30 37 66 33 41 72 36 45 78 49 84 52 Weights for polymer coated pipe are 1% to 4% higher, varying by gage. See previous page for height of cover notes. Aluminum ULTRA FLO HL 93 Live Load Minimum/Maximum Cover (Feet) Specified Thickness and Gage Diameter (Inches) (0.060) 16 (0.075) 14 (0.105) 12 (0.135) 10 18 1.0/43 1.0/61 21 1.0/38 1.0/52 1.0/84 24 1.0/33 1.0/45 1.0/73 30 1.0/26 1.25/36 1.25/58361.5*/21*1.50/30 1.5/49 1.5/69 42 1.75*/25*1.75/41 1.75/59 48 2.0/36 2.0/51 54 2.0/32 2.0/46 60 2.0*/29*2.0/41 66 2.0/37 72 2.5*/34* 15 Installation Corrugated Metal Pipe Overview Satisfactory site preparation, trench excavation, bedding and backfill operations are essential to develop the strength of any flexible conduit. In order to obtain proper strength while preventing settlement, it is necessary that the soil envelope around the pipe be of good granular material, properly placed and carefully compacted. Bedding Bedding preparation is critical to both pipe performance and service life. The bed should be constructed to uniform line and grade to avoid distortions that may create undesirable stresses in the pipe and/or rapid deterioration of the roadway. The bed should be free of rock formations, protruding stones, frozen lumps, roots and other foreign matter that may cause unequal settlement. Placing the pipe Corrugated metal pipe weighs much less than other commonly used drainage structures. This is due to the efficient strength of the metal, further improved with carefully designed and formed corrugations. Even the heaviest sections of Contech pipe can be handled with relatively light equipment compared with equipment required for much heavier reinforced concrete pipe. Backfill Satisfactory backfill material, proper placement and compaction are key factors in obtaining maximum strength and stability. Backfill should be a well-graded granular material and should be free of large stones, frozen lumps and other debris. Backfill materials should be placed in layers about six inches deep, deposited alternately on opposite sides of the pipe. Each layer should be compacted carefully. Select backfill is placed and compacted until minimum cover height is reached, at which point, standard road embankment backfill procedures are used. Installation References For more information, see AASHTO Bridge Construction Specification Section 26, the Installation Manual of the National Corrugated Steel Pipe Association, ASTM A798 for steel and ASTM B788 for aluminum ULTRA FLO. Additional Considerations for ULTRA FLO Installations Bedding and Backfill Typical ULTRA FLO installation requirements are the same as for any other corrugated metal pipe installed in a trench. Bedding and backfill materials for ULTRA FLO follow the requirements of the CMP installation specifications mentioned above, and must be free from stones, frozen lumps or other debris. When ASTM A796 (steel) or B790 (aluminum) designs are to be followed for condition III requirements, indicated by asterisk (*) in the tables on page 13 and 14, use clean, easily compacted granular backfill materials. Embankment Conditions ULTRA FLO is a superior CMP storm sewer product that is normally installed in a trench condition. In those unusual embankment installation conditions, pipe sizes and gages may be restricted. Your Contech Sales Representative can provide you with further guidance. Minimum Cover (feet) for Indicated Axle Loads (kips) Construction Loads For temporary construction vehicle loads, an extra amount of compacted cover may be required over the top of the pipe. The Height of Cover shall meet minimum requirements shown in the table below. The use of heavy construction equipment necessitates greater protection for the pipe than finished grade cover minimums for normal highway traffic. Min. Height of Cover Requirements for Construction Loads On Corrugated Steel Pipe* Diameter/ Span, (Inches) 18-50 50-75 75-110 110-150 12-42 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.0 48-72 3.0 3.0 3.5 4.0 78-120 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.0 126-144 3.5 4.0 4.5 4.5 Temporary Cover For Construction Loads Finished Grade Height of Cover Min. Height of Cover Requirements for Construction Loads On Corrugated Aluminum Pipe* Diameter/ Span (Inches) 18-50 50-75 75-110 110-150 12-42 3.0’ 3.5’ 4.0’ 4.0’ 48-72 4.0’ 4.0’ 5.0’ 5.5’ 78-120 4.0’ 5.0’ 5.5’ 5.5’ Axle Load (Kips) Min. Height of Cover Requirements for Construction Loads On ULTRA FLO Pipe* Diameter/ Span 18-50 50-75 75-110 110-150 (Inches) 15-42 2.0' 2.5' 3.0' 3.0' 48-72 3.0' 3.0' 3.5' 4.0' 78-108 3.0' 3.5' 4.0' 4.5' 15-42 3.0' 3.5' 4.0' 4.0' Axle Load (Kips) Aluminum 3/4” x 3/4” x 7-1/2” Steel 3/4” x 3/4” x 7-1/2” * Minimum cover may vary depending on local conditions. The contractor must provide the additional cover required to avoid damage to the pipe. Minimum cover is measured from the top of the pipe to the top of the maintained construction roadway surface. 16 SmoothCor™ Pipe Excellent Hydraulics, Long Lengths and Easy Installation Corrugated Steel Shell SmoothCor pipe has a smooth interior steel liner that provides a Manning’s “n” of 0.012. Its rugged, corrugated steel shell supplies the structural strength to outperform rigid pipe. SmoothCor pipe is both the economical and performance alternate to concrete. Superior hydraulics SmoothCor, with its smooth interior surface, is hydraulically superior to conventional corrugated steel pipe and with fewer joints and better interior surface, outperforms reinforced concrete pipe. SmoothCor, with its long lengths, light weight and beam strength, is superior to concrete pipe in many difficult situations such as poor soils, poor subsurface drainage conditions, steep slopes and high fills. SmoothCor should be specified as an alternate under normal site conditions, and specified exclusively under very difficult situations that demand the strength of CSP with positive joints and a hydraulically efficient smooth liner. Two Pipe Shapes In addition to full-round pipe, SmoothCor comes in a pipe-arch shape for limited headroom conditions. The low, wide pipe-arch design distributes the flow area horizontally, enabling it to be installed with lower head room than a round pipe. Reference specifications Material Polymer Coated ASTM A 929 AASHTO M246 ASTM A 742 Pipe Polymer AASHTO M245 ASTM A 762 & A 760 Design Steel Pipe AASHTO Section 12 ASTM A 796 Installation Steel Pipe AASHTO Section 26 ASTM A 798 Structural Design SmoothCor is lined with either 18 or 20 gage steel. Contech has taken a conservative approach to the Height of Cover. The maximum heights-of-cover are based on the shell thickness with no additional structural allowance for the liner as provided for in the AASHTO and ASTM design specifications. Using this approach, the Height of Cover tables for 2 2/3" x 1/2" and 3"x1" steel corrugations can be used for SmoothCor. Diameters SmoothCor is available in diameters ranging from 18 inches to 66 inches in 2 2/3" x 1/2" corrugation. The 3" x 1" corrugation is available in diameters of 48 inches to 126 inches. Pipe-arch sizes range from 21” x 15” through 77” x 52” for 2 2/3" x 1/2" corrugations, and 53” x 41” through 137” x 87” for 3"x1" corrugations. Materials SmoothCor is available with Dow's TRENCHCOAT® that allows the engineer to design for long service life. TRENCHCOAT is a tough, heavy-gage polymer film laminated to both sides of the steel coil, providing a barrier to corrosion and mild abrasion. TRENCHCOAT is particularly effective for protection in corrosive soils. Fittings SmoothCor can be fabricated into any type of structure including tees, elbows, laterals, catch basins, manifolds and reducers. Pre-fabricated fittings are more economical and have superior hydraulic characteristics when compared to concrete structures. Lockseam Retaining Offset Smooth Interior Liner 17 QUICK STAB® Joint Save Time and Money With Faster Pipe Bell and Spigot Coupling The Contech QUICK STAB Bell and Spigot joint speeds installation of corrugated metal pipe (CMP), reducing your costs. With the QUICK STAB coupling system, installation of CMP storm sewers and culverts has never been easier or faster. The QUICK STAB joint creates a bell and spigot joining system with the bell only 1-1/2” larger than the pipe’s O.D. Assembled at the factory, the QUICK STAB bell is shipped to the job site ready for installation. The only field operation is placing a special fluted gasket onto the spigot end of the pipe, applying lubricant and pushing it into the bell end of the preceding pipe. Without bands, bolts and wrenches to work and worry with, you can join pipe segments 50% to 90% faster—saving time, money and aggravation. Soil Tight Joint Contech’s QUICK STAB joint provides the same soil tightness as conventional CMP bands. Each QUICK STAB joint uses a double sealing fluted gasket to seal the spigot against the bell. A flat gasket is installed at the plant between the pipe and the corrugated end of the bell. With the deep bell, you gain maximum soil tightness with minimal installation effort. Wide Variety of Coatings and Materials l Plain galvanized l Aluminized Steel Type 2 l Aluminum l Polymeric coated Four Times Faster Installation Than Concrete The QUICK STAB’s bell and spigot joining system allows pipe segments to be joined quicker than reinforced concrete pipe. Next, add in Contech’s corrugated metal pipe’s length advantage—each segment is four times longer than standard concrete pipe lengths. That means fewer joints and faster installation—up to four times faster! Plus, with the bell only 1-1/2” larger than the pipe, trench excavation is considerably less compared with concrete—again, saving time and money. Field Installation Instructions The spigot and bell ends must be cleaned of any dirt or debris prior to assembly. The fluted gasket shall be placed in the first corrugation with the lower flute nearest the end of the pipe. The bell & gasket shall be thoroughly lubed just before stabbing in the bell. Do not place hands, fingers, or any other body parts between bell and spigot during assembly. If it is necessary to pull the joint apart, the bell, spigot and gasket shall be inspected and cleaned of any dirt or debris prior to re-stabbing. Corrugated Metal Pipe Bell and Spigot Joint Specification The joints shall be of such design and the ends of the corrugated metal pipe sections so formed that the pipe can be laid together to make a continuous line of pipe. The joint shall be made from the same material as the pipe and shall prevent infiltration of the fill material. Corrugation to Engage Pipe End Fluted Gasket with the Lower Flute Nearest to the Pipe EndQUICK STAB Bell Pipe with Rerolled End 12.5” Stab Direction Bell and Spigot Coupling System for CMP This Side is Assembled at the Plant with a gasket. Fluted Gasket The Bell and Spigot joint is available on ULTRA FLO and 2-2/3” x 1/2” corrugation in 15” through 60” diameter. Sleeve Lap is Skip Welded 18 OVERALL WIDTH W End Sections Easily installed, easily maintained culvert end treatments for corrugated metal pipe, reinforced concrete pipe and HDPE Pipe Contech End Sections provide a practical, economical and hydraulically superior method of finishing a variety of culvert materials. The lightweight, flexible metal construction of Contech End Sections creates an attractive, durable and erosion- preventing treatment for all sizes of culvert inlets and outlets. They can be used with corrugated metal pipe having either annular or helical corrugations, and both reinforced concrete and plastic pipes. End sections can be salvaged when lengthening or relocating the culvert. Standard End Sections are fabricated from pregalvanized steel. For added corrosion resistance, Aluminized Type II or Aluminum End Sections are available in smaller sizes. Special End Sections for multiple pipe installations may be available on a specific inquiry basis. Better hydraulics Flow characteristics are greatly improved by the exacting design of Contech End Sections. Scour and sedimentation conditions are improved, and headwater depth can be better controlled. Culverts aligned with the stream flow and finished with Contech End Sections generally require no additional hydraulic controls. Improved appearance Contech End Sections blend well with the surroundings. The tapered sides of an End Section merge with slope design to improve roadside appearance. Unsightly weeds and debris collection at the culvert end are reduced. Economical installation Lightweight equipment and simple crew instructions result in smooth and easy installation. Contech End Sections are easily joined to culvert barrels, forming a continuous, one- piece structure. For easiest installation, End Sections should be installed at the same time as the culvert. Installation is completed by tamping soil around the End Section. Low maintenance Contech End Sections reduce maintenance expense because their tapered design promotes easier mowing and snow removal. There is no obstruction to hamper weed cutting. Notes for all End Sections: 1. All three-piece bodies to have 12-gage sides and 10-gage center panels. Multiple panel bodies to have lap seams which are to be tightly joined by galvanized rivets or bolts. 2. For 60” through 84” sizes, reinforced edges are supplemented with stiffener angles. The angles are attached by galvanized nuts and bolts. For the 66” and 72” equivalent round pipe-arch sizes, reinforced edges are supplemented by angles. The angles are attached by galvanized nuts and bolts. 3. Angle reinforcements are placed under the center panel seams on the 66” and 72” equivalent round pipe-arch sizes. 4. Toe plate is available as an accessory, when specified on the order, and will be same gage as the End Section. 5. Stiffener angles, angle reinforcement, and toe plates are the same base metal as end section body. 6. End sections with 6:1 and 4:1 slopes are available in 12” through 24” diameters. 7. Actual dimensions may vary slightly. 8. During manufacturing, a slight invert slope may result along the length of the end section to be accommodated in the field. Typical Cross Section Variable Slope L 1 Elevation Reinforced Edge H Optional Toe Plate Extension 8”2” Elevation Reinforced Edge H Optional Toe Plate Extension 8”2” Plan 19 Approximate Dimensions, Inches (7) Span/Rise Equiv. Round (Inches) Gage A (+/- 1") (Inches) B (Max) (Inches) H (+/- 1") (Inches) W (+/- 2") (Inches) L (+/- 2") (Inches) Overall Width (+/- 4") (Inches) 53”x41”48 12 18 25 12 90 63 126 60”x46”54 12 18 34 12 102 70 138 66”x51”60 12/10 18 33 12 116 77 152 73”x55”66 12/10 18 36 12 126 77 162 81”x59”72 12/10 18 39 12 138 77 174 87”x63”78 12/10 20 38 12 148 77 188 95”x67”84 12/10 20 34 12 162 87 202 103”X71”90 12/10 20 38 12 174 87 214 112”x75”96 12/10 20 40 12 174 87 214 End Sections for Pipe-Arch (2-2/3” x 1/2”) End Sections for Round Pipe (2-2/3” x 1/2”, 3” x 1” and 5” x 1”) End Sections for Pipe-Arch (3” x 1” and 5” x 1”) Approximate Dimensions, Inches (7) Pipe Diameter (Inches) Gage A (+/- 1") (Inches) B (Max) (Inches) H (Min) (Inches) L (+/-2") (Inches) W (+/- 2") (Inches) Overall Width (+/- 4") (Inches) 12 16 6 6 6 21 24 36 15 16 7 8 6 26 30 44 18 16 8 10 6 31 36 52 21 16 9 12 6 36 42 60 24 16 10 13 6 41 48 68 30 14 12 16 8 51 60 84 36 14 14 19 9 60 72 100 42 12 16 22 11 69 84 116 48 12 18 27 12 78 90 126 54 12 18 30 12 84 102 138 60 12/10 18 33 12 87 114 150 66 12/10 18 36 12 87 120 156 72 12/10 18 39 12 87 126 162 78 12/10 18 42 12 87 132 168 84 12/10 18 45 12 87 138 174 Approximate Dimensions, Inches (7) Span/Rise Equiv. Round (Inches) Gage A (+/- 1") (Inches) B (Max) (Inches) H (+/- 1") (Inches) L (+/- 2") (Inches) W (+/- 2”) (Inches) Overall Width (+/- 4") (Inches) 17”x13”15 16 7 9 6 19 30 44 21”x15”18 16 7 10 6 23 36 50 24”x18”21 16 8 12 6 28 42 58 28”x20”24 16 9 14 6 32 48 66 35”x24”30 14 10 16 6 39 60 80 42”x29”36 14 12 18 8 46 75 99 49”x33”42 12 13 21 9 53 85 111 57”x38”48 12 18 26 12 63 90 126 64”x43”54 12 18 30 12 70 102 138 71”x47”60 12/10 18 33 12 77 114 150 77”x52”66 12/10 18 36 12 77 126 162 83”x57”72 12/10 18 39 12 77 138 174 Note: The Type 3 connection is not illustrated. This connection is a one-foot length of pipe attached to the end section. Type 1 End Of Pipe Flat Strap Connector Strap Bolt Type 2 End Of Pipe 1/2” Threaded Rod 1/2” Threaded Rod Type 5 Pipe To Which End Section Is Attached Dimple Band Collar Bolted To End Section With 3/8” Bolts Contech End Sections attach to corrugated metal pipe, reinforced concrete and plastic pipe. Low-slope End Sections—Contech manufactures 4:1 and 6:1 low-slope End Sections for corrugated metal pipe. This photo shows the optional field-attached safety bars. End Sections are available for CSP Pipe-Arch End Section on Round CSP Contech End Sections are often used on concrete pipe. They can be used on both the bell and spigot end. BRO-CMP-DESIGN 8/14 3M PDF © 2014 Contech Engineered Solutions LLC All rights reserved. Printed in USA. ENGINEERED SOLUTIONS Contech Engineered Solutions LLC is a leading provider of site solution products and services for the civil engineering industry. Contech’s product portfolio includes bridges, drainage, retaining walls, sanitary sewer, stormwater, erosion control, soil stabilization and wastewater products. For more information, call one of Contech’s Regional Offices located in the following cities: Ohio (Corporate Office) 513-645-7000 Colorado (Denver) 720-587-2700 Florida (Orlando) 321-348-3520 Maine (Scarborough) 207-885-9830 Maryland (Baltimore) 410-740-8490 Oregon (Portland) 503-258-3180 Texas (Dallas) 972-590-2000 Visit our web site: www.ContechES.com 800-338-1122 NOTHING IN THIS CATALOG SHOULD BE CONSTRUED AS AN EXPRESSED WARRANTY OR AN IMPLIED WARRANTY OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PARTICULAR PURPOSE. SEE THE CONTECH STANDARD CONDITIONS OF SALE (VIEWABLE AT WWW.CONTECHES.COM/COS) FOR MORE INFORMATION. Worksheet 2 Design Procedure Form for Design Flow Uniform Intensity Design Flow Designer: Company: Date: Project: Location: 1. Determine Impervious Percentage a. Determine total tributary area Atotal = acres (1) b. Determine Impervious % i = % (2) 2. Determine Runoff Coefficient Values Use Table 4 and impervious % found in step 1 a. A Soil Runoff Coefficient Ca = (3) b. B Soil Runoff Coefficient Cb = (4) c. C Soil Runoff Coefficient Cc = (5) d. D Soil Runoff Coefficient Cd = (6) 3. Determine the Area decimal fraction of each soil type in tributary area a. Area of A Soil / (1) = Aa = (7) b. Area of B Soil / (1) = Ab = (8) c. Area of C Soil / (1) = Ac = (9) d. Area of D Soil / (1) = Ad = (10) 4. Determine Runoff Coefficient a. C = (3)x(7) + (4)x(8) + (5)x(9) + (6)x(10) = C = (11) 5. Determine BMP Design flow a. QBMP = C x I x A = (11) x 0.2 x (1) QBMP = ft3 s (12) Table 4. Runoff Coefficients for an Intensity = 0.2 in/hr for Urban Soil Types* Impervious % A Soil RI =32 B Soil RI =56 C Soil RI =69 D Soil RI =75 0 (Natural) 0.06 0.14 0.23 0.28 5 0.10 0.18 0.26 0.31 10 0.14 0.22 0.29 0.34 15 0.19 0.26 0.33 0.37 20 (1-Acre) 0.23 0.30 0.36 0.40 25 0.27 0.33 0.39 0.43 30 0.31 0.37 0.43 0.47 35 0.35 0.41 0.46 0.50 40 (1/2-Acre) 0.40 0.45 0.50 0.53 45 0.44 0.48 0.53 0.56 50 (1/4-Acre) 0.48 0.52 0.56 0.59 55 0.52 0.56 0.60 0.62 60 0.56 0.60 0.63 0.65 65 (Condominiums) 0.61 0.64 0.66 0.68 70 0.65 0.67 0.70 0.71 75 (Mobilehomes) 0.69 0.71 0.73 0.74 80 (Apartments) 0.73 0.75 0.77 0.78 85 0.77 0.79 0.80 0.81 90 (Commercial) 0.82 0.82 0.83 0.84 95 0.86 0.86 0.87 0.87 100 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 *Complete District’s standards can be found in the Riverside County Flood Control Hydrology Manual 9 ENGINEERED SOLUTIONS CDS ® Hydrodynamic Separator Your Contech Team Contech is the leader in stormwater management solutions, helping engineers, contractors and owners with infrastructure and land development projects throughout North America. With our responsive team of stormwater experts, local regulatory expertise and flexible solutions, Contech is the trusted partner you can count on for stormwater management solutions. STORMWATER CONSULTANT It’s my job to recommend the best solution to meet permitting requirements. STORMWATER DESIGN ENGINEER I work with consultants to design the best approved solution to meet your project’s needs. REGULATORY MANAGER I understand the local stormwater regulations and what solutions will be approved. SALES ENGINEER I make sure our solutions meet the needs of the contractor during construction. The experts you need to solve your stormwater management challenges Contech is your partner in stormwater management solutions ENGINEERED SOLUTIONS The CDS hydrodynamic separator uses swirl concentration and continuous deflective separation to screen, separate and trap trash, debris, sediment, and hydrocarbons from stormwater runoff. At the heart of the CDS system is a unique screening technology used to capture and retain trash and debris. The screen face is louvered so that it is smooth in the downstream direction. The effect created is called “Continuous Deflective Separation.” The power of the incoming flow is harnessed to continually shear debris off the screen and to direct trash and sediment toward the center of the separation cylinder. This results in a screen that is self-cleaning and provides 100% removal of floatables and neutrally buoyant material debris 4.7 mm or larger, without blinding. CDS is used to meet trash Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) requirements, for stormwater quality control, inlet and outlet pollution control, and as pretreatment for filtration, detention/infiltration, bioretention, rainwater harvesting systems, and a variety of green infrastructure practices. Unique screening technology for stormwater runoff – CDS® Setting new standards in Stormwater Treatment CDS® Features and Benefits FEATURE BENEFIT Captures and retains 100% of floatables and neutrally buoyant debris 4.7mm or larger Superior pollutant removal Self-cleaning screen Ease of maintenance Isolated storage sump eliminates scour potential Excellent pollutant retention Internal bypass Eliminates the need for additional structures Multiple pipe inlets and 90-180º angles Design flexibility Clear access to sump and stored pollutants Fast, easy maintenance A fundamentally different approach to trash control ... Traditional approaches to trash control typically involve “direct screening” that can easily become clogged, as trash is pinned to the screen as water passes through. Clogged screens can lead to flooding as water backs up. The design of the CDS screen is fundamentally different. Flow is introduced to the screen face which is louvered so that it is smooth in the downstream direction. The effect created is called “Continuous Deflective Separation.” The power of the incoming flow is harnessed to continually shear debris off the screen and to direct trash and sediment toward the center of the separation cylinder. The CDS® Screen APPLICATION TIPS • Because of its internal peak bypass weirs, CDS systems can provide cost savings by eliminating the need for additional structures. • Pretreating detention, infiltration, and green infrastructure practices with CDS can protect downstream structures and provide for easy maintenance. • The CDS an ideal solution for retrofit applications due to its compact footprint and configuration flexibility. ENGINEERED SOLUTIONS Traditional stormwater treatment site design Why use traditional stormwater design when ONE system can do it all ... The CDS effectively treats stormwater runoff while reducing the number of structures on your site. Inline, offline, grate inlet, and drop inlet configurations available. Internal and external peak bypass options also available. CDS® Design Configuration • Grate inlet option available • Internal bypass weir • Accepts multiple inlets at a variety of angles • Advanced hydrodynamic separator • Captures and retains 100% of floatables and neutrally buoyant debris 4.7 mm or larger • Indirect screening capability keeps screen from clogging • Retention of all captured pollutants, even at high flows • Performance verified by NJCAT, WA Ecology, and ETV Canada CDS® Advantages Learn More: www.ContechES.com/cds INLET JUNCTION BYPASS STRUCTURE TREATMENTUNIT A Traditional Stormwater Treatment Site Design would require several structures on your site. With CDS, one system can do it all! GRATE INLET (CAST IRON HOOD FOR CURB INLET OPENING) CREST OF BYPASS WEIR(ONE EACH SIDE) INLET (MULTIPLE PIPES POSSIBLE) OIL BAFFLE SUMP STORAGE SEPARATION SLAB TREATMENT SCREEN OUTLET INLET FLUME SEPARATION CYLINDER CLEAN OUT (REQUIRED) DEFLECTION PAN, 3 SIDED (GRATE INLET DESIGN) Save time, space and money with CDS CDS® Applications CDS is commonly used in the following stormwater applications: • Stormwater quality control – trash, debris, sediment, and hydrocarbon removal • Urban retrofit and redevelopment • Inlet and outlet protection • Pretreatment for filtration, detention/infiltration, bioretention, rainwater harvesting systems, and Low Impact Development designs CDS has been verified by some of the most stringent stormwater technology evaluation organizations in North America, including: • Washington State Department of Ecology (GULD) - Pretreatment • New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection (NJ DEP) • Canadian Environmental Technology Verification (ETV) • California Statewide Trash Amendments Full Capture System Certified* Select CDS® Certifications and Verifications *The CDS System has been certified by the California State Water Resources Control Board as a Full Capture System provided that it is sized to treat the peak flow rate from the region specific 1-year, 1-hour design storm, or the peak flow capacity of the corresponding storm drain, whichever is less. CDS® pretreats a bioswaleCDS® provides trash control CDS® Maintenance Select a cost-effective and easy-to-access treatment system ... Systems vary in their maintenance needs, and the selection of a cost-effective and easy-to-access treatment system can mean a huge difference in maintenance expenses for years to come. A CDS unit is designed to minimize maintenance and make it as easy and inexpensive as possible to keep our systems working properly. INSPECTION Inspection is the key to effective maintenance. Pollutant deposition and transport may vary from year to year and site to site. Semi-annual inspections will help ensure that the system is cleaned out at the appropriate time. Inspections should be performed more frequently where site conditions may cause rapid accumulation of pollutants. RECOMMENDATIONS FOR CDS MAINTENANCE The recommended cleanout of solids within the CDS unit’s sump should occur at 75% of the sump capacity. Access to the CDS unit is typically achieved through two manhole access covers – one allows inspection and cleanout of the separation chamber and sump, and another allows inspection and cleanout of sediment captured and retained behind the screen. A vacuum truck is recommended for cleanout of the CDS unit and can be easily accomplished in less than 30 minutes for most installations. ENGINEERED SOLUTIONS Most CDS® units can easily be cleaned within thirty minutes. Our in-house team of engineers can support you through the entire permitting process - and the first step is sending us your project information by filling out one of the Project Design Worksheets. We will forward your information to an in-house engineer who will contact you with specific recommendations for your project. The free tool is available at www.ContechES.com/pdw-treatment HDS Product Design Worksheets Learn More: www.ContechES.com/pdw-treatment Get social with us: 800-338-1122 | www.ContechES.com NOTHING IN THIS CATALOG SHOULD BE CONSTRUED AS A WARRANTY. APPLICATIONS SUGGESTED HEREIN ARE DESCRIBED ONLY TO HELP READERS MAKE THEIR OWN EVALUATIONS AND DECISIONS, AND ARE NEITHER GUARANTEES NOR WARRANTIES OF SUITABILITY FOR ANY APPLICATION. CONTECH MAKES NO WARRANTY WHATSOEVER, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, RELATED TO THE APPLICATIONS, MATERIALS, COATINGS, OR PRODUCTS DISCUSSED HEREIN. ALL IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY AND ALL IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF FITNESS FOR ANY PARTICULAR PURPOSE ARE DISCLAIMED BY CONTECH. SEE CONTECH’S CONDITIONS OF SALE (AVAILABLE AT WWW.CONTECHES.COM/COS) FOR MORE INFORMATION. © 2019 Contech Engineered Solutions LLC, a QUIKRETE Company All Rights Reserved. Printed in the USA. ENGINEERED SOLUTIONS A partner you can rely on STORMWATER SOLUTIONS PIPE SOLUTIONS STRUCTURES SOLUTIONS CDS MODEL Treatment Flow Rates1 Estimated Maximum Peak Conveyance Flow3 (cfs)/(L/s) Minimum Sump Storage Capacity4 (yd3)/(m3) Minimum Oil Storage Capacity4 (gal)/(L) 75 microns (cfs)/(L/s) 125 microns2 (cfs)/(L/s) Trash & Debris (cfs)/(L/s)PRECASTCDS2015-4 0.5 (14.2)0.7 (19.8)1.0 (28.3)10 (283)0.9 (0.7)61 (232) CDS2015-5 0.5 (14.2)0.7(19.8)1.0 (28.3)10 (283)1.5 (1.1)83 (313) CDS2020-5 0.7 (19.8)1.1 (31.2)1.5 (42.5)14 (396)1.5 (1.1)99 (376) CDS2025-5 1.1 (31.2)1.6 (45.3)2.2 (62.3)14 (396)1.5 (1.1)116 (439) CDS3020-6 1.4 (39.6)2.0 (56.6)2.8 (79.3)20 (566)2.1 (1.6)184 (696) CDS3025-6 1.7 (48.1)2.5 (70.8)3.5 (99.2)20 (566)2.1 (1.6)210 (795) CDS3030-6 2.0 (56.6)3.0 (85.0)4.2 (118.9)20 (566)2.1 (1.6)236 (895) CDS3035-6 2.6 (73.6)3.8 (106.2)5.3 (150.0)20 (566)2.1 (1.6)263 (994) CDS4030-8 3.1 (87.7)4.5 (127.4)6.3 (178.3)30 (850)5.6 (4.3)426 (1612) CDS4040-8 4.1 (116.1)6.0 (169.9)8.4 (237.8)30 (850)5.6 (4.3)520 (1970) CDS4045-8 5.1 (144.4)7.5 (212.4)10.5 (297.2)30 (850)5.6 (4.3)568 (2149) CDS5640-10 6.1 (172.7)9.0 (254.9)12.6 (356.7)50 (1416)8.7 (6.7)758 (2869) CDS5653-10 9.5 (268.9)14.0 (396.5)19.6 (554.8)50 (1416)8.7 (6.7)965 (3652) CDS5668-10 12.9 (365.1)19.0 (538.1)26.6 (752.9)50 (1416)8.7 (6.7)1172 (4435) CDS5678-10 17.0 (481.2)25.0 (708.0)35.0 (990.7)50 (1416)8.7 (6.7)1309 (4956) CDS9280-12 27.2 (770.2)40.0 (1132.7)56.0 (1585.7) Offline 16.8 (12.8) N/A CDS9290-12 35.4 (1002.4)52.0 (1472.5)72 (2038.8)16.8 (12.8) CDS92100-12 42.8 (1212.0)63.0 (1783.9)88 (2491.9)16.8 (12.8)CAST-IN-PLACECDS150134-22 100.7 (2851.5)148.0 (4190.9)270 (7645.6)56.3 (43.0) CDS200164-26 183.6 (5199.0)270.0 (7645.6)378.0 (10703.8)78.7 (60.2) CDS240160-32 204 (5776.6)300.0 (8495.1)420.0 (11893.0)119.1 (91.1) Additional Cast-in-Place models available upon request. 1. Alternative PSD/D50 sizing is available upon request. 2. 125 micron flows are based on the CDS Washington State Department of Ecology approval for 80% removal of a particle size distribution (PSD) having a mean particle size (D50) of 125 microns. 3. Estimated maximum peak conveyance flow is calculated using conservative values and may be exceeded on sites with lower inflow velocities and sufficient head over the weir. 4. Sump and oil capacities can be customized to meet site needs. CDS® Models and Capacities Attachment C Educational Materials D id you know that disposing of pollutants into the street, gutter, storm drain or body of water is PROHIBITED by law and can result in stiff penalties? Best Management Practices Waste wash water from Mechanics, Plumbers, Window/Power Washers, Carpet Cleaners, Car Washing and Mobile Detailing activities may contain significant quantities of motor oil, grease, chemicals, dirt, detergents, brake pad dust, litter and other materials. Best Management Practices, or BMPs as they are known, are guides to prevent pollutants from entering the storm drains. Each of us can do our part to keep stormwater clean by using the suggested BMPs below: Simple solutions for both light and heavy duty jobs: Do •.. consider dry cleaning methods first such as a mop, broom, rag or wire brush. Always keep a spill response kit on site. Do .•. prepare the work area before power cleaning by using sand bags, rubber mats, vacuum booms, containment pads or temporary berms to keep wash water away from the gutters and storm drains. Do ••• use vacuums or other machines to remove and collect loose deb1is or litter before applying water. Do •.. obtain the property owner's permission to dispose of small amounts of power washing waste water on to landscaped, gravel or unpaved surfaces. Do .•. check your local sanitary sewer agency's policies on wash water disposal regulations before disposing of wash water into the sewer. (See list on reverse side) Do ••• be aware that if discharging to landscape areas, soapy wash water may damage landscaping. Residual wash water may remain on paved surfaces to evaporate. Sweep up solid residuals and dispose of properly. Vacuum booms are another option for capturing and collecting wash water. Do ••• check to see if local ordinances prevent certain activities. Do not let ..• wash or waste water from sidewalk, plaza or building cleaning go into a street or storm drain. Report illegal storm drain disposal Call Toll Free 1-800-506-2555 Using Cleaning Agents Try using biodegradable/phosphate-free proJucts. They are easier on the environment, but don't confuse them with being toxic free. Soapy water entering the storm drain system can impact the delicate aquatic environment. When cleaning surfaces with a high,pressure washer or steam cleaner, additional precautions should be taken to prevent the discharge of pollutants into th storm drain system. These two methods of surface cleaning can loosen additional material that can contaminate local waterways. Think Water Conservation Minimize water use by using high pressure, low volume nozzles. Be sure to check all hoses for leaks. Water is a precious resource, don't let it flow freely and be sure to shut it off in between uses. Screening Wash Water Conduct thorough dry cleanup before washing exterior surfaces, such as buildings and decks with loose paint, sidewalks or plaza areas. Keep debris from entering the storm drain after cleaning by first passing the wash water through a "20 mesh" or finer screen to catch the solid materials, then dispose of the mesh in a refuse container. Do not let the remaining wash water enter a street, gutter or storm drain. Drain Inlet Protection & Collection of Wash Water • Prior to any washing, block all storm drains with an impervious barrier such as sandbags or berms, or seal the storm drain with plugs or other appropriate materials. • Create a containment area with berms and traps or take advantage of a low spot to keep wash water contained. • Wash vehicles and equipment on grassy or gravel areas so that the wash water can seep into the ground. • Pump or vacuum up all wash water in the contained area. Concrete/Coring/Saw Cutting and Drilling Projects Protect any down,gradient inlets by using dry activity techniques whenever possible. If ·water is used, minimize the amount of water used during the coring/drilling or saw cutting process. Place a barrier of sandbags and/or absorbent berms to protect the storm drain inlet or watercourse. Use a shovel or wet vacuum to remove the residue from the pavement. Do not wash residue or particulate matter into a storm drain inlet or watercourse. Riverside County Stormwater Protection Partners Flood Control District County of Riverside City of Banning City of Beaumont City of Calimesa City of Can ~·on Lake Cathedral City City of Coachella City of Corona City of Desert Hot Springs City of Eastvale City of Hemet City of Indian Wells City of Indio City of Lake Elsinore City of La Quinta City of Menifee City of Moreno Valley City of Murrieta City of Norco City of Palm Desert City of Palm Springs City of Perris City of Rancho Mirage City of Riverside City of San Jacinto City of Temecula City of Wildomar (951) 955-1200 (951) 955-1000 (951) 922-3105 (951) 769-8520 (909) 795-9801 (951} 244-2955 (760) 770-0327 (760) 398-4978 (951) 736-244 7 (760) 329-6411 (951) 361-0900 (951) 765-2300 (760) 346-2489 (760) 391-4000 (951) 674-3124 (760) 777,7000 (951) 672-6777 (951) 413-3000 (951) 304-2489 (951) 270-5607 (760) 346-0611 (760) 323-8299 (951) 943,6100 (760) 324-4511 (951) 361-0900 (951) 654 -7337 (951) 694-6444 (951) 677-775 J REPORT ILLEGAL STORM DRAIN DISPOSAL 1-800-506-2555 or e-mail us at fcnpdes@rdlood.org · • Riverside County Flood Control and \Vater Conservation District www.rcflood.org Online resources include: • California Storm Water Quality Association www.casqa.org • State Water Resources Control Board www.waterboards.ca.gov • Power Washers of North America www.thepwna.org Storm drains are NOT connected to sanitarv sewer svstems and treatment plants! T he prun ary purpose f storm dr ins i t c try rain water away from dev 1 )p are to prevent fL ding. Pollutant di charged t st rm drains are transported directly into rivers, lakes and streams. Soaps, degreasers, automotive fluids, litter and a host of material are washed ff buildings, id walk ·, plaza and parking areas. Vehicles and equipment must be properly managed to prevent the pollution oflocal waterways. Unintentional spills by mobile service operators can flow into storm drains and pollute our waterways. Avoid mishaps. Always have a Spill Response Kit on hand to clean up unintentional spills. Only emergency Mechanical repairs should be done in City streets, using drip pans for spills. Plumbing should be done on private property. Always store chemicals in a leak, proof container and keep covered when not in use. Window /Power Washing waste water shouldn't be released into the streets, but should be disposed of in a sanitary sewer, landscaped area or in the soil. Soiled Carpet Cleaning wash water should be filtered before being discharged into the sanitary sewer. Dispose of all filter debris properly. Car Washing/Detailing operators should wash cars on privat pr p ty and use a regulated hose nozzle for water flow control and runoff prevention. Capture and dispose of waste water and chemicals properly. Remember, storm drains are for receiving rain water runoff only. REPORT ILLEGAL STORM DRAIN DISPOSAL 1-800-506-2555 lUvlOj<.: Stormwater runoff occurs when precipitation from rain or snowmelt flows over the ground. Impervious surfaces like driveways, sidewalks, and streets prevent stormwater from naturally soaking into the ground. Stormwater can pick up debris, chemicals, dirt, and other pollutants and flow into a storm sewer system or directly to a lake, stream, river, wetland, or coastal water. Anything that enters a storm sewer system is discharged untreated into the waterbodies we use for swimming, fishing, and providing drinking water. 'il3.l:VA\.NVKD i01MIA31U sdu/AoB·eda·MMM J3'.)"eM.WJO:JS/sapdu/AoB·edai\\M.M lJSJA JO :pe)UOO UOl)1?W10JU! a.row .10.:1 Polluted stormwater runoff can have many adverse effects on plants, fish, animals, and people. • Sediment can cloud the water and make it difficult or impossible for aquatic plants to grow. Sediment also can destroy aquatic habitats. • Excess nutrients can cause algae blooms. When algae die, they sink to the bottom and decompose in a process that removes oxygen from the water. Fish and other aquatic organisms can't exist in water with low dissolved oxygen levels. • Bacteria and other pathogens can wash into swimming areas and create health hazards, often making beach closures necessary. • Debris-plastic bags, six~pack rings, bottles, and cigarette butts-washed into waterbodies can choke, suffocate, or disable aquatic life like ducks, fish, turtles, and birds. • Household hazardous wastes like insecticides, pesticides, paint. solvents, used motor oil, and other auto fluids can poison aquatic life. Land animals and people can become sick or die from eating diseased fish and shellfish or ingesting polluted water. • Polluted storrnwater often affects drinking water sources. This, in turn, can affect human health and increase drinking water treatment costs. Auto care Reegcle (JI(, p'UJfle4J rli.dpoJ.t of kcuAekld p'UJdapJi 1lvir wi1auf, ~/ ;.udt al. w.eilleide4, pPiJ1leukli, pauit, ;.o/vl!Ji!J., ad u;.ed ~ad a.«J, -aa1U IMJ;.. Washing your car and degreasing auto parts at home can send detergents and other contaminants through the storm sewer system. Dumping automotive fluids into storm drains has the same result as dumping the materials directly into a waterbody. • Use a commercial car wash that treats or recycles its wastewater, or wash your car on your yard so the water infiltrates into the ground. D(jff, 't pawr, 1kM ofi1b 1k g'loWfli, o1r; Ui1ir ;.~ c/JroJ.S1J. • Lawn care Excess fertilizers and pesticides applied to lawns and gardens wash off and pollute streams. In addition, yard clippings and leaves can wash into storm drains and contribute nutrients and organic matter to streams. • Don't overwater your lawn. Consider using a soaker hose instead of a sprinkler. • Use pesticides and fertilizers sparingly. When use is necessary, use these chemicals in the recommended amounts. Use organic mulch or safer pest control methods whenever possible. • Compost or mulch yard waste. Don't leave it in the street or sweep it into storm drains or streams. • Cover piles of dirt or mulch being used i· '•ndscaping projects. ( ""/ • Repair leaks and dispose of used auto fluids and batteries at designated drop-off or recycling locations. Septic systems Leaking and poorly maintained septic systems release nutrients and pathogens (bacteria and viruses) that can be picked up by stormwater and discharged into nearby waterbodies. Pathogens can cause public health problems and environmental concerns. • Inspect your system every 3 years and pump your tank as necessary (every 3 to 5 years). • Don't dispose of household hazardous waste in sinks or toilets. Pet waste Pet waste can be a major source of bacteria and excess nutrients in local waters. • When walking your pet. remember to pick up the waste and dispose of it properly. Flushing pet waste is the best disposal method. Leaving pet waste on the ground increases public health risks by allowing harmful bacteria and nutrients to wash into the storm drain and eventually into local waterbodies. Permeable Pavement-Traditional concrete and asphalt don't allow water to soak into the ground. Instead these surfaces rely on storm drains to divert unwanted water. Permeable pavement systems allow rain and snowmelt to soak through, decreasing stormwater runoff. Rain Barrels-You can collect rainwater from rooftops in mosquito- proof containers. The water can be used later on lawn or garden areas. Rain Gardens and Grassy Swales-Specially designed areas planted with native plants can provide natural places for rainwater to collect and soak into the ground. Rain from rooftop areas or paved areas can be diverted into these areas rather than into storm drains. Vegetated Filter Strips-Filter strips are areas of native grass or plants created along roadways or streams. They trap the pollutants stormwater picks up as it flows across driveways and streets. Dirt, oil, and debris that collect in parking lots and paved areas can be washed into the storm sewer system and eventually enter local waterbodies. fr0sion controls that aren't maintained can cause <;sive amounts of sediment and debris to be • Sweep up litter and debris from sidewalks, driveways and parking lots, especially around storm drains. L ... .od into the stormwater system. Construction vehicles can leak fuel. oil, and other harmful fluids that can be picked up by stormwater and deposited into local waterbodies. • Divert stormwater away from disturbed or exposed areas of the construction site. • Cover grease storage and dumpsters and keep them clean to avoid leaks. • Report any chemical spill to the local hazardous waste cleanup team. They'll know the best way to keep spills from harming the environment. • Install silt fences, vehicle mud removal areas, vegetative cover, and other sediment and erosion controls and properly maintain them, especially after rainstorms. • Prevent soil erosion by minimizing disturbed areas during construction projects, and seed and mulch bare areas as soon as possible. Lack of vegetation on streambanks can lead to erosion. Overgrazed pastures can also contribute excessive amounts of sediment to local waterbodies. Excess fertilizers and pesticides can poison aquatic animals and lead to destructive algae blooms. Livestock in streams can contaminate waterways with bacteria, making them unsafe for human contact. • Keep livestock away from streambanks and provide them a water source away from waterbodies. • Store and apply manure away from waterbodies and in accordance with a nutrient management plan. • Vegetate riparian areas along waterways. • Rotate animal grazing to prevent soil erosion in fields . • Apply fertilizers and pesticides according to label instructions to save money and minimize pollution. Improperly managed logging operations can result in erosion and sedimentation. • Conduct preharvest planning to prevent erosion and lower costs. • Use logging methods and equipment that minimize soil disturbance. • Plan and design skid trails, yard areas, and truck access roads to minimize stream crossings and avoid disturbing the forest floor. • Construct stream crossings so that they minimize erosion and physical changes to streams. • Expedite revegetation of cleared areas. Uncovered fueling stations allow spills to be washed into storm drains. Cars waiting to be repaired can leak fuel, oil. and other harmful fluids that can be picked up by stormwater. • Clean up spills immediately and properly dispose of cleanup materials. • Provide cover over fueling stations and design or retrofit facilities for spill containment. • Properly maintain fleet vehicles to prevent oil, gas, and other discharges from being washed into local waterbodies. • Install and maintain oil/water separators. Riverside County has two drainage systems - sewers and storm drains. The storm drain system was designed to reduce flooding by carrying excess rainwater away from streets and developed areas. Since the storm drain system does not provide for water treatment, it also serves the function of transportingpollutantsdirectlytoourlocalwaterways. Stormwater runoff is a part of the natural hydrologic process. However, land development and construction activities can significantly alter natural drainage processes and introduce pollutants into stormwater runoff. Polluted stormwater runoff from construction sites has been identified as a major source of water pollution in California. It jeopardizes the quality of our local waterways and can pose a serious threat to the health of our aquaticecosystems. Because preventing pollution is much easier and less costly than cleaning up “after the fact,” the Cities and County of Riverside StormWater/CleanWater Protection Program informs residents and businesses on pollution prevention activities. This pamphlet describes various Best Management Practices (BMPs) that construction siteoperatorscanusetopreventstormwaterpollution. In accordance with applicable federal and state law, the Cities and County of Riverside have adopted ordinances for stormwater management and discharge control that the discharge of pollutants into the storm drain system or local surface water. This includes discharges from construction sites containing sediment, concrete, mortar, paint, solvents, lubricants,vehiclefluids,fuel,pesticides,andconstructiondebris. The Federal, State and local regulations strictly prohibit the discharge of sediment and pollutants into the streets, the storm drain system or waterways.As an owner, operator or supervisor of a construction site, you may be held financially responsible for any environmentaldamagecausedbyyoursubcontractorsoremployees. unintended Unlike sanitary sewers, storm drains are not connected to a wastewater treatment plant – they flow directly to our local streams,riversandlakes. prohibit PLEASE NOTE: StormWater Pollution...What You Should KnowStormWater Pollution...What You Should Know STORMWATER POLLUTION FROM CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES The two most common sources of stormwater pollution problems associatedwithconstructionactivitiesare and . Failure to maintain adequate erosion and sediment controls at construction sites often results in sediment discharges into the storm drain system, creating multiple problems onceitenterslocalwaterways. Construction vehicles and heavy equipment can also track significant amounts of mud and sediment onto adjacent streets. Additionally, wind may transport construction materials and wastes into streets storm drains, or directlyintoourlocalwaterways. erosion sedimentation The Cities and County of Riverside StormWater/CleanWater Protection Program The Cities and County of Riverside StormWater/CleanWater Protection ProgramWhat you should know for...StormWaterPollutionStormWaterPollutionDevelopersGeneral ContractorsHome BuildersConstruction InspectorsAnyoneintheconstructionbusinessGENERALCONSTRUCTION&SITESUPERVISIONBest ManagementPractices (BMPs)for:StateWaterResourcesControlBoardDivision of Water Quality1001 I StreetSacramento CA 95814(916) 341-5455Santa Ana Regional WaterQuality Control Board - Region 83737 Main Street, Suite 500Riverside, CA 92501-3348(909) 782-4130San Diego Regional WaterQuality Control Board - Region 99771 Clairemont Mesa Blvd., Suite ASan Diego, CA 92124(858) 467-2952Colorado River Basin Regional WaterQuality Control Board - Region 773-720 Fred Waring Drive, Suite 100Palm Desert, CA 92260(760) 346-7491www.swrcb.ca.gov/stormwtr/www.swrcb.ca.gov/~rwqcb8/www.swrcb.ca.gov/~rwqcb9/www.swrcb.ca.gov/~rwqcb7/ResourcesTo report a hazardous materials spill,call:For recycling and hazardous wastedisposal, call:To report an illegal dumping or aclogged storm drain, call:To order additional brochures or to obtaininformation on other pollution preventionactivities, please call (909) 955-1200 or visit theStormWater/CleanWater Protection Programwebsiteat:The StormWater/CleanWater Protection Programgratefully acknowledges the Santa Clara ValleyNonpoint Pollution Control Program, AlamedaCountywide CleanWater Program and the City ofLosAngelesStormwaterManagementDivisionforinformationprovidedinthisbrochure.Riverside County Hazardous MaterialsEmergency Response Team8:00 a.m. – 5:00 p.m.after 5:00 p.m.In an emergency call:(909) 358-5055(909) 358-5245911(909) 358-50551-800-506-2555www.co.riverside.ca.us/depts/flood/waterqualitynpdes.aspStormWaterCleanWaterPROTECTION PROGRAM GENERAL CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES STORMWATER PERMIT (Construction Activities General Permit) The State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) adopted a new Construction Activities General Permit (WQ Order No. 99- 08DWQ) on August 19, 1999, superseding the now expired SWRCB statewide General Permit (WQ Order No. 92-08DWQ). This permit is administered and enforced by the SWRCBandthelocalRegionalWaterQuality Control Boards (RWQCB). The updated Construction Activities General Permit establishes a number of new stormwater management requirements for construction siteoperator. Yes, if construction activity results in the disturbance of five or more acres of total land area or is part of a common plan of developmentthatresultsinthedisturbanceof fiveormoreacres. Obtain the permit package and submit the completed Notice of Intent (NOI) form to the Some construction activies stormwater permits are issued on a regional basis.ConsultyourlocalRWQCBtofindoutif your project requires coverage under any of thesepermits. NOTE: FrequentlyAskedQuestions: Does my construction site require coverage under the Construction Activities General Permit? How do I obtain coverage under the Construction Activities General Permit? SWRCB prior to grading or disturbing soil at the construction site. For ongoing construction activity involving a change of ownership,thenewownermustsubmitanew NOI within 30 days of the date of change of ownership.ThecompletedNOIalongwiththe requiredfeeshouldbemailedtotheSWRCB. Implement BMPs for non-stormwater dischargesyear-round. Prepare and implement a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) prior tocommencingconstructionactivities. Keep a copy of the SWPPP at the construction site for the entire duration of theproject. Calculate the anticipated stormwater run- off. Implement an effective combination of erosion and sediment control on all soil disturbedareas. Conduct site inspections prior to anticipated storm events, every 24-hours during extended storm events, and after actualstormevent. Perform repair and maintenance of BMPs as soon as possible after storm events dependinguponworkersafety. What must I do to comply with the requirements of the Construction Activities General Permit? NOTE: www.swrcb.ca.gov/stormwtr/ How long is this Construction Activities General Permit in effect? Update the SWPPP as needed, to manage pollutants or reflect changes in siteconditions. Include description of post construction BMPs at the construction site, including parties responsible for long-term maintenance. The Permit coverage stays in effect untilyou submit a Notice of Termination (NOT) to the SWRCB. For the purpose of submitting a NOT, all soil disturbing activities have to be completed and one of the three following criteriahastobemet: 1. Changeofownership; 2. A uniform vegetative cover with 70 percent coverage has been established; or, 3. Equivalent stabilization measures such as the use of reinforced channel liners, soil cement, fiber matrices, geotextiles, etc.,havebeenemployed. Please refer to the Construction Activities General Permit for detailed information. You may contact the SWRCB, your local RWQCB, or visit the SWRCB website at to obtain a State Construction Activities StormwaterGeneralPermitpacket. BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES Protect all storm drain inlets and streams located near the construction site to prevent sediment-laden water from enteringthestormdrainsystem. Limitaccesstoandfromthesite.Stabilize construction entrances/exits to minimize thetrackoutofdirtandmudontoadjacent streets. Conduct frequent street sweeping. Protect stockpiles and construction materials from winds and rain by storing them under a roof, secured impermeable tarporplasticsheeting. Avoidstoringorstockpilingmaterialsnear stormdraininlets,gulliesorstreams. Phasegradingoperationstolimitdisturbed areasanddurationofexposure. Perform major maintenance and repairs ofvehiclesandequipmentoffsite. Wash out concrete mixers only in designated washout areas at the constructionsite. Set-upandoperatesmallconcretemixers ontarpsorheavyplasticdropcloths. Keep construction sites clean by removing trash, debris, wastes, etc. on a regularbasis. The following Best Management Practices (BMPs) can significantly reduce pollutant discharges from your construction site. Compliance with stormwater regulations can be as simple as minimizing stormwater contact with potential pollutants by providing covers and secondary containment for construction materials, designating areas away from storm drain systems for storing equipment and materialsandimplementinggoodhousekeepingpracticesattheconstructionsite. Clean-up spills immediately using dry clean-up methods (e.g., absorbent materials such as cat litter, sand or rags for liquid spills; sweeping for dry spills such as cement, mortar or fertilizer) and by removing the contaminated soil from spillsondirtareas.. Prevent erosion by implementing any or a combination of soil stabilization practices such as mulching, surface roughening, permanentortemporaryseeding. Maintain all vehicles and equipment in good working condition. Inspect frequently forleaks,andrepairpromptly. Practice proper waste disposal. Many construction materials and wastes, including solvents, water-based paint, vehicle fluids, broken asphalt and concrete, wood, and cleared vegetation canberecycled. Materialsthatcannotbe recycled must be taken to an appropriate landfill or disposed of as hazardous waste. Coveropendumpsterswithsecuredtarps or plastic sheeting. Never clean out a dumpster by washing it down on the constructionsite. Arrange for an adequate debris disposal schedule to insure that dumpsters do not overflow. What Should You Do? Advance Planning to Prevent Pollution Note:Consult local drainage policies for more information. Remove existing vegetation only as needed. Schedule excavation, grading, and paving operations for dry weather periods,ifpossible. Designate a specific area of the construction site, well away from storm drain inlets or watercourses, for material storage and equipment maintenance. Develop and implement an effective combination of erosion and sediment controls for the constructionsite. Practice source reduction by ordering only the amount of materials that are needed to finish theproject. Educate your employees and subcontractors about stormwater management requirements and their pollution prevention responsibilities. Control the amount of surface runoff at the construction site by impeding internally generated flows and using berms or drainage ditches to direct incoming offsite flows to go around the site. Riverside County has two drainage systems - sanitary sewers and storm drains.The storm drain system is designed to help prevent flooding by carrying excessrainwater away from streets. Since the storm drain system does not provide forwater treatment, it also serves thefunction of transportingpollutants directly to our waterways.In recent years, awareness of the needto protect water quality has increased.As a result, federal, state, and localprograms have been established toreduce polluted stormwater discharges toour waterways. The emphasis of theseprograms is to prevent stormwaterpollution since it’s much easier, and lesscostly, than cleaning up “after the fact.”unintendedUnlike sanitary sewers, stormdrains are not connected to atreatment plant - they flow directlyto our local streams, rivers andlakes.DIDYOUKNOW...National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES)StormWater Pollution. . . What you should knowMany industrial facilitiesand manufacturing operationsmust obtain coverage under theIndustrial Activities Storm WaterGeneral PermitFIND OUTIF YOUR FACILITYMUST OBTAIN A PERMITStormWater Pollution. . . What you should knowNational Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES)In 1987, the Federal Clean Water Act was amended to establish a framework forregulating industrial stormwater discharges under the NPDES permit program. InCalifornia, NPDES permits are issued by the State Water Resources Control Board(SWRCB) and the nine (9) Regional Water Quality Control Boards (RWQCB). Ingeneral, certain industrial facilities and manufacturing operations must obtaincoverage under the Industrial Activities Storm Water General Permit if the type offacilities or operations falls into one of the several categories described in thisbrochure.For more information on the General IndustrialStorm Water Permit contact:StateWaterResourcesControlBoard(SWRCB)(916) 657-1146 or www.swrcb.ca.gov/ or, at yourRegionalWaterQualityControlBoard(RWQCB).Santa Ana Region (8)California Tower3737 Main Street, Ste. 500Riverside, CA 92501-3339(909) 782-4130San Diego Region (9)9771 Clairemont Mesa Blvd., Ste. ASan Diego, CA 92124(619) 467-2952Colorado River Basin Region (7)73-720 Fred Waring Dr., Ste. 100Palm Desert, CA 92260(760) 346-7491StormWaterCleanWaterPROTECTION PROGRAMSPILLRESPONSEAGENCY:HAZARDOUSWASTEDISPOSAL:RECYCLINGINFORMATION:TOREPORTILLEGALDUMPING OR ACLOGGEDSTORMDRAIN:HAZ-MAT: (909) 358-5055(909) 358-50551-800-366-SAVE1-800-506-2555To order additional brochures or to obtain informationon other pollution prevention activities, call:(909) 955-1111.Riverside County gratefully acknowledges the StateWater Quality Control Board and the American PublicWorksAssociation, Storm Water Quality Task Force fortheinformationprovidedinthisbrochure.DIDYOUKNOW...YOURFACILITYMAYNEEDASTORMWATERPERMIT?ForInformation: A BMP is . . .How Do I Know If I Need A Permit?What are the requirements of theIndustrial Activities Storm Water General Permit?Following are of theindustrycategoriestypesthatareregulatedbytheIndustrial Activities Storm Water General Permit.Contact your local Region Water Quality ControlBoard to determine if your facility/operationrequirescoverageunderthePermit.Facilities such as cement manufacturing;feedlots; fertilizer manufacturing; petroleumrefining; phosphate manufacturing; steam electricpower generation; coal mining; mineral miningand processing; ore mining and dressing; andasphaltemulsion;general descriptionsFacilities classified as lumber and woodproducts (except wood kitchen cabinets); pulp,paper, and paperboard mills; chemical producers(except some pharmaceutical and biologicalproducts); petroleum and coal products; leatherproduction and products; stone, clay and glassproducts; primary metal industries; fabricatedstructural metal; ship and boat building andrepairing;Active or inactive mining operations andoilandgasexploration,production,processing,ortreatmentoperations;Hazardous waste treatment, storage, ordisposalfacilities;Landfills, land application sites and opendumpsthatreceiveorhavereceivedanyindustrialwaste; unless there is a new overlying land usesuch as a golf course, park, etc., and there is nodischargeassociatedwiththelandfill;Facilities involved in the recycling ofmaterials, including metal scrap yards, batteryreclaimers, salvage yards, and automobilejunkyards;Steamelectricpowergeneratingfacilities,facilities that generate steam for electric power bycombustion;Transportation facilities that have vehiclemaintenance shops, fueling facilities, equipmentcleaning operations, or airport deicing operations.This includes school bus maintenance facilitiesoperatedbyaschooldistrict;Sewagetreatmentfacilities;Facilities that have areas where materialhandling equipment or activities, raw materials,intermediate products, final products, wastematerials, by-products, or industrial machineryareexposedtostormwater.How do I obtain coverage under theIndustrial Activities Storm Water General Permit?Obtain a permit application package from your local Regional Water Quality Control Board listed on the backofthisbrochureortheStateWaterResourcesControlBoard(SWRCB). SubmitacompletedNoticeofIntent(NOI) form, site map and the appropriate fee ($250 or $500) to the SWRCB. Facilities must submit an NOIthirty (30) days prior to beginning operation. Once you submit the NOI, the State Board will send you a letteracknowledgingreceiptofyourNOIandwillassignyourfacilityawastedischargeidentificationnumber(WDIDNo.). Youwillalsoreceiveanannualfeebilling.ThesebillingsshouldroughlycoincidewiththedatetheStateBoardprocessedyouroriginalNOIsubmittal.WARNING: There are significant penalties for non-compliance: a minimum fine of $5,000 for failing to obtain permitcoverage,and,upto$10,000perday,perviolationplus$10pergallonofdischargeinexcessof1,000gallons.anydischarge to a storm drain system that is notcomposed entirely of storm water. The followingnon-storm water discharges are authorized by theGeneral Permit: fire hydrant flushing; potablewater sources, including potable water related tothe operation, maintenance, or testing of potablewater systems; drinking fountain water;atmospheric condensates including refrigeration,air conditioning, and compressor condensate;irrigation drainage; landscape watering; springs;non-contaminated ground water; foundation orfooting drainage; and sea water infiltration wherethe sea waters are discharged back into the seawatersource.A Non-Storm Water Discharge is...The basic requirements of the Permit are:The facility must eliminate any non-stormwater discharges or obtain a separate permit for suchdischarges.The facility must develop and implement a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP). TheSWPPP must identify sources of pollutants that may be exposed to stormwater. Once the sources ofpollutants have been identified, the facility operator must develop and implement Best ManagementPractices(BMPs)tominimizeorpreventpollutedrunoff.The facility must develop and implement a Monitoring Program that includes conducting visualobservations and collecting samples of the facility’s storm water discharges associated with industrialactivity. TheGeneralPermitrequiresthattheanalysisbeconductedbyalaboratorythatiscertifiedbytheStateofCalifornia.The facility must submit to the Regional Board, every July 1, an annual report that includes the results ofitsmonitoringprogram.1.2.3.4.Guidance in preparing a SWPPP is available from a document prepared by the California Storm WaterQualityTaskForcecalledtheCaliforniaStormWaterBestManagementPracticeHandbook.a technique, process, activity,orstructureusedtoreducethepollutantcontentofa storm water discharge. BMPs may includesimple, non-structural methods such as goodhousekeeping, staff training and preventivemaintenance. Additionally, BMPs may includestructural modifications such as the installation ofberms, canopies or treatment control (e.g. settingbasins,oil/waterseparators,etc.) Outdoor Loading/Unloading SC-30 Objectives Cover Contain Educate Reduce/Minimize Product Substitution Targeted Constituents Sediment Nutrients Trash Metals Bacteria Oil and Grease Organics Description The loading/unloading of materials usually takes place outside on docks or terminals; therefore, materials spilled, leaked, or lost during loading/unloading may collect in the soil or on other surfaces and have the potential to be carried away by stormwater runoff or when the area is cleaned. Additionally, rainfall may wash pollutants from machinery used to unload or move materials. Implementation of the following protocols will prevent or reduce the discharge of pollutants to stormwater from outdoor loading/unloading of materials. Approach Reduce potential for pollutant discharge through source control pollution prevention and BMP implementation. Successful implementation depends on effective training of employees on applicable BMPs and general pollution prevention strategies and objectives. Pollution Prevention Keep accurate maintenance logs to evaluate materials removed and improvements made. Park tank trucks or delivery vehicles in designated areas so that spills or leaks can be contained. Limit exposure of material to rainfall whenever possible. Prevent stormwater run-on. Check equipment regularly for leaks. January 2003 California Stormwater BMP Handbook 1 of 4 Industrial and Commercial www.cabmphandbooks.com SC-30 Outdoor Loading/Unloading Suggested Protocols Loading and Unloading – General Guidelines Develop an operations plan that describes procedures for loading and/or unloading. Conduct loading and unloading in dry weather if possible. Cover designated loading/unloading areas to reduce exposure of materials to rain. Consider placing a seal or door skirt between delivery vehicles and building to prevent exposure to rain. Design loading/unloading area to prevent stormwater run-on, which would include grading or berming the area, and position roof downspouts so they direct stormwater away from the loading/unloading areas. Have employees load and unload all materials and equipment in covered areas such as building overhangs at loading docks if feasible. Load/unload only at designated loading areas. Use drip pans underneath hose and pipe connections and other leak-prone spots during liquid transfer operations, and when making and breaking connections. Several drip pans should be stored in a covered location near the liquid transfer area so that they are always available, yet protected from precipitation when not in use. Drip pans can be made specifically for railroad tracks. Drip pans must be cleaned periodically, and drip collected materials must be disposed of properly. Pave loading areas with concrete instead of asphalt. Avoid placing storm drains in the area. Grade and/or berm the loading/unloading area to a drain that is connected to a deadend. Inspection Check loading and unloading equipment regularly for leaks, including valves, pumps, flanges and connections. Look for dust or fumes during loading or unloading operations. Training Train employees (e.g., fork lift operators) and contractors on proper spill containment and cleanup. Have employees trained in spill containment and cleanup present during loading/unloading. Train employees in proper handling techniques during liquid transfers to avoid spills. Make sure forklift operators are properly trained on loading and unloading procedures. 2 of 4 California Stormwater BMP Handbook January 2003 Industrial and Commercial www.cabmphandbooks.com Outdoor Loading/Unloading SC-30 Spill Response and Prevention Keep your Spill Prevention Control and Countermeasure (SPCC) Plan up-to-date. Contain leaks during transfer. Store and maintain appropriate spill cleanup materials in a location that is readily accessible and known to all and ensure that employees are familiar with the site’s spill control plan and proper spill cleanup procedures. Have an emergency spill cleanup plan readily available. Use drip pans or comparable devices when transferring oils, solvents, and paints. Other Considerations (Limitations and Regulations) Space and time limitations may preclude all transfers from being performed indoors or under cover. It may not be possible to conduct transfers only during dry weather. Requirements Costs Costs should be low except when covering a large loading/unloading area. Maintenance Conduct regular inspections and make repairs as necessary. The frequency of repairs will depend on the age of the facility. Check loading and unloading equipment regularly for leaks. Conduct regular broom dry-sweeping of area. Supplemental Information Further Detail of the BMP Special Circumstances for Indoor Loading/Unloading of Materials Loading or unloading of liquids should occur in the manufacturing building so that any spills that are not completely retained can be discharged to the sanitary sewer, treatment plant, or treated in a manner consistent with local sewer authorities and permit requirements. For loading and unloading tank trucks to above and below ground storage tanks, the following procedures should be used: - The area where the transfer takes place should be paved. If the liquid is reactive with the asphalt, Portland cement should be used to pave the area. - The transfer area should be designed to prevent run-on of stormwater from adjacent areas. Sloping the pad and using a curb, like a speed bump, around the uphill side of the transfer area should reduce run-on. January 2003 California Stormwater BMP Handbook 3 of 4 Industrial and Commercial www.cabmphandbooks.com SC-30 Outdoor Loading/Unloading 4 of 4 California Stormwater BMP Handbook January 2003 Industrial and Commercial www.cabmphandbooks.com - The transfer area should be designed to prevent runoff of spilled liquids from the area. Sloping the area to a drain should prevent runoff. The drain should be connected to a dead-end sump or to the sanitary sewer. A positive control valve should be installed on the drain. For transfer from rail cars to storage tanks that must occur outside, use the following procedures: - Drip pans should be placed at locations where spillage may occur, such as hose connections, hose reels, and filler nozzles. Use drip pans when making and breaking connections. - Drip pan systems should be installed between the rails to collect spillage from tank cars. References and Resources California’s Nonpoint Source Program Plan http://www.swrcb.ca.gov/nps/index.html Clark County Storm Water Pollution Control Manual http://www.co.clark.wa.us/pubworks/bmpman.pdf King County Storm Water Pollution Control Manual http://dnr.metrokc.gov/wlr/dss/spcm.htm Santa Clara Valley Urban Runoff Pollution Prevention Program http://www.scvurppp.org The Storm Water Managers Resource Center http://www.stormwatercenter.net/ TECHNICAL GUIDANCE DOCUMENT APPENDICES XIV-3 May 19, 2011 XIV.1. Hydrologic Source Control Fact Sheets (HSC) HSC-1: Localized On-Lot Infiltration ‘Localized on-lot infiltration’ refers to the practice of collecting on-site runoff from small distributed areas within a catchment and diverting it to a dedicated on-site infiltration area. This technique can include disconnecting downspouts and draining sidewalks and patios into french drains, trenches, small rain gardens, or other surface depressions. For downspout disconnections and other impervious area disconnection involving dispersion over pervious surfaces, but without intentional ponding, see HSC-2: Impervious Area Dispersion. Feasibility Screening Considerations x ‘Localized on-lot infiltration’ shall meet infiltration infeasibility screening criteria to be considered for use. Opportunity Criteria x Runoff can be directed to and temporarily pond in pervious area depressions, rock trenches, or similar. x Soils are adequate for infiltration or can be amended to provide an adequate infiltration rate. x Shallow utilities are not present below infiltration areas. OC-Specific Design Criteria and Considerations □ A single on-lot infiltration area should not be sized to retain runoff from impervious areas greater than 4,000 sq. ft.; if the drainage area exceeds this criteria, sizing should be based on calculations for bioretention areas or infiltration trenches. □ Soils should be sufficiently permeable to eliminate ponded water within 24 hours following a 85th percentile, 24-hour storm event. □ Maximum ponding depth should be should be less than 3 inches and trench depth should be less than 1.5 feet. □ Infiltration should not be used when the depth to the mounded seasonally high table is within 5 feet of the bottom of infiltrating surface. □ Infiltration via depression storage, french drains, or rain gardens should be located greater than 8 feet from building foundations. □ Site slope should be less than 10%. □ Infiltration unit should not be located within 50 feet of slopes greater than 15 percent. □ Side slopes of rain garden or depression storage should not exceed 3H:1V. □ Effective energy dissipation and uniform flow spreading methods should be employed to prevent erosion resulting fromwater entering infiltration areas. Also known as: ¾ Downspout infiltration ¾ Retention grading ¾ French drains ¾ On-lot rain gardens On-lot rain garden Source: lowimpactdevelopment.org TECHNICAL GUIDANCE DOCUMENT APPENDICES XIV-4 May 19, 2011 □ Overflow should be located such that it does not cause erosion orand is conveyed away from structures toward the downstream conveyance and treatment system. . Calculating HSC Retention Volume x The retention volume provided by localized on-lot infiltration can be computed as the storage volume provided by surface ponding and the pore space within an amended soil layer or gravel trench. x Estimate the average retention volume per 1000 square feet impervious tributary area provided by on-lot infiltration. x Look up the storm retention depth, dHSC from the chart to the right. x The max dHSC is equal to the design capture storm depth for the project site. Configuration for Use in a Treatment Train x Localized on-lot infiltration would typically serve as the first in a treatment train and should only be used where tributary areas do not generate significant sediment that would require pretreatment to mitigate clogging. x The use of impervious area disconnection reduces the sizing requirement for downstream LID and/or conventional treatment control BMPs. Additional References for Design Guidance x LID Center – Rain Garden Design Template. http://www.lowimpactdevelopment.org/raingarden_design/ x University of Wisconsin Extension. Rain Gardens: A How-To Manual for Homeowners. http://learningstore.uwex.edu/assets/pdfs/GWQ037.pdf 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1 0 102030405060708090dHSC, inchesRetention Storage (cf) per 1000 sf of Impervious Tributary Area TECHNICAL GUIDANCE DOCUMENT APPENDICES XIV-5 May 19, 2011 HSC-2: Impervious Area Dispersion Impervious area dispersion refers to the practice of routing runoff from impervious areas, such as rooftops, walkways, and patios onto the surface of adjacent pervious areas. Runoff is dispersed uniformly via splash block or dispersion trench and soaks into the ground as it move slowly across the surface of pervious areas. Minor ponding may occur, but it is not the intent of this practice to actively promote localized on-lot storage (See HSC-1: Localized On-Lot Infiltration). Feasibility Screening Considerations x Impervious area dispersion can be used where infiltration would otherwise be infeasible, however dispersion depth over landscaped areas should be limited by site-specific conditions to prevent standing water or geotechnical issues. Opportunity Criteria x Rooftops and other low traffic impervious surface present in drainage area. x Soils are adequate for infiltration. If not, soils can be amended to improve capacity to absorb dispersed water (see MISC-2: Amended Soils). x Significant pervious area present in drainage area with shallow slope x Overflow from pervious area can be safely managed. OC-Specific Design Criteria and Considerations □ Soils should be preserved from their natural condition or restored via soil amendments to meet minimum criteria described in Section . □ A minimum of 1 part pervious area capable of receiving flow should be provided for every 2 parts of impervious area disconnected. □ The pervious area receiving flow should have a slope ≤ 2 percent and path lengths of ≥ 20 feet per 1000 sf of impervious area. □ Dispersion areas should be maintained to remove trash and debris, loose vegetation, and protect any areas of bare soil from erosion. □ Velocity of dispersed flow should not be greater than 0.5 ft per second to avoid scour. Calculating HSC Retention Volume x The retention volume provided by downspout dispersion is a function of the ratio of impervious to pervious area and the condition of soils in the pervious area. x Determine flow patterns in pervious area and estimate footprint of pervious area receiving dispersed flow. Calculate the ratio of pervious to impervious area. x Check soil conditions using the soil condition design criteria below; amend if necessary. x Look up the storm retention depth, dHSC from the chart below. Simple Downspout Dispersion Source: toronto.ca/environment/water.htm Also known as: ¾ Downspout disconnection ¾ Impervious area disconnection ¾ Sheet flow dispersion TECHNICAL GUIDANCE DOCUMENT APPENDICES XIV-6 May 19, 2011 x The max dHSC is equal to the design storm depth for the project site. Soil Condition Design Criteria □ Maximum slope of 2 percent □ Well-established lawn or landscaping □ Minimum soil amendments per criteria in MISC-2: Amended Soils. Configuration for Use in a Treatment Train x Impervious area disconnection is an HSC that may be used as the first element in any treatment train x The use of impervious area disconnection reduces the sizing requirement for downstream LID and/or treatment control BMPs Additional References for Design Guidance x SMC LID Manual (pp 131) http://www.lowimpactdevelopment.org/guest75/pub/All_Projects/SoCal_LID_Manual/SoCalL ID_Manual_FINAL_040910.pdf x City of Portland Bureau of Environmental Services. 2010. How to manage stormwater – Disconnect Downspouts. http://www.portlandonline.com/bes/index.cfm?c=43081&a=177702 x Seattle Public Utility: http://www.cityofseattle.org/util/stellent/groups/public/@spu/@usm/documents/webcontent/sp u01_006395.pdf x Thurston County, Washington State (pp 10): http://www.co.thurston.wa.us/stormwater/manual/docs-faqs/DG-5-Roof-Runoff- Control_Rev11Jan24.pdf 1 Pervious area used in calculation should only include the pervious area receiving flow, not pervious area receiving only direct rainfall or upslope pervious drainage. TECHNICAL GUIDANCE DOCUMENT APPENDICES XIV-7 May 19, 2011 HSC-3: Street Trees By intercepting rainfall, trees can provide several aesthetic and stormwater benefits including peak flow control, increased infiltration and ET, and runoff temperature reduction. The volume of precipitation intercepted by the canopy reduces the treatment volume required for downstream treatment BMPs. Shading reduces the heat island effect as well as the temperature of adjacent impervious surfaces, over which stormwater flows, and thus reduces the heat transferred to downstream receiving waters. Tree roots also strengthen the soil structure and provide infiltrative pathways, simultaneously reducing erosion potential and enhancing infiltration. Feasibility Screening Considerations x Not applicable Opportunity Criteria x Street trees can be incorporated in green streets designs along sidewalks, streets, parking lots, or driveways. x Street trees can be used in combination with bioretention systems along medians or in traffic calming bays. x There must be sufficient space available to accommodate both the tree canopy and root system. OC-Specific Design Criteria and Considerations □ Mature tree canopy, height, and root system should not interfere with subsurface utilities, suspended powerlines, buildings and foundations, or other existing or planned structures. Required setbacks should be adhered to. □ Depending on space constarints, a 20 to 30 foot diameter canopy (at maturity) is recommended for stormwater mitigation. □ Native, drought-tolerant species should be selected in order to minimize irrigation requirements and improve the long-term viability of trees. □ Trees should not impede pedstrian or vehicle sight lines. □ Planting locations should receive adequate sunlight and wind protection; other environmental factors should be considered prior to planting. □ Frequency and degree of vegetation management and maintenance should be considered with respect to owner capabilities (e.g., staffing, funding, etc.). □ Soils should be preserved in their natural condition (if appropriate for planting) or restored via soil amendments to meet minimum criteria described in MISC-2: Amended Soils. If necessary, a landscape architect or plant biologist should be consulted. □ A street tree selection guide, such as that specific to the City of Los Angeles, may need to be consulted to select species appropriate for the site design constraints (e.g., parkway size, tree height, canopy spread, etc.) □ Infiltration should not cause geotechnical hazards related to adjacent structures (buildings, Also known as: ¾ Canopy interception Street trees Source: Geosyntec Consultants TECHNICAL GUIDANCE DOCUMENT APPENDICES XIV-8 May 19, 2011 roadways, sidewalks, utilities, etc.) Calculating HSC Retention Volume x The retention volume provided by streets trees via canopy interception is dependent on the tree species, time of the year, and maturity. x To compute the retention depth, the expected impervious area covered by the full tree canopy after 4 years of growth must be computed (IAHSC). The maximum retention depth credit for canopy interception (dHSC) is 0.05 inches over the area covered by the canopy at 4 years of growth. Configuration for Use in a Treatment Train x As a HSC, street trees would serve as the first step in a treatment train by reducing the treatment volume and flow rate of a downstream treatment BMP. Additional References for Design Guidance x California Stormwater BMP Handbook. http://www.cabmphandbooks.com/Documents/Development/Section_3.pdf x City of Los Angeles, Street Tree Division - Street Tree Selection Guide. http://bss.lacity.org/UrbanForestryDivision/StreetTreeSelectionGuide.htm x Portland Stormwater Management Manual. http://www.portlandonline.com/bes/index.cfm?c=35122&a=55791 x San Diego County – Low Impact Development Fact Sheets. http://www.sdcounty.ca.gov/dplu/docs/LID-Appendices.pdf Attachment D Infiltration Report Consultants in the Earth & Material Sciences 16801 Van Buren Blvd., Bldg. B Riverside, CA 92504 Tel: 951.776.0345 Fax: 951.776.0395 www.aragongeo.com December 13, 2021 Project No. 4757-I Live Oak Land, LLC c/o WPT Capital Advisors, LLC 150 South 5th Street, Suite 2675 Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402 Attention: Mr. Jonah Chodosh Subject: Soil Infiltration Test Results & Stormwater BMP Recommendations Live Oak Avenue at Santa Ana Avenue Industrial Project City of Fontana, San Bernardino County, California. Mr. Chodosh: In accordance with our proposal dated September 27, 2021, and your authorization, Aragón Geotechnical Inc. (AGI) presents our assessments of soil infiltration potential for purposes of developing a site-specific preliminary water quality management plan (WQMP) and the related design of stormwater best management practices (BMPs) at the listed project. AGI’s infiltration study relies in part on subsurface data contained in our Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation report currently under development and to be issu- ed separately. Key data from the latter report such as subsurface soil boring logs have been reproduced for this study. AGI’s infiltration report is intended to support engineering design and construction of low-impact development (LID), hydromodification, and pollution prevention features for site stormwater runoff as required by the Santa Ana Region (SAR) Water Quality Management Plan effective January 1, 2013. Site infiltration feasibility assessment has followed requirements of the Technical Guidance Document for Water Quality Management Plans, The County of San Bernardino Areawide Stormwater Program, effective date September 19, 2013. The primary infiltration-related tasks consisted of reviews of the geotechnical data, field tests of soil absorption rates on November 8-10, 2021, and preparation of this results report. Three project soil borings were deemed to highlight relevant soils conditions for a Live Oak Land, LLC December 13, 2021 Project No. 4757-I Page No. 2 Aragón Geotechnical, Inc. hypothesized system location. Other already-completed site soil borings may have relevancy if the future system location deviates from our assumptions. Calculations or recommendations for the design precipitation event, stormwater retention or treatment flow rates, or treatment volumes were not within the scope of AGI’s services. Proposed Construction AGI was furnished with a digital copy of the conceptual development plot plan [Scheme 2], illustrating the prospective building outline, paved yards, and landscape areas. The conceptual plan was not a civil grading plan, and neither existing nor suggested final surface elevations were known. AGI estimated the prospective infiltration surface depth from assumed finish grades (some predicted fill), general knowledge of regional BMP design practices, and our preliminary drilling findings. The rectangular site is identified in County databases as three contiguous parcels, APN 0236-141-05-0000, 0236-141-06-0000, and 0236-141-20-0000. The principal development improvement would be a 325,192-square-foot warehouse. Approximately 82 percent of the 13.9-acre APN 0237-043-04-0000 would comprise impermeable surfaces such as the building roof and paved parking or truck yard areas. The site receives zero runoff from surrounding properties. It is expected that the site will be constructed by normal cut-and-fill mass grading. Consistent with regional practices, we think the building setback zone paralleling the east side of the warehouse, and a parking lot setback from Santa Ana Avenue, could be utilized for shallow-depth biofiltration basins. Some of the former setback zone will necessarily be composed of engineered fill placed at least 5 feet beyond the perimeter foundation concrete. However, it appears that at least 15 to 20 horizontal feet of basin bottom could be squeezed in parallel with Live Oak Avenue, with a freeboard depth of ~2 feet or so inside of the property line. Building roof runoff could be the primary input. Ultimately, however, we interpret that the site’s prospectively large drainage management area(s) will require either a deeper detention basin, or a similar storage volume within a subterranean infiltration chamber installation. A chamber array could augment or even completely replace surface basins. AGI elected to evaluate the potential for chambers situated in the lowest-elevation part of the south- Live Oak Land, LLC December 13, 2021 Project No. 4757-I Page No. 3 Aragón Geotechnical, Inc. sloping site. Many proprietary systems exist. However, when utilized under paved sections, most systems rely on at least 3 to 4 feet of select densified backfill cover (e.g., gravel) to distribute traffic loads. The actual infiltration surface depth thus is commonly in the 8-foot to 12-foot range after adding the storage system height and bedding zone thickness to the cover depth. A modified version of the conceptual plan has been prepared by AGI that depicts our assumed BMP site, geotechnical and infiltration-related soil borings, and locations of tests done for this study (Plate No. 1 at the back of this report). Subsurface Investigation and Permeability Testing Site-wide, 11 deep exploratory soil borings were drilled on October 28, 2021 with a truck- mounted hollow-stem auger rig for the project geotechnical investigation. Three borings along the south building line were situated adjacent to the southern paved area where a chamber array could be accommodated. Other geotechnical borings within the building envelope were in proximity to other potential chamber sites or shallow basin alignments. All exploratory borings were continuously observed by AGI’s engineering geologist and logged for materials classifications, interpreted materials origins, relative density assessed from in situ penetration tests, presence of groundwater, and other characteristics that can influence water uptake rates. The soil borings were backfilled with tamped auger cuttings. No permanent wells were created. The Field Boring Logs for explorations closest to the tested soil zones are included in the accompanying Appendix. AGI performed infiltration testing at 4 representative sites depicted as IN-1 through IN-4 on Plate No. 1. Field explorations, absorption testing, and derivations of infiltration velocities were performed or directly supervised by the undersigned engineering geologist. AGI’s infiltration determinations were based on technical guidelines for percolation testing in small-diameter boreholes. Most California jurisdictions including Fontana and San Bernardino County accept percolation test results for stormwater BMP design, with the proviso that percolation test data be adjusted to an equivalent one-dimensional (1-D) infiltration velocity. Boreholes of course infiltrate water both vertically and laterally. Considering typical chamber array depths, AGI elected to use the constant-head U.S. Bureau of Reclamation Well Permeameter Method (USBR Procedure 7300-89). Measured water takes in units of vol/time are converted by formula into an equivalent infiltration test velocity in units of length/time. Live Oak Land, LLC December 13, 2021 Project No. 4757-I Page No. 4 Aragón Geotechnical, Inc. Test boring bottom elevations were established at approximately 8 feet below existing grades. AGI’s intent was to test the roughly 6 feet of materials composing the bottom and sidewalls of a future chamber excavation should this option be elected. The intended 72- inch interval also exceeded the minimum-desired test interval of at least 10 times the 4- inch borehole radius. Once terminal depths were achieved, a 3.0-inch PVC perforated pipe encased in filter sleeve material was set inside the augers. Clean gravel was added to bring annular backfill up to 6 feet above the bottom. The absorption tests were performed 11 to 14 days after drilling. Pressurized municipal feed water pumped from a truck-mounted tank was introduced near the bottom of permeameter test holes. Maximum-available delivery rates were a little under 4 gallons per minute. All borehole tests were able to achieve a 6-foot head. Water volumes delivered per time-trial increment were directly measured to the nearest 0.1 gallon using a Sensus SR-II magnetic-drive positive displacement water meter. Absolute water level was monitored with an electric meter probe inserted into the delivery casing. Total input durations of 2 hours or slightly more were sufficient to arrive at stabilized water heads. A typical permeameter test would show incremental (constant-head) rates asymptotically approaching a minimum rate. Record sheets with the field measurement data are included in the Appendix. FINDINGS Local Soil Conditions The Live Oak Avenue project site features two primary native-soil units: (1) Near-surface deposits of distinctly yellowish brown, silty, and fine-grained sand (Unified Soil Classifica- tion System symbol SM); and (2) Brown-colored, massive to crudely stratified, low- cohesion, and variably poorly to well-graded gravelly sand, sandy gravel, sand with silt, and subordinate silty sand (symbols SM, SW-SM, SP-SM and GW-GM). The fine-grained surficial silty sand is only ~3 feet thick in the northeast site corner, almost absent from the northwest corner, but generally more than 20 feet thick over the majority of the site. All four infiltration test bores were entirely within the fine sand unit. The underlying far coarser sediments are typically mixtures of gritty, immature sand and fresh to slightly weathered gravel particles derived from crystalline bedrock sources. A slight tendency to coarsening-downward sequences is apparent in drilling logs. In one site Live Oak Land, LLC December 13, 2021 Project No. 4757-I Page No. 5 Aragón Geotechnical, Inc. boring, probable older deposits marked by some moderately weathered and much weaker clasts were encountered at a depth of about 23½ feet. Geologically the project vicinity is representative of young braided-stream alluvium and sheet flood deposits composing the distal portions of the vast Lytle Creek fan. Sediments originated from a watershed located in the San Gabriel Mountains northeast of the project. However, we interpret the bulk of the near-surface fine-grained sand zones to represent quasi-stabilized wind-blown sediments deposited as low dunes and sand sheets. Farther east, similar deposits are dated as Pleistocene age. The wide variability in fine-sand depths at the Live Oak site supports a conclusion of significant elevation relief of the top of the underlying alluvium. Fine sand everywhere in the region has usually by homoge- nized by native burrowing fauna (bioturbation). No evidence was encountered of cohesive clay layers or cemented/weathered soils judged to be very impermeable within 50 feet of ground surfaces. From a soil science viewpoint, the National Resources Conservation Service classifies shallow soils at the Live Oak project site as Tujunga loamy sand TuB. This soil series is assigned to hydrologic soil group A. Immature soil profiles generally lacking illuvial clay B- horizons are described for the unit. Tujunga soils are typically alluvial and not eolian, however, and the geotechnical findings suggest an erroneous classification by the agency for Live Oak soils except for the northernmost quarter. Delhi fine sand Db is mapped close to the site and is the judged better fit for the majority of site surficial deposits. A second caveat is that soil classifications and hydrologic soil groups are usually limited to materials shallower than 60 inches or so; thus, deeper infiltration improvements do not automatically encounter the same soil classifications mapped according to the NRCS. Groundwater None of AGI’s soil borings encountered groundwater to the maximum explored depth of 51.5 feet. Rarely, soil samples from the deepest site soil borings exhibited some iron oxide staining or limonitic spots that could be evidence for transient or seasonal soil saturation. These instances were judged to be artifacts of material age and not groundwater, however. AGI research also found no evidence for present-day or historical occurrence of rising water such as springs, seeps, or clustered phreatophytic vegetation. Live Oak Land, LLC December 13, 2021 Project No. 4757-I Page No. 6 Aragón Geotechnical, Inc. Checks of State “CASGEM” groundwater monitoring hydrographs for southern Fontana indicate unconfined permanent groundwater is more than 350 feet deep at the site. There are no active municipal extraction wells nearby. Jurisdictional requirements usually mandate a minimum vertical separation between stormwater BMPs and groundwater of at least 10 feet and up to 40 feet (for very permeable soils). In our judgment, there should be no limitations on BMP design or construction due to groundwater. Permeameter Test Results – Prospective Chamber Area The table below summarizes the obtained field test results. Based on the drilling logs, the test results were obtained in massive silty fine eolian sand with minor reworked intervals. Test Location Tested Interval (depth below existing ground surface, feet) Constant-Head Percolation Rate (gal/hr.) Field Test Infiltration Velocity It (in/hr) IN-1 (east) 1.8 - 7.8 17.1 0.26 IN-2 1.8 - 7.8 49.0 0.73 IN-3 1.9 - 7.9 22.5 0.34 IN-4 (west) 2.0 - 8.0 59.7 0.89 Measured percolation rates were converted to 1-D infiltration velocities by the USBR 7300- 89 formula: The calculated result Ks is close to but not exactly the same as an infiltration test velocity It calculated from a ring infiltrometer test. The minor difference is ignored for stormwater BMP design. Live Oak Land, LLC December 13, 2021 Project No. 4757-I Page No. 7 Aragón Geotechnical, Inc. The calculated velocities are only marginally adequate for infiltration BMPs. Similar low take rates have been obtained by AGI in correlative fine sand deposits elsewhere in Fontana. We think the Live Oak results correctly characterize infiltration potential essentially anywhere within the mapped “Qoe” geological unit shown on Plate No. 1. Results variability is within a range of values expected for dune sands that have some zones of alluvial reworking with introduction of some coarser-grained and more-permeable lenses. Conclusions, Recommendations, and Advice The SAR Water Quality Management Plan explicitly requires any infiltration-based BMP to be clear of water in 72 hours or less after the design storm event. Mathematically, for typical volume-based treatment control BMP designs, this requires field infiltration velocities It of roughly 1.6 inches per hour or faster. Site test data do not clear this hurdle. For subterranean chamber arrays in the “Qoe” geological unit on Plate No. 1, we recommend adoption of the average of the 4 test results, or KM = 0.56 in/hr., before applicable safety factors. We hypothesize that much better infiltration performance is possible in the northern end of the project area. This is the topographically “high” side of the site, though. If site design can accommodate a primary or auxiliary chamber array in the area shown under map unit “Qyf” on Plate No. 1, then we think it could be technically feasible to dispose of a larger water volume than at the south end. A second set of tests, ideally with a known infiltration bottom elevation, would be recommended if this possibility is considered for final design. Per the County’s Technical Guidance Document, field test velocities must be reduced by a factor of safety when calculating the design infiltration velocity KDESIGN for an infiltration- type BMP. The reduced design velocity adds conservatism for test variability, construction practices, introduction of sediments, and degradation from less-than-ideal BMP maintenance. A worksheet approach that considers both natural site characteristics and project design variables is used to derive a combined safety factor. Relevant criteria for assigning factor values for the 8 total factors influencing the final FS are explained in Section VII.4 of Appendix VII of the document. We have re-created the worksheet tables and placed our recommended values in the appropriate slots. Some values must be assigned by the civil engineer before a design infiltration velocity KDESIGN can be calculated. Live Oak Land, LLC December 13, 2021 Project No. 4757-I Page No. 8 Aragón Geotechnical, Inc. Worksheet for Subterranean Chamber Design Infiltration Velocity Factor Category Factor Description Assigned Weight (w) Factor Value (v) Product (p) p = w x v A Suitability Assessment Soil assessment methods 0.25 1 0.25 Predominant soil texture 0.25 2 0.50 Site soil variability 0.25 2 0.50 Depth to GW / limiting layer 0.25 1 0.25 Suitability Assessment Safety Factor, SA = Σp 1.50 B Design Tributary area size 0.25 TBD Pretreatment / sediment loads 0.25 TBD Redundancy 0.25 TBD Compaction during construction 0.25 1 0.25 Design Safety Factor, SB = Σp TBD Combined Safety Factor, STOT = SA x SB Measured Infiltration Velocity, in/hr, KM (corrected for test-specific bias) 0.56 Design Infiltration Velocity, in/hr, KDESIGN = KM ÷ STOT Note: Modified from Worksheet H, Appendix VII, with formula correction made to properly derive KDESIGN. We think shallow-depth BMPs such as bioswales, biofiltration trenches, and small basins will perform poorly on the site. Evidence is that the upper 2 to 3 feet of site soils are compacted due to historical uses such as heavy truck parking. Nonetheless, amended soil zones bottomed more than 3 feet below grade in unit “Qoe” may have infiltration potential similar to that measured in deeper boreholes. AGI recommends field observations and (if necessary) confirmation tests of absorption potential in any basin or subterranean chamber bottom by the geotechnical engineer of record before placement of biofiltration soil medium or chamber units. Infiltration test velocities were obtained in carefully prepared test bores as free as practicable of surface sealing and boundary-zone compaction. Field performance of any designed LID improvement could be markedly lower than AGI’s achieved results if precautions are not maintained during construction. It will be imperative to follow industry best practices for minimizing soil bottom compaction. Excavations should be made with backhoes or excavators working from beside open cuts. Construction specifications should explicitly state that heavy equipment is prohibited from rolling or tracking any excavation Live Oak Land, LLC December 13, 2021 Project No. 4757-I Page No. 9 Aragón Geotechnical, Inc. bottoms. Although scarifying or deep ripping may be able to partially restore infiltration capability, this action also breaks down permeability-enhancing natural porosity that is essentially unrecoverable. Preliminary recommended geotechnical “removals” for correction of loose and compress- ible soils in the structural pad will locally exceed 7 feet deep. We are anticipating removal plus foundation overexcavation depths approaching this value along the southern side of the building. Removal limits must not encroach into infiltration BMP outlines. Some care would be needed by the grading contractor to minimize encroachment risks. Staking of BMP locations is suggested in advance of mass grading. Lastly, AGI concludes from test and exploration findings that any reasonable site BMP locations should neither cause structural concerns, nor result in significantly increased risks from slope instability, liquefaction, or settlement. Ephemeral basin stormwater inputs and increasing rather than decreasing permeability with depth will in our opinion eliminate chances for permanent mounding or perched-water horizons. Investigation Limitations The findings in this report may require modification as a result of later field observations. Our opinions have been based on the results of limited testing within the selected areas combined with extrapolations of soil conditions between or away from the test sites. The nature and extent of variations beyond the test locations may not become evident until construction. Additional testing is recommended if proposed infiltration BMPs are of types requiring different test protocols (e.g., drywells), or are sited distant from the reported permeameter holes, or would be situated in a differing geological unit. Unfavorable conditions observed during construction or inadvertent contractor compaction may prompt recommendations from this office for verification tests before completing the stormwater treatment control BMPs. Aragón Geotechnical, Inc. APPENDIX Live Oak Land, LLC December 13, 2021 Project No. 4757-I Page No. A-1 Aragón Geotechnical, Inc. A P P E N D I X MAP EXHIBIT & SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION LOGS The Geotechnical Map exhibit (Plate No. 1, foldout) was prepared based upon information supplied by the client, or others, along with Aragón Geotechnical's field measurements and observations. Field exploration and infiltration test locations illustrated on the exhibit were derived from taped or pace measurements of distance to existing improvements, and should be considered approximate. The Field Boring Logs for the 3 most relevant geotechnical soil borings for an assumed south-side chamber array, B-7, B-8, and B-9 are reproduced on the following pages. Drilling logs schematically depict and describe the subsurface (soil and groundwater) conditions encountered at the specific exploration locations on the dates that the explorations were performed. Unit descriptions reflect predominant soil types; actual variability may be much greater. Unit boundaries may be approximate or gradational. Text information often incorporates the field investigator’s interpretations of geologic history, origin, diagenesis, and unit identifiers such as formation name or time-stratigraphic group. Additionally, soil conditions between recovered samples are based in part on judgment. Therefore, the log contains both factual and interpretive information. Subsurface conditions may differ between other exploration locations and within areas of the site that were not explored. The subsurface conditions may also change at any exploration location over the passage of time. The combined investigation scope and field operations were conducted in general accordance with the procedures recommended by the American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) standard D 420-98 entitled "Site Characterization for Engineering Design and Construction Purposes" and/or other relevant specifications. Soil samples were preserved and transported to AGI’s Riverside laboratory in general accordance with the procedures recommended by ASTM standard D 4220 entitled "Standard Practices for Preserving and Transporting Soil Samples". Brief descriptions of the sampling and testing procedures are presented below: Ring-Lined Barrel Sampling – ASTM D 3550-01 In this procedure, a thick-walled “California-modified” barrel sampler constructed to receive thin-wall liners (usually a stack of 1-inch-high brass rings) is used to collect “relatively undisturbed” soil samples for classification and laboratory tests. Samples were attempted at selected depths in all geotechnical hollow-stem auger borings. The drilling rig was equipped with a 140-pound mechanically actuated automatic driving hammer operated to fall 30 inches, acting on rods. A 12-inch-long sample barrel fitted with 2.50-inch-diameter rings and tubes plus a waste barrel extension was subsequently driven a distance of 18 inches or to practical refusal (considered to be 50 blows for 6 inches). The raw blow counts for each 6-inch increment of penetration (or fraction thereof) were recorded and are shown on the Field Boring Logs. An asterisk (*) marks refusal within the initial 6-inch seating interval. The hammer weight of 140 pounds and fall of 30 inches allow rough Live Oak Land, LLC December 13, 2021 Project No. 4757-I Page No. A-2 Aragón Geotechnical, Inc. correlations to be made (via conversion factors that normally range from 0.60 to 0.65 in Southern California practice) to uncorrected Standard Penetration Test N-values, and their correlative descriptions of consistency or relative density. The relatively undisturbed ring samples fit directly into laboratory test instruments without additional handling and disturbance. Standard Penetration Tests – ASTM D 1586-11 In each drill hole, Standard Penetration Tests were performed to recover closely spaced but disturbed samples suitable for classification and stratigraphic interpretations, and to screen the site for shallow groundwater. A split-barrel sampler with a 2.0-inch outside diameter is driven by successive blows of a 140-pound hammer with a vertical fall of 30 inches, for a distance of 18 inches at the desired depth. The drill rig used for this investigation was equipped with an automatic trip hammer acting on drilling rods. The total number of blows required to drive the sampler the last 12 inches of the 18-inch sample interval is defined as the Standard Penetration Resistance, or “N-value”. Penetration resistance counts for each 6-inch interval and the raw, uncorrected N-value for each test are shown on the Field Boring Logs. Drive efficiencies for automatic hammers are higher than older rope-and-cathead systems, which have mostly disappeared from practice. Where practical refusal was encountered within a 6-inch interval, defined as penetration resistance 50 blows per 6 inches, the raw blow count was recorded for the noted fractional interval; an asterisk (*) marks refusal within the initial 6-inch seating interval. N-values are undefined for drives of less than 18 inches, but would normally be greater than 50. The N-value represents an index of the relative density for granular soils or comparative consistency for cohesive soils. Bulk Sample A relatively large volume of soil is collected with a shovel or trowel. The sample is transported to the materials laboratory in a sealed plastic bag or bucket. Classification of Samples Bulk drill cuttings and discrete soil samples were visually-manually classified, based on texture and plasticity, utilizing the procedures outlined in the ASTM D 2487-93 standard. The assignment of a group name to each of the collected samples was performed according to the Unified Soil Classification System (ASTM D 2488-93). Where reported, plasticity comments on field logs refer to soil behavior at field moisture content unless noted otherwise. The classifications are reported on the Field Boring Logs. 0 5 10 15 (MSL DATUM)BULKFIELD LOG OF BORING B -(Blows/ft.)Page A - Comments:COMPLETIONCONTENT (%)Date(s) Drilled:DENSITY (pcf)DEPTH (ft.)Drilled By: Drilling Method:DRIVEDRYELEVATIONGEOTECHNICAL DESCRIPTION GRAPHIC LOGHammer Type: Hammer Weight/Drop: Hole Diameter: INTERVALS Location: Logged By:WATERorOTHER TESTSProject: Rig Make/Model: SAMPLE Sheet 1 of Surface Elevation: Total Depth:TYPE, "N"USCSWELLAGI Project No. 995 990 985 Aggregate Base Material: 4" of CAB, Corona source quarry. Silty Sand: Yellowish brown; loose; moist; fine-grained sand with traces of native gravel inupper 3 feet; massive and featureless. [Eoliandeposits] 7 SM SM SM SM SM Silty sand, as above, disturbed texture. Silty sand, massive, not visibly porous, estimated 40% silt. Silty sand, grades to light brown and with traces of medium + coarse sand, low 20% fines. Interpreted partly fluvial. Silty sand, yellowish brown, fine-grained eolian sediment with zero gravel, rare fine carbonate threads. RING 6259 RING 667 RING 779 RING 11912 114.2 112.2 105.5 105.3 6.3 6.1 3.8 5.8 BULK: MAX, EI, SHEAR, SULFATE CHLORIDE, pH, RESISTIVITY CONSOL CONSOL 34757-SFI 10/28/21 M. Doerschlag 51.5 Ft. Automatic trip 140 Lb./30 In. ± 996 Ft. AMSL per Earth DEM GP Drilling Mobile B-61 Hollow-Stem Auger 8 In. Located at SEC of proposed building. 3 SANTA ANA AVE. AT LIVE OAK AVE. FONTANA, SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY, CA Continued on next sheet. (34) (13) (16) (21) 15 20 25 30 35 (MSL DATUM)BULKFIELD LOG OF BORING B -(Blows/ft.)Page A -COMPLETIONCONTENT (%)DENSITY (pcf)DEPTH (ft.)DRIVEDRYELEVATIONGEOTECHNICAL DESCRIPTION GRAPHIC LOGINTERVALS Location:WATERorOTHER TESTSProject: SAMPLE Sheet 2 of TYPE, "N"USCSWELLAGI Project No. 980 975 970 965 Silty Sand: Yellowish brown; medium dense;moist; fine-grained sand with overall ~20%fines; massive and featureless. [Eoliandeposits, partly reworked] Gravelly Sand: Brown; dense; slightly moist;well-graded fine to coarse sand and ~40%gravel but still around 15% fines, clasts to 1"diameter are sometimes moderately weathered. Not hard drilling. [Older alluvium] Sandy Gravel: Brown; dense; slightly moist.Heavy rocks/cobbles near top, but cuttable.Averages under 10% fines, and is faintlystratified 6"-8" thick. Some clasts (especially schist) are moderately weathered. [Older alluvium] 7 SM SM SM GW-GM GW-GM Silty sand, as above, sample hassubordinate light brown (fluvial?) beds, notvisibly porous. Sandy gravel, faintly bedded 6"-8" thick, tightgrain packing. SPT579 SPT688 SPT122122 SPT131924 44757-SFI 3 SANTA ANA AVE. AT LIVE OAK AVE. FONTANA, SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY, CA Continued on next sheet. N=16 N=16 N=43 N=43 35 40 45 50 (MSL DATUM)BULKFIELD LOG OF BORING B -(Blows/ft.)Page A -COMPLETIONCONTENT (%)DENSITY (pcf)DEPTH (ft.)DRIVEDRYELEVATIONGEOTECHNICAL DESCRIPTION GRAPHIC LOGINTERVALS Location:WATERorOTHER TESTSProject: SAMPLE Sheet 3 of TYPE, "N"USCSWELLAGI Project No. 960 955 950 945 Silty Sand: Layered sequence of yellowishbrown eolian sand and fine to coarse grainedfluvial sandy gravel; dense; slightly moist; bedsseem to range 6"-12+" thick. Light rig chatter and easily drilled. [Older alluvium] Sandy Gravel: Brown; medium dense; slightlymoist. Some cobbles possible in upper twofeet. Clasts often weathered. [Older alluvium] 7 SM,GW-GM SM,GW-GM ML GW-GM GW-GM, SM Silty sand and gravelly sand, latter under10% fines, origins as noted above. Sample composed entirely of moist and non-plastic sandy silt, dark yellowish brown, stiff,rare thin sandy partings, common fine MnOspots. Sandy gravel, with minor eolian silty fine sand in shoe. SPT81423 SPT231716 SPT6814 SPT171812 54757-SFI 3 SANTA ANA AVE. AT LIVE OAK AVE. FONTANA, SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY, CA N=37 N=33 N=22 N=30 Bottom of boring at 51.5 feet. No groundwater encountered. Boring backfilled with compacted soil cuttings. 0 5 10 15 (MSL DATUM)BULKFIELD LOG OF BORING B -(Blows/ft.)Page A - Comments:COMPLETIONCONTENT (%)Date(s) Drilled:DENSITY (pcf)DEPTH (ft.)Drilled By: Drilling Method:DRIVEDRYELEVATIONGEOTECHNICAL DESCRIPTION GRAPHIC LOGHammer Type: Hammer Weight/Drop: Hole Diameter: INTERVALS Location: Logged By:WATERorOTHER TESTSProject: Rig Make/Model: SAMPLE Sheet 1 of Surface Elevation: Total Depth:TYPE, "N"USCSWELLAGI Project No. 995 990 985 980 Aggregate Base Material: 4" of CAB, Corona source quarry. Silty Sand: Yellowish brown; loose; moist; fine-grained sand with estimated 25-30%;silt;massive and featureless. [Eolian deposits] 8 SM SM SM SM Silty sand, about 30% silt, plus trace of birdseye gravel massive, not visibly porous, lacks pedogenic solum. Silty sand, faint thick layering and trace of rounded gravel to ½" diameter. May be partly reworked (fluvial). Silty sand, becomes brown and light brown, fine grained, zero gravel. Probably fluvial reworked horizon. SPT 244 SPT 368 SPT 477 64757-SFI 10/28/21 M. Doerschlag 21.5 Ft. Automatic trip 140 Lb./30 In. ± 995 Ft. AMSL per Earth DEM GP Drilling Mobile B-61 Hollow-Stem Auger 8 In. Located at south-central end of proposed building; WQMP boring. 2 SANTA ANA AVE. AT LIVE OAK AVE. FONTANA, SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY, CA Continued on next sheet. N=8 N=14 N=14 15 20 (MSL DATUM)BULKFIELD LOG OF BORING B -(Blows/ft.)Page A -COMPLETIONCONTENT (%)DENSITY (pcf)DEPTH (ft.)DRIVEDRYELEVATIONGEOTECHNICAL DESCRIPTION GRAPHIC LOGINTERVALS Location:WATERorOTHER TESTSProject: SAMPLE Sheet 2 of TYPE, "N"USCSWELLAGI Project No. 980 975 Silty Sand: Yellowish brown; loose to mediumdense; moist; fine-grained sand with ~40%fines at 15 feet. Few fine pores and faint fineFeO mottles. Massive and otherwise featureless. [Eolian deposits] 8 SM SM Silty sand, as above, about 30% silt, not visibly porous. SPT344 SPT458 74757-SFI 2 SANTA ANA AVE. AT LIVE OAK AVE. FONTANA, SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY, CA N=8 N=13 Bottom of boring at 21.5 feet. No groundwater encountered. Boring backfilled with compacted soil cuttings. 0 5 10 15 (MSL DATUM)BULKFIELD LOG OF BORING B -(Blows/ft.)Page A - Comments:COMPLETIONCONTENT (%)Date(s) Drilled:DENSITY (pcf)DEPTH (ft.)Drilled By: Drilling Method:DRIVEDRYELEVATIONGEOTECHNICAL DESCRIPTION GRAPHIC LOGHammer Type: Hammer Weight/Drop: Hole Diameter: INTERVALS Location: Logged By:WATERorOTHER TESTSProject: Rig Make/Model: SAMPLE Sheet 1 of Surface Elevation: Total Depth:TYPE, "N"USCSWELLAGI Project No. 995 990 985 980 Aggregate Base Material: 3" of CAB, Corona source quarry. Gravelly Sand with Silt: Yellowish brown; loose to medium dense; moist; fine-grainedsand with up to 25% local gravel; massive andfeatureless. [Fill] Silty Sand: Yellowish brown; loose; moist; fine- to very fine-grained sand with estimated 35-40% silt. Not visibly porous at 4 feet. 9 SM SM SM SM SM Silty sand, as above. Silty sand, becomes medium dense, slightly darker color, and less silt (~25%). Silty sand, grading to brown color, fine grained, zero gravel and around 35% fines. Possible fluvial reworked horizon. RING 979 RING 577 RING 7914 RING 7811 107.7 103.3 109.2 93.3 10.2 5.9 4.6 5.3 CONSOL CONSOL 84757-SFI 10/29/21 M. Doerschlag 26.5 Ft. Automatic trip 140 Lb./30 In. ± 995 Ft. AMSL per Earth DEM GP Drilling Mobile B-61 Hollow-Stem Auger 8 In. Located at SWC of proposed building. 2 SANTA ANA AVE. AT LIVE OAK AVE. FONTANA, SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY, CA Continued on next sheet. (16) (14) (23) (19) 15 20 25 (MSL DATUM)BULKFIELD LOG OF BORING B -(Blows/ft.)Page A -COMPLETIONCONTENT (%)DENSITY (pcf)DEPTH (ft.)DRIVEDRYELEVATIONGEOTECHNICAL DESCRIPTION GRAPHIC LOGINTERVALS Location:WATERorOTHER TESTSProject: SAMPLE Sheet 2 of TYPE, "N"USCSWELLAGI Project No. 980 975 970 Silty Sand: Yellowish brown; medium dense;moist; fine to very fine-grained sand with ~30%fines at 15 feet. Massive and not visiblyporous. [Eolian deposits] Sandy Gravel: Brown; dense; moist;composed mostly of fine to mediumsubrounded gravel to 1" diameter and about35% sand. Some clasts moderately weathered. Interbedded with minor silty sand (thin eolian sheets). [Older alluvium] 9 SM ML GP-GM GP-GM, SM Sandy silt, firm, wet, distinct mottles. Sharp contact. Sandy gravel, as above but includes strong brown fine-grained 6" silty sand bed. SPT557 SPT344 SPT51224 94757-SFI 2 SANTA ANA AVE. AT LIVE OAK AVE. FONTANA, SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY, CA N=14 N=8 N=36 Bottom of boring at 26.5 feet. No groundwater encountered, local seepage zone at 21 feet. Boring backfilled with compacted soil cuttings. USBR 7300-89 Vadose Zone Well Permeameter Data Sheet Project: Live Oak Ave. at Santa Ana Ave. Project Test Bore No. IN-1 Project No. 4757-SF Test Date: 11/8/21 Site Location: City of Fontana Tested By: J. Burling Boring Bottom Depth (bgs): 7.8 ft. Water Temp: n/a Soil Temp: n/a Boring Diameter: 8 in. USCS Soil Class.: Silty fine sand (SM) Groundwater Depth (bgs): >50 ft. % Pass #200: Estimated 30-35% Notes: Muni water source close to 20C (68F), viscosity ratio taken as 1.0 Time Time Interval (min.) Total Elapsed Time (min.) Initial Meter Reading (gal) Final Meter Reading (gal) Total Discharge Volume (gal) Wetted Length (in.) Flow Rate Q (gal/hr) 1227 20 20 734.0 742.6 8.6 72 25.81247 1247 20 40 742.6 749.3 6.7 72 20.11307 1307 20 60 749.3 755.3 6.0 72 18.01327 1327 20 80 755.3 761.0 5.7 72 17.11347 1347 20 100 761.0 766.7 5.7 72 17.11407 1407 20 120 766.7 772.4 5.7 72 17.11427 USBR 7300-89 Vadose Zone Well Permeameter Data Sheet Project: Live Oak Ave. at Santa Ana Ave. Project Test Bore No. IN-2 Project No. 4757-SF Test Date: 11/9/21 Site Location: City of Fontana Tested By: J. Burling Boring Bottom Depth (bgs): 7.8 ft. Water Temp: n/a Soil Temp: n/a Boring Diameter: 8 in. USCS Soil Class.: Silty fine sand (SM), tr. gravel Groundwater Depth (bgs): >50 ft. % Pass #200: Estimated 20-25% Notes: Muni water source close to 20C (68F), viscosity ratio taken as 1.0 Time Time Interval (min.) Total Elapsed Time (min.) Initial Meter Reading (gal) Final Meter Reading (gal) Total Discharge Volume (gal) Wetted Length (in.) Flow Rate Q (gal/hr) 1023 20 20 791.0 813.2 22.2 72 66.61043 1043 20 40 813.2 832.2 19.0 72 57.01103 1103 20 60 832.2 850.1 17.9 72 53.71123 1123 20 80 850.1 867.9 17.8 72 53.41143 1143 20 100 867.4 885.0 17.1 72 51.31203 1203 20 120 885.0 902.0 17.0 72 49.01223 USBR 7300-89 Vadose Zone Well Permeameter Data Sheet Project: Live Oak Ave. at Santa Ana Ave. Project Test Bore No. IN-3 Project No. 4757-SF Test Date: 11/10/21 Site Location: City of Fontana Tested By: J. Burling Boring Bottom Depth (bgs): 7.9 ft. Water Temp: n/a Soil Temp: n/a Boring Diameter: 8 in. USCS Soil Class.: Silty fine sand (SM) Groundwater Depth (bgs): >50 ft. % Pass #200: Estimated 25% Notes: Muni water source close to 20C (68F), viscosity ratio taken as 1.0 Time Time Interval (min.) Total Elapsed Time (min.) Initial Meter Reading (gal) Final Meter Reading (gal) Total Discharge Volume (gal) Wetted Length (in.) Flow Rate Q (gal/hr) 0942 20 20 95.0 104.5 9.5 72 28.51002 1002 20 40 104.5 113.0 8.5 72 25.51022 1022 20 60 113.0 121.5 8.5 72 25.51042 1042 20 80 121.5 129.1 7.6 72 22.81102 1102 20 100 129.1 136.9 7.8 72 23.41122 1122 20 120 136.9 144.4 7.5 72 22.51142 USBR 7300-89 Vadose Zone Well Permeameter Data Sheet Project: Live Oak Ave. at Santa Ana Ave. Project Test Bore No. IN-4 Project No. 4757-SF Test Date: 11/9/21 Site Location: City of Fontana Tested By: J. Burling Boring Bottom Depth (bgs): 8.0 ft. Water Temp: n/a Soil Temp: n/a Boring Diameter: 8 in. USCS Soil Class.: Silty fine sand (SM) Groundwater Depth (bgs): >50 ft. % Pass #200: Estimated 20% Notes: Muni water source close to 20C (68F), viscosity ratio taken as 1.0 Time Time Interval (min.) Total Elapsed Time (min.) Initial Meter Reading (gal) Final Meter Reading (gal) Total Discharge Volume (gal) Wetted Length (in.) Flow Rate Q (gal/hr) 1255 20 20 917.7 947.2 29.5 72 88.51315 1315 20 40 947.2 971.5 24.3 72 72.51335 1335 20 60 971.5 993.9 22.4 72 67.21355 1355 20 80 993.9 1015.4 21.5 72 64.51415 1415 20 100 1015.4 1035.9 20.5 72 61.51435 1435 20 120 1035.9 1055.9 20.0 72 60.01455 1455 20 140 1055.9 1078.8 19.9 72 59.71515 GEOTECHNICAL MAP LIVE OAK AVE. AT SANTA ANA AVE. INDUSTRIAL PROJECT, FONTANA, CA. PROJECT NO. 4757-SFI DATE: 12/16/21 PLATE NO. 1 GEOTECHNICAL LEGEND B-1 B-7 B-8 B-9 B-6 B-5 B-4 B-2 IN-4 IN-3 IN-2 IN-1 B-11 Approximate location of exploratory boring Approximate location of permeameter test Eolian silty fine sand, dune and channel-fill deposits. Younger fan alluvium IN-4 B-10 B-11 B-3 Qyf Qyf Qe Qe QeN SCALE 0'80'160'320' Consultants in the Earth & Material Sciences 16801 Van Buren Blvd., Bldg. B Riverside, CA 92504 Tel: 951.776.0345 Fax: 951.776.0395 www.aragongeo.com December 30, 2021 Project No. 4757-I2 Live Oak Land, LLC c/o WPT Capital Advisors, LLC 150 South 5th Street, Suite 2675 Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402 Attention: Mr. Jonah Chodosh Subject: Supplemental Infiltration Test Results & BMP Recommendations Live Oak Avenue at Santa Ana Avenue Industrial Project City of Fontana, San Bernardino County, California. Gentlemen: Aragón Geotechnical Inc. (AGI) has completed additional site studies for infiltration BMPs at the listed industrial site. The following brief narrative discusses subsurface findings and revised design recommendations for what we interpret to be the most-favorable BMP locations. This report piggybacks on AGI’s more-comprehensive infiltration feasibility report dated December 13, 2021. The latter should be referenced for discussions of site soil units, groundwater, and construction guidelines. The two reports should be used and submitted for agency review in tandem. Four additional borehole infiltration tests were performed on December 28, 2021, at engineer-identified preferred locations for one or more subterranean storage chamber arrays. One goal of the supplemental testing was to characterize absorption capability of much coarser-grained and much less-silty alluvium located below and lateral to a thick deposit of very fine-grained silty sand. Both material types were selectively sampled from depths near prospective array bottoms and submitted for laboratory gradation analyses. A second goal was to more accurately pin down the depths to permeable alluvium. An updated version of the conceptual plan prepared for our primary WQMP feasibility study shows all geotechnical and infiltration-related soil borings completed to date for the Live Oak site (Plate No. 1 at the back of this report). The added tests are labeled IN-5 to IN-8. Live Oak Land, LLC December 30, 2021 Project No. 4757-I2 Page No. 2 Aragón Geotechnical, Inc. Subsurface Findings & Permeability Testing Test sites IN-5 and IN-6 were drilled with a truck-mounted hollow-stem auger rig to terminal depths of approximately 25 feet. Previous work had suggested that the fine wind- deposited sands in the area were around 23 feet thick. Test sites IN-7 and IN-8 were located in an area of mapped gravelly alluvium, and had shorter terminal depths of about 15 feet. Test well construction mirrored that used for IN-1 through IN-4 as described in the primary report. Holes were marginally larger in diameter (9 inches) versus first-round tests. Soil borings, infiltration testing, and derivations of infiltration velocities were performed or directly supervised by the undersigned engineering geologist. Site IN-5 proved to have even deeper fine-grained deposits than predicted, with probable gravelly alluvium detected by drilling rig chatter just inches shy of the 25-foot total depth. A drive sample from ±24 feet deep was composed of massive, uncemented but stiff sandy silt with distinct iron oxide mottles (below). Site IN-6 seemed to be primarily alluvial low-fines sand and gravelly sand starting only 4 feet below grade. Sandy gravel was interpreted at 23 feet. Attempted drive sampling from this depth resulted in no recovery, probably due to a rock. Site IN-7 was informally logged as approximately 3½ feet of fine sand over a coarsening- downward sequence of silty sand to 7 feet followed by well-graded gravelly sand. A drive sample from ±14 feet had a measured fines proportion of 5.7 percent. Live Oak Land, LLC December 30, 2021 Project No. 4757-I2 Page No. 3 Aragón Geotechnical, Inc. Site IN-8 appeared to lack any fine-grained wind-laid sand. Silty sand alluvium (0-4 feet) capped a brief rocky zone from 4-7 feet before penetrating very uniform and remarkably clean well-graded gravelly sand from 7 feet to the bottom at 15 feet. Recovered soils from roughly 14 feet had only 3.6 percent silt according to a sieve analysis and no detectible clay in visual-manual tests. As done previously, AGI’s infiltration determinations were based on the constant-head U.S. Bureau of Reclamation Well Permeameter Method (USBR Procedure 7300-89). Measured water takes in units of vol/time are converted by formula into an equivalent infiltration test velocity in units of length/time. Six-foot heads were specified. Constant head tests are superior in high-permeability scenarios because far larger volumes of water can be introduced into the soil (hundreds to thousands of gallons). Lower-permeability zones in layered sequences can be interpreted. Precision and repeatability are also better than other deep borehole methods. Permeameter Test Results The table below summarizes field test results from all 8 infiltration test sites. It is very easy to conclude that the silty fine eolian sand and localized sandy silt tested by IN-1 through IN-5 are generally poor candidates for infiltration BMPs. Test Location Tested Interval (depth below existing ground surface, feet) Constant-Head Percolation Rate (gal/hr.) Field Test Infiltration Velocity It (in/hr) IN-1 1.8 - 7.8 17.1 0.26 IN-2 1.8 - 7.8 49.0 0.73 IN-3 1.9 - 7.9 22.5 0.34 IN-4 2.0 - 8.0 59.7 0.89 IN-5 19.2 - 25.2 18.9 0.26 IN-6 18.7 - 24.7 260.1 3.52 IN-7 9.1 - 15.1 245.4 3.32 IN-8 9.0 - 15.0 267.3 3.62 Live Oak Land, LLC December 30, 2021 Project No. 4757-I2 Page No. 4 Aragón Geotechnical, Inc. Conclusions, Recommendations, and Advice The calculated velocities for IN-6 through IN-8 indicate that infiltration BMPs are feasible in specific areas. For subterranean chamber arrays bottomed in the “Qyf” geological unit we recommend adoption of the average of the 3 fastest test results, or KM = 3.5 in/hr., before applicable safety factors. Plate No. 1 shows recommended areas and estimated minimum infiltration system depths (bottom of gravel) referenced to existing grades. The Qyf/Qe geologic contact is an important dividing line. Systems north of this line need only be 10 feet deep. Systems south of the contact line should be bottomed at 15 feet or greater. In either case, unexpected findings of silty fine sand at the target bottom elevation will prompt recommended deepening of the excavation until gravelly alluvium is exposed. Per the County’s Technical Guidance Document, field test velocities must be reduced by a factor of safety when calculating the design infiltration velocity KDESIGN for an infiltration- type BMP. We have reviewed and modified previously recommended suitability assessment factors considering new exploration and test data. The worksheet table with our recommended values in the appropriate slots is shown below. Some values must be assigned by the civil engineer before a design infiltration velocity KDESIGN can be calculated. Worksheet for Subterranean Chamber Design Infiltration Velocity Factor Category Factor Description Assigned Weight (w) Factor Value (v) Product (p) p = w x v A Suitability Assessment Soil assessment methods 0.25 1 0.25 Predominant soil texture 0.25 1 0.25 Site soil variability 0.25 1 0.25 Depth to GW / limiting layer 0.25 1 0.25 Suitability Assessment Safety Factor, SA = Σp 1.00 B Design Tributary area size 0.25 TBD Pretreatment / sediment loads 0.25 TBD Redundancy 0.25 TBD Compaction during construction 0.25 1 0.25 Design Safety Factor, SB = Σp TBD Combined Safety Factor, STOT = SA x SB Measured Infiltration Velocity, in/hr, KM (corrected for test-specific bias) 3.5 Design Infiltration Velocity, in/hr, KDESIGN = KM ÷ STOT Live Oak Land, LLC December 30, 2021 Project No. 4757-I2 Page No. 5 Aragón Geotechnical, Inc. AGI recommends field observations and (if necessary) confirmation tests of absorption potential in any basin or subterranean chamber bottom by the geotechnical engineer of record before placement of biofiltration soil medium or chamber units. Other construction recommendations presented in the main WQMP feasibility report remain valid. The tested revised BMP sites should not cause structural concerns or increase hazard risks from slope instability, liquefaction, or settlement. Investigation Limitations The findings in this report may require modification as a result of later field observations. Our opinions have been based on the results of limited testing within the selected areas combined with extrapolations of soil conditions between or away from the test sites. The nature and extent of variations beyond the test locations may not become evident until construction. Additional testing is recommended if proposed infiltration BMPs are of types requiring different test protocols (e.g., drywells), or are sited distant from the reported permeameter holes, or would be situated in a differing geological unit. Unfavorable conditions observed during construction or inadvertent contractor compaction may prompt recommendations from this office for verification tests before completing the stormwater treatment control BMPs. Aragón Geotechnical, Inc. APPENDIX Coarse Fine Coarse Medium Fine Sand %:Fines %: Hydrometer Analysis Sample Description:Sandy Silt (ML), non-plastic 0.4 37.7 61.9 GRAVEL SAND SILT or CLAY 12/27/2021 23 ARAGÓN GEOTECHNICAL, INC. 16801 Van Buren Blvd., Bldg. B Riverside, California 92504 951-776-0345 Grain Size Distribution Curve Project Name:Tested by:WPT Live Oak Miguel Robles Sample Location: Project Number:Date Tested: Depth (ft): 4757-I2 IN-5 Job No.: Log No.: Mark Doerschlag 21-Dec-21 - 21-2067 Gravel %: Sampled by: Date Sampled: 0.0 10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0 50.0 60.0 70.0 80.0 90.0 100.0 0.0010.010.1110100 PERCENT FINER BY WEIGHTGRAIN SIZE (mm) # 2003"# 41"# 30 Coarse Fine Coarse Medium Fine Sand %:Fines %: Hydrometer Analysis Sample Description:Gravelly Sand with Silt (SW-SM) 16.8 77.5 5.7 GRAVEL SAND SILT or CLAY 12/27/2021 13 ARAGÓN GEOTECHNICAL, INC. 16801 Van Buren Blvd., Bldg. B Riverside, California 92504 951-776-0345 Grain Size Distribution Curve Project Name:Tested by:WPT Live Oak Miguel Robles Sample Location: Project Number:Date Tested: Depth (ft): 4757-I2 IN-7 Job No.: Log No.: Mark Doerschlag 21-Dec-21 - 21-2068 Gravel %: Sampled by: Date Sampled: 0.0 10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0 50.0 60.0 70.0 80.0 90.0 100.0 0.0010.010.1110100 PERCENT FINER BY WEIGHTGRAIN SIZE (mm) # 2003"# 41"# 30 Coarse Fine Coarse Medium Fine Sand %:Fines %:Gravel %: Sampled by: Date Sampled: Job No.: Log No.: Mark Doerschlag 21-Dec-21 - 21-2069 12/27/2021 13 ARAGÓN GEOTECHNICAL, INC. 16801 Van Buren Blvd., Bldg. B Riverside, California 92504 951-776-0345 Grain Size Distribution Curve Project Name:Tested by:WPT Live Oak Miguel Robles Sample Location: Project Number:Date Tested: Depth (ft): 4757-I2 IN-8 GRAVEL SAND SILT or CLAY Hydrometer Analysis Sample Description:Gravelly Sand (SW) 17.4 79.0 3.6 0.0 10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0 50.0 60.0 70.0 80.0 90.0 100.0 0.0010.010.1110100 PERCENT FINER BY WEIGHTGRAIN SIZE (mm) # 2003"# 41"# 30 USBR 7300-89 Vadose Zone Well Permeameter Data Sheet Project: Live Oak Ave. at Santa Ana Ave. Project Test Bore No. IN-5 Project No. 4757-I2 Test Date: 12/28/21 Site Location: City of Fontana Tested By: K. Lauritzen Boring Bottom Depth (bgs): 25' 2' Water Temp: n/a Soil Temp: n/a Boring Diameter: 10 in. USCS Soil Class.: Silty fine sand (SM) Groundwater Depth (bgs): >300 ft. % Pass #200: xx.x per sieve analysis Notes: Muni water source close to 20C (68F), viscosity ratio taken as 1.0 Time Time Interval (min.) Total Elapsed Time (min.) Initial Meter Reading (gal) Final Meter Reading (gal) Total Discharge Volume (gal) Wetted Length (in.) Flow Rate Q (gal/hr) 0949 20.0 20 128.7 135.7 7.0 72 21.01009 1009 20.0 40 135.7 142.0 6.3 72 18.91029 1029 20.0 60 142.7 148.2 6.2 72 18.61049 1049 20.0 80 148.2 154.5 6.3 72 18.91109 1109 20.0 100 154.5 160.8 6.3 72 18.91129 1129 20.0 120 160.8 167.1 6.3 72 18.91149 USBR 7300-89 Vadose Zone Well Permeameter Data Sheet Project: Live Oak Ave. at Santa Ana Ave. Project Test Bore No. IN-6 Project No. 4757-I2 Test Date: 12/28/21 Site Location: City of Fontana Tested By: M. Doerschlag Boring Bottom Depth (bgs): 24' 8" Water Temp: n/a Soil Temp: n/a Boring Diameter: 10 in. USCS Soil Class.: Gravelly sand with silt (SP-SM) Groundwater Depth (bgs): >300 ft. % Pass #200: Estimated <8% @ bottom Notes: Muni water source close to 20C (68F), viscosity ratio taken as 1.0 Time Time Interval (min.) Total Elapsed Time (min.) Initial Meter Reading (gal) Final Meter Reading (gal) Total Discharge Volume (gal) Wetted Length (in.) Flow Rate Q (gal/hr) 0940 20.0 20 645.0 755.7 110.7 72 332.11000 1000 20.0 40 755.7 867.7 112.0 72 336.01020 1020 20.0 60 867.7 959.8 92.1 72 278.31040 1040 20.0 80 959.8 1051.3 91.5 72 274.51100 1100 20.0 100 1051.3 1139.2 87.9 72 263.71120 1120 20.0 120 1139.2 1225.9 86.7 72 260.11140 USBR 7300-89 Vadose Zone Well Permeameter Data Sheet Project: Live Oak Ave. at Santa Ana Ave. Project Test Bore No. IN-7 Project No. 4757-I2 Test Date: 12/28/21 Site Location: City of Fontana Tested By: K. Lauritzen Boring Bottom Depth (bgs): 15' 1" Water Temp: n/a Soil Temp: n/a Boring Diameter: 10 in. USCS Soil Class.: Gravelly sand with silt (SP-SM) Groundwater Depth (bgs): >300 ft. % Pass #200: x.x per sieve analysis @ bottom Notes: Muni water source close to 20C (68F), viscosity ratio taken as 1.0 Time Time Interval (min.) Total Elapsed Time (min.) Initial Meter Reading (gal) Final Meter Reading (gal) Total Discharge Volume (gal) Wetted Length (in.) Flow Rate Q (gal/hr) 1300 20.0 20 297.0 437.2 140.2 70 420.61320 1320 20.0 40 437.2 547.1 109.9 72 329.71340 1340 20.0 60 547.1 643.0 95.9 72 287.71400 1400 20.0 80 643.0 732.8 89.8 72 269.41420 1420 20.0 100 732.8 821.0 88.2 72 264.61440 1440 20.0 120 821.0 906.9 85.9 72 257.71500 1500 20.0 140 906.9 988.7 81.8 72 245.41520 USBR 7300-89 Vadose Zone Well Permeameter Data Sheet Project: Live Oak Ave. at Santa Ana Ave. Project Test Bore No. IN-8 Project No. 4757-I2 Test Date: 12/28/21 Site Location: City of Fontana Tested By: M. Doerschlag Boring Bottom Depth (bgs): 15' 0" Water Temp: n/a Soil Temp: n/a Boring Diameter: 10 in. USCS Soil Class.: Gravelly sand with silt (SP-SM) Groundwater Depth (bgs): >300 ft. % Pass #200: x.x per sieve analysis @ bottom Notes: Muni water source close to 20C (68F), viscosity ratio taken as 1.0 Time Time Interval (min.) Total Elapsed Time (min.) Initial Meter Reading (gal) Final Meter Reading (gal) Total Discharge Volume (gal) Wetted Length (in.) Flow Rate Q (gal/hr) 1255 20.0 20 1390.0 1547.0 157.0 72 471.01315 1315 20.0 40 1547.0 1665.9 118.9 72 356.71335 1335 20.0 60 1665.9 1770.7 104.8 72 314.41355 1355 20.0 80 1770.7 1870.7 100.0 72 300.01415 1415 20.0 100 1870.7 1966.3 95.6 72 286.81435 1435 20.0 120 1966.3 2058.7 92.4 72 279.21455 1455 20.0 140 2058.7 2147.8 89.1 72 267.31515 GEOTECHNICAL MAP LIVE OAK AVE. AT SANTA ANA AVE. INDUSTRIAL PROJECT, FONTANA, CA. PROJECT NO. 4757-I2 DATE: 12/30/21 PLATE NO. 1 GEOTECHNICAL LEGEND B-1 B-7 B-8 B-9 B-6 B-5 B-4 B-2 IN-4 IN-3 IN-2 IN-1 B-11 Approximate location of exploratory boring Approximate location of permeameter test Eolian silty fine sand, dune and channel-fill deposits. Younger fan alluvium IN-8 B-10 B-11 B-3 Qyf Qyf Qe Qe QeN SCALE 0'80'160'320' IN-5IN-6IN-7 IN-8 Min. BMP depth = 15' bgs Min. BMP depth = 10' bgs Attachment E Rainfall Data (NOAA Atlas 14) & Worksheet H TECHNICAL GUIDANCE DOCUMENT APPENDICES VII-31 May 19, 2011 VII.4.1. Site Suitability Considerations Suitability assessment related considerations include (Table VII.3): Soil assessment methods – the site assessment extent (e.g., number of borings, test pits, etc.) and the measurement method used to estimate the short-term infiltration rate. Predominant soil texture/percent fines – soil texture and the percent of fines can greatly influence the potential for clogging. Site soil variability – site with spatially heterogeneous soils (vertically or horizontally) as determined from site investigations are more difficult to estimate average properties for resulting in a higher level of uncertainty associated with initial estimates. Depth to seasonal high groundwater/impervious layer – groundwater mounding may become an issue during excessively wet conditions where shallow aquifers or shallow clay lenses are present. Table VII.3: Suitability Assessment Related Considerations for Infiltration Facility Safety Factors Consideration High Concern Medium Concern Low Concern Assessment methods (see explanation below) Use of soil survey maps or simple texture analysis to estimate short-term infiltration rates Direct measurement of ≥ 20 percent of infiltration area with localized infiltration measurement methods (e.g., infiltrometer) Direct measurement of ≥ 50 percent of infiltration area with localized infiltration measurement methods or Use of extensive test pit infiltration measurement methods Texture Class Silty and clayey soils with significant fines Loamy soils Granular to slightly loamy soils Site soil variability Highly variable soils indicated from site assessment or limited soil borings collected during site assessment Soil borings/test pits indicate moderately homogeneous soils Multiple soil borings/test pits indicate relatively homogeneous soils Depth to groundwater/ impervious layer <5 ft below facility bottom 5-10 ft below facility bottom >10 below facility bottom Localized infiltration testing refers to methods such as the double ring infiltrometer test (ASTM D3385-88) which measure infiltration rates over an area less than 10 sq-ft, may include lateral TECHNICAL GUIDANCE DOCUMENT APPENDICES VII-32 May 19, 2011 flow, and do not attempt to account for heterogeneity of soil. The amount of area each test represents should be estimated depending on the observed heterogeneity of the soil. Extensive infiltration testing refers to methods that include excavating a significant portion of the proposed infiltration area, filling the excavation with water, and monitoring drawdown. The excavation should be to the depth of the proposed infiltration surface and ideally be at least 50 to 100 square feet. In all cases, testing should be conducted in the area of the proposed BMP where, based on review of available geotechnical data, soils appear least likely to support infiltration. VII.4.2. Design Related Considerations Design related considerations include (Table VII.4): Size of area tributary to facility – all things being equal, risk factors related to infiltration facilities increase with an increase in the tributary area served. Therefore facilities serving larger tributary areas should use more restrictive adjustment factors. Level of pretreatment/expected influent sediment loads – credit should be given for good pretreatment by allowing less restrictive factors to account for the reduced probability of clogging from high sediment loading. Also, facilities designed to capture runoff from relatively clean surfaces such as rooftops are likely to see low sediment loads and therefore should be allowed to apply less restrictive safety factors. Redundancy – facilities that consist of multiple subsystems operating in parallel such that parts of the system remains functional when other parts fail and/or bypass should be rewarded for the built-in redundancy with less restrictive correction and safety factors. For example, if bypass flows would be at least partially treated in another BMP, the risk of discharging untreated runoff in the event of clogging the primary facility is reduced. A bioretention facility that overflows to a landscaped area is another example. Compaction during construction – proper construction oversight is needed during construction to ensure that the bottoms of infiltration facility are not overly compacted. Facilities that do not commit to proper construction practices and oversight should have to use more restrictive correction and safety factors. TECHNICAL GUIDANCE DOCUMENT APPENDICES VII-33 May 19, 2011 Table VII.4: Design Related Considerations for Infiltration Facility Safety Factors Consideration High Concern Medium Concern Low Concern Tributary area size Greater than 10 acres. Greater than 2 acres but less than 10 acres. 2 acres or less. Level of pretreatment/ expected influent sediment loads Pretreatment from gross solids removal devices only, such as hydrodynamic separators, racks and screens AND tributary area includes landscaped areas, steep slopes, high traffic areas, or any other areas expected to produce high sediment, trash, or debris loads. Good pretreatment with BMPs that mitigate coarse sediments such as vegetated swales AND influent sediment loads from the tributary area are expected to be relatively low (e.g., low traffic, mild slopes, disconnected impervious areas, etc.). Excellent pretreatment with BMPs that mitigate fine sediments such as bioretention or media filtration OR sedimentation or facility only treats runoff from relatively clean surfaces, such as rooftops. Redundancy of treatment No redundancy in BMP treatment train. Medium redundancy, other BMPs available in treatment train to maintain at least 50% of function of facility in event of failure. High redundancy, multiple components capable of operating independently and in parallel, maintaining at least 90% of facility functionality in event of failure. Compaction during construction Construction of facility on a compacted site or elevated probability of unintended/ indirect compaction. Medium probability of unintended/ indirect compaction. Heavy equipment actively prohibited from infiltration areas during construction and low probability of unintended/ indirect compaction. TECHNICAL GUIDANCE DOCUMENT APPENDICES VII-34 May 19, 2011 VII.4.3. Determining Factor of Safety A factor of safety shall be used. To assist in selecting the appropriate design infiltration rate, the measured short term infiltration rate should be adjusted using a weighted average of several safety factors using the worksheet shown in Worksheet H below. The design infiltration rate would be determined as follows: 1. For each consideration shown in Table VII.3 and Table VII.4 above, determine whether the consideration is a high, medium, or low concern. 2. For all high concerns, assign a factor value of 3, for medium concerns, assign a factor value of 2, and for low concerns assign a factor value of 1. 3. Multiply each of the factors by the corresponding weight to get a product. 4. Sum the products within each factor category to obtain a safety factor for each. 5. Multiply the two safety factors together to get the final combined safety factor. If the combined safety factor is less than 2, then 2 shall be used as the safety factor. 6. Divide the measured short term infiltration rate by the combined safety factor to obtain the adjusted design infiltration rate for use in sizing the infiltration facility. The design infiltration rate shall be used to size BMPs and to evaluate their expected long term performance. This rate shall not be less than 2, but may be higher at the discretion of the design engineer. TECHNICAL GUIDANCE DOCUMENT APPENDICES VII-35 May 19, 2011 Worksheet H: Factor of Safety and Design Infiltration Rate and Worksheet Factor Category Factor Description Assigned Weight (w) Factor Value (v) Product (p) p = w x v A Suitability Assessment Soil assessment methods 0.25 Predominant soil texture 0.25 Site soil variability 0.25 Depth to groundwater / impervious layer 0.25 Suitability Assessment Safety Factor, SA = p B Design Tributary area size 0.25 Level of pretreatment/ expected sediment loads 0.25 Redundancy 0.25 Compaction during construction 0.25 Design Safety Factor, SB = p Combined Safety Factor, STOT= SA x SB Measured Infiltration Rate, inch/hr, KM (corrected for test-specific bias) Design Infiltration Rate, in/hr, KDESIGN = STOT × KM Supporting Data Briefly describe infiltration test and provide reference to test forms: Note: The minimum combined adjustment factor shall not be less than 2.0 and the maximum combined adjustment factor shall not exceed 9.0. TECHNICAL GUIDANCE DOCUMENT APPENDICES VII-36 May 19, 2011 VII.5. References ASTM D 3385-94, 2003. “Standard Test Method for Infiltration Rate of Soils Field Using Double- Ring Infiltrometer.” American Society for Testing Materials, Conshohocken, PA. 10 Jun, 2003. Caltrans, 2003. “Infiltration Basin Site Selection”. Study Volume I. California Department of Transportation. Report No. CTSW-RT-03-025. City of Portland, 2010. Appendix F.2: Infiltration Testing. Portland Stormwater Management Manual, Revised February 1, 2010. United States Department of the Interior, Bureau of Reclamation (USBR), 1990a, "Procedure for Performing Field Permeability Testing by the Well Permeameter Method (USBR 7300-89)," in Earth Manual, Part 2, A Water Resources Technical Publication, 3rd ed., Bureau of Reclamation, Denver, Colo.