cemex advhs final tm03 20140808 - npsnps.acgov.org/nps-assets/docs/npstrj.pdf · cemex construction...

Technical Memorandum

Limitations: This document was prepared solely for CEMEX Construction Materials, Inc. in accordance with professional standards at the time the services were performed and in accordance with the contract between CEMEX Construction Materials, Inc. and Brown and Caldwell dated April 11, 2014. This document is governed by the specific scope of work authorized by CEMEX Construction Materials, Inc.; it is not intended to be relied upon by any other party except for regulatory authorities contemplated by the scope of work. We have relied on information or instructions provided by CEMEX Construction Materials, Inc. and other parties and, unless otherwise expressly indicated, have made no independent investigation as to the validity, completeness, or accuracy of such information.

701 Pike Street, Suite 1200 Seattle, WA 98101 Phone: 206-624-0100 Fax: 206-749-2200

Prepared for: CEMEX Construction Materials, Inc.

Project Title: Eliot Facility Reclamation Plan Amendment, Surface Mining Permit 23, CA Mine 91-01-0009

Project No.: 144718

Technical Memorandum 3

Subject: Hydraulic Evaluation of the Lake A to Lake C Pipeline

Date: August 11, 2014

To: Ronald D. Wilson, Manager, Land Use Permits: Pacific Region

From: Nathan Foged, P.E., Brown and Caldwell, Supervising Engineer

Copy to: Andrew Kopania, EMKO Environmental Karen Spinardi, Spinardi and Associates

Prepared by: William K. Faisst, Ph.D., P.E., Vice President

California License C 29146 Engineer in Responsible Charge

Reviewed by: Nathan Foged, P.E., Supervising Engineer

California License C 66395

Technical Memorandum 3 Hydraulic Evaluation of the Lake A to Lake C Pipeline

ii

\\bcsea06\projects\CEMEX\144718 Arroyo del Valle Hydraulic Study\500 Deliverables\2014-08-01_Tech Memo 3\CEMEX AdVHS Final TM03 20140808.docx

Table of Contents List of Figures ............................................................................................................................................................ ii

Executive Summary .................................................................................................................................................. 1

Section 1: Introduction ............................................................................................................................................. 1

Section 2: Background ............................................................................................................................................. 2 2.1 Site Description ............................................................................................................................................... 2 2.2 Reclamation Planning ..................................................................................................................................... 2

Section 3: Hydraulic Evaluation ............................................................................................................................... 3 3.1 Conclusions...................................................................................................................................................... 4

References ................................................................................................................................................................ 5

Attachment A: Lake A to Lake C Pipeline Drawing .................................................................................................. A

Attachment B: Schematic for Slide Gate Section in Lake A ................................................................................... B

List of Figures Figure 2-1. Location of CEMEX’s Eliot Facility........................................................................................................ 2

Figure 3-1. Calculated Capacities for the Proposed Pipeline from Lake A to Lake C ......................................... 4


1


Executive Summary This Technical Memorandum (TM) 3 describes the proposed 84-inch-diameter [high density polyethylene pipe (HDPE) and reinforced concrete pipe (RCP)] pipeline from Lake A to Lake C and the hydraulic modeling results for the proposed pipeline that Brown and Caldwell (BC) completed. The proposed pipeline will carry flow under Isabel Avenue (California Highway 84), with a RCP pipe contained in a 108-inch-diameter welded steel or RCP bore-and-jack installed casing that conforms to State of California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) standards. A submerged stainless steel slide gate at the pipeline’s upstream (Lake A) end will control the flow and allow pipeline shutdown for inspection and maintenance.

BC based the hydraulic modeling on a pipeline configuration and range of water surface elevations of Lake A developed with Spinardi Associates (Spinardi). Discharge into Lake C always would be with a pipe invert above the Lake C water level. Hence, the water surface elevation in Lake C would never affect pipeline hydraulic capacity. The hydraulic modeling for the new pipeline produced flows greater than the required flow of 500 cubic feet per second (cfs) for the varied Lake A water surface elevations provided that the Lake A water surface was higher than approximately 405 feet mean sea level (MSL). Thus, based on the analysis of the proposed pipeline, the design is suitable for the required 500-cfs flow.

Section 1: Introduction CEMEX Construction Materials, Inc. (CEMEX) owns and operates the Eliot Facility, a sand-and-gravel mining operation located between the cities of Pleasanton and Livermore within the unincorporated area of Alameda County (County), California. CEMEX has requested approval from Alameda County Community Development Agency (ACCDA) for an amendment to its existing Reclamation Plan, originally approved in 1987 under Surface Mining Permit 23 (SMP-23).

In June 2013, Spinardi Associates (Spinardi) prepared the SMP-23 Reclamation Plan Amendment (Amendment) and submitted it to the ACCDA. ACCDA provided comments on the Amendment in a July 8, 2013, letter from James Gilford to Ron Wilson, titled “Completeness Review of Application to Amend Surface Mining Permit and Reclamation Plan No. 23.” The letter requested additional technical evaluations including the following two comments (summarized here):

Hydraulic impacts: Conduct technical analyses (e.g., hydraulic modeling) to demonstrate that the restored channel will remain stable, and that neither the channel modifications nor the diversion structure will increase flood risk to neighboring properties and infrastructure.

Design feasibility: Present a complete design concept (e.g., schematic plans) and demonstrate that the elements of the reclamation plan designed to address diversion and conveyance into the Chain of Lakes1 can be feasibly constructed in compliance with known regulatory requirements.

In response to these comments, CEMEX retained Brown and Caldwell (BC) to evaluate design options and to analyze hydraulic impacts along affected reaches of Arroyo del Valle (Study). Technical Memorandum (TM) 1, addressed hydraulic impacts (i.e., channel stability and flood risk) as described in the above comment. A separate document, TM2, addressed design feasibility related to diverting water into Lake A. TM3 addresses design feasibility for gravity transfer of water from Lake A to Lake C.

TM3 includes the following four sections:

1 The original SMP-23 Reclamation Plan was developed in accordance with the Specific Plan for Livermore-Amador Valley Quarry Area Reclamation (LAVQAR Specific Plan), adopted by Alameda County in November 1981. The LAVQAR Specific Plan describes a “Chain of Lakes” reclamation concept that calls for the creation of a series of excavated lakes to be used for storage and groundwater recharge. See Section 0 for more information.


2


1. Introduction: This section provides a brief introduction to the Reclamation Plan Amendment, describes the purpose of the Study, and lists specific objectives addressed by this document.

2. Background: This section provides background information regarding the project site, Arroyo del Valle, and the development of the reclamation plan amendment.

3. Hydraulic Evaluation: This section discusses the hydraulic evaluation of the proposed Lake A to Lake C pipeline.

4. Conclusions: This section briefly summarizes the outcomes from the hydraulic evaluation.

Section 2: Background This section provides background information regarding the project site (Section 2.1) and the development of the reclamation plan amendment (Section 2.2).

2.1 Site Description The CEMEX Eliot Facility is located in the Livermore-Amador Valley (Valley) between the cities of Pleasanton and Livermore, California. Figure 2-1 shows the general project location. Mining operations at the Eliot Facility are vested under Alameda County Quarry Permit 1 (Q-1) and Quarry Permit 76 (Q-76) granted in 1957 and 1969, respectively. The authorized mining area (Site) covers approximately 975 acres of land between Stanley Boulevard and Vineyard Avenue. The Shadow Cliffs Regional Recreation Area is located directly west of the Site, Vulcan’s sand and gravel operation is located to the north and east, and the Ruby Hill subdivision is located across Vineyard Avenue to the south.

2.2 Reclamation Planning The SMP-23 Reclamation Plan (1987) was developed in accordance with the Specific Plan for Livermore-Amador Valley Quarry Area Reclamation (LAVQAR Specific Plan), which was adopted by the County in November 1981. The LAVQAR Specific Plan describes a “Chain of Lakes” reclamation concept, where excavated gravel quarries are to be converted into a series of open lakes and used for storage and groundwater recharge. After mining is completed and quarry sites are reclaimed, the Chain of Lakes will be dedicated to Zone 7 of the Alameda County Flood Control and Water Conservation District (Zone 7) for use in managing the groundwater basin. According to the SMP-23 Reclamation Plan (1987), and consistent with the LAVQAR Specific Plan, mining at the Site will result in the formation of two lakes:

Figure 2-1. Location of CEMEX’s Eliot Facility

ISABEL AVE LAKE B

LAKE A

LAKE C


3


Lake A will be located north of Vineyard Avenue, between Isabel Avenue (State Route 84) and Vallecitos Road.

Lake B will be located north of Vineyard Avenue, between Isabel Avenue (State Route 84) and the Shadow Cliffs Regional Recreation Area.

A third lake, Lake C, will be located generally north of Lake B. The SMP-23 Reclamation Plan (1987) as amended requires a connection from Lake A to Lake C, with a hydraulic capacity of at least 500 cubic feet per second (cfs).

The latest version of the Reclamation Plan Amendment has eliminated the mining of Lake A (communication with Karen Spinardi, June 2014), thereby increasing the length of the proposed Lake A to Lake C pipeline. Spinardi requested that BC perform a hydraulic evaluation of the newly proposed pipeline to estimate the conveyance capacity and determine whether sufficient hydraulic head will be available in Lake A to meet the 500-cfs capacity requirement. The following section describes the evaluation completed by BC.

Section 3: Hydraulic Evaluation Spinardi provided BC with a concept-level design of the proposed pipeline configuration/alignment from Lake A to Lake C (see Attachment A). The pipe alignment is approximately 1,620 foot long, including 150 feet through a bore-and-jack crossing under Isabel Avenue. The bore-and-jack section will include an installed casing that conforms to State of California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) standards. Pipe installation east of Isabel Avenue will use cut-and-cover construction. Pipe installation west of the Isabel Avenue right-of-way (ROW) will use shoring and shielding. A submerged stainless steel slide gate at the pipeline’s upstream (Lake A) end will control the flow and allow pipeline shutdown for inspection and maintenance (see Attachment B). The slide gate would have an above-water surface platform accessible by a grated walkway starting approximately 100 feet west of the Lake A pipe inlet/slide gate, for operator access to the gate operator. The grated walkway will be constructed of galvanized steel structural components, grating and hand railing. Sacrificial anodes may be included to increase the longevity of the walkway.

The new pipeline will be primarily constructed with 84-inch-diameter high density polyethylene (HDPE) pipe material, except for the bore-and-jack section under Isabel Avenue, which, based on Caltrans standards, BC assumed to be constructed with reinforced concrete pipe (RCP) encased in a 108-inch-diameter welded steel pipe or RCP casing. Construction details will conform to Caltrans standards in effect during final design.

BC performed a hydraulic analysis of the pipeline using InfoWorks CS (Version 12.5)2. The following key design parameters and assumptions were used for the analysis:

The 84-inch-diameter, HDPE pipe has an assumed conservative roughness value (i.e., Manning’s n) of 0.013; this value was used for the entire length of the pipeline, since the RCP section spans less than 10 percent of the total pipe length.

The slide gate at the Lake A outfall is approximately 7 feet wide by 7 feet high. The pipe invert elevation at Lake A is at 390 feet mean sea level (MSL, NVGD1929 datum).

The pipe invert elevation at Lake C is at 380 feet MSL.

The water surface elevation at Lake C was assumed to be at 380 feet MSL; assuming a free discharge at Lake C.

2 InfoWorks CS is a modeling software package used to analyze hydraulics for complex water infrastructure systems. For more information see: http://www.innovyze.com/products/infoworks_cs/.


4


For hydraulic calculations, BC varied water surface elevations at Lake A from 395 feet MSL to 420 feet MSL. Figure 3-1 presents the calculated discharge capacities.

Figure 3-1. Calculated Capacities for the Proposed Pipeline from Lake A to Lake C

3.1 Conclusions BC performed a hydraulic analysis of the conceptual pipeline design proposed by Spinardi and estimated the conveyance capacity for a range of Lake A water surface elevations, assuming that water levels in Lake C are always below the pipeline outfall (i.e., free discharge conditions). The results indicated that the proposed pipe configuration will have the capacity to convey up to 500 cfs and the water surface elevation at Lake A is a minimum of approximately 405 feet MSL. This minimum water surface level and range of water surface levels at Lake A that were modeled are acceptable per e-mail correspondence with Mr. Andrew Kopania, in which he stated:

" The average groundwater elevation in the vicinity of Lake A is 412 ft msl (Zone 7 Water Agency, March 2014, Preliminary Lake Use Evaluation for the Chain of Lakes, Appendix D), indicating that the long-term static water level in Lake A should average close to 412 ft msl. The actual water level in Lake A will vary depending on climatic conditions and the diversion of water into and out of the lake. Diversion of water from Arroyo del Valle into Lake A will occur at an elevation of approximately 434 ft msl. Therefore, the water surface elevation in Lake A is anticipated to be above 405 ft msl for diversion operations."


5


References Alameda County Community Development Agency (ACCDA), June 2013. Letter from James Gifford to Ron Wilson titled

“Completeness Review of Application to Amend Surface Mining Permit and Reclamation Plan No. 23.”

Specific Plan for Livermore-Amador Valley Quarry Area Reclamation (Specific Plan), adopted November 5, 1981 by the Alameda County Board of Supervisors.

Spinardi Associates (Spinardi), June 2013. Reclamation Plan Amendment, CEMEX SMP-23, 1544 Stanley Boulevard, Pleasanton, California 94566, Unincorporated Alameda County, Submitted to: Alameda County Community Development Agency Neighborhood Preservation and Sustainability Department, 224 W. Winton Ave, Suite 205, Hayward, California 94544, Prepared by: Spinardi Associates, 265 Sea View Avenue, Piedmont, California 94610

Brown and Caldwell (BC), 2014, Eliot Facility Reclamation Plan Amendment, Surface Mining Permit 23, CA Mine 91-01-0009, Technical Memorandum 2 prepared for Ronald D. Wilson, Manager, CEMEX Construction Materials, Inc., Land Use Permits: Pacific Region.

Zone 7 Water Agency, August 2014. E-mail correspondence from Andrew Kopania to Kelsi Oshiro/Bill Faisst, August 4, 2013. “Re: Draft TM 03.”

This page intentionally left blank.


A


Attachment A: Lake A to Lake C Pipeline Drawing

IS

AB

EL A

VE

NU

E

CE

ME

X S

MP

-2

3

CU

LV

ER

T C

ON

NE

CT

IN

G L

AK

ES

A

&

C

CONDUIT PROFILE

CE

ME

X S

MP

-2

3

CU

LV

ER

T C

ON

NE

CT

IN

G L

AK

ES

A

&

C


B


Attachment B: Schematic for Slide Gate Section in Lake A

KNOshiro

Rectangle

KNOshiro

Oval

KNOshiro

Rectangle

KNOshiro

Line

KNOshiro

Line

KNOshiro

Line

KNOshiro

Line

KNOshiro

Line

KNOshiro

Text Box

CEMEX

KNOshiro

Text Box

Attachment B - Schematic for Slide Gate Section in Lake A

KNOshiro

Text Box

1/1

KNOshiro

Line

KNOshiro

Line

KNOshiro

Line

KNOshiro

Line

KNOshiro

Text Box

37'

KNOshiro

Line

KNOshiro

Line

KNOshiro

Text Box

12'

KNOshiro

Text Box

2'

KNOshiro

Text Box

2'

KNOshiro

Line

KNOshiro

Line

KNOshiro

Line

KNOshiro

Line

KNOshiro

Line

KNOshiro

Line

KNOshiro

Text Box

8'

KNOshiro

Line

KNOshiro

Line

KNOshiro

Text Box

B. Faisst

KNOshiro

Text Box

144718

KNOshiro

Text Box

K. Oshiro

KNOshiro

Text Box

8/7/14

KNOshiro

Text Box

NOTE: NTS

KNOshiro

Stamp

KNOshiro

Line

KNOshiro

Line

KNOshiro

Line

KNOshiro

Line

KNOshiro

Line

KNOshiro

Line

KNOshiro

Line

KNOshiro

Line

KNOshiro

Line

KNOshiro

Line

KNOshiro

Line

KNOshiro

Line

KNOshiro

Line

KNOshiro

Line

KNOshiro

Text Box

LOCAL LAKE BOTTOM

KNOshiro

Oval

KNOshiro

Line

KNOshiro

Line

KNOshiro

Rectangle

KNOshiro

Text Box

SLIDE GATE OPERATOR

KNOshiro

Rectangle

KNOshiro

Text Box

SLIDE GATE

KNOshiro

Callout

WORKING PLATFORM ABOVE LAKE A MAXIMUM WATER SURFACE WITH HAND RAILING

KNOshiro

Line

KNOshiro

Callout

PIPELINE INVERT ELEVATION IS 390 FEET

KNOshiro

Line

KNOshiro

Line

KNOshiro

Text Box

14'

KNOshiro

Line

KNOshiro

Callout

1.5'

KNOshiro

Line

KNOshiro

Text Box

5'

KNOshiro

Line

KNOshiro

Callout

EXTEND TOP OF CONCRETE TO ELEVATION 425 FEET, TO SUPPORT PLATFORM AND ACCESS WALKWAY GIRDERS.

KNOshiro

Line

KNOshiro

Text Box

2'

KNOshiro

Line

cemex advhs final tm03 20140808 - npsnps.acgov.org/nps-assets/docs/npstrj.pdf · cemex construction...

Documents