Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutWTR2701017Attendees: Representing Renton Kulchin-Condon WSDOT SC & DI Project OLD BUSINESS: SR-900 HOV / HOUSER WAY RELOCATION Construction Meeting Minutes -- Weekly Meeting #4 January 4, 1996 Name Joe Armstrong, Mark Longridge, Dan Thompson Eric Dybevik, Phil Antush, Scott Banford Dave Lindberg Drainage (12/7/95): Two wetlands exist in the Swale at the toe of the embankment at the north end of the project. There is concern over the sub -grade preparations. It is anticipated there will be about three feet of organics with a wet, sandy bottom and drainage seepage. Some form of subgrade protection will be required (i.e., layer of fabric and pit run; maybe gravel, etc.). In essence, the peat materials must be removed and the Contractor should anticipate anywhere from 1-1/2 to 4 feet of depth for materials removal. Contractor asked if peat is classified as unsuitable foundation materials. Yes, anything under two feet is classified as Roadway X. It was determined measurement will be calculated by truck load count. How much cover is wanted over the fabric? Depends upon how far below grade gets mucked out. Typically, 12-18" of cover is needed. Contractor may need a gravel drain to the other side of the roadway to prevent ponding. Is there a provision in the SC&DI contract to handle the drain off the wall? Tri-State doesn't know. Dave Lindberg (WSDOT) indicated the Hillflicker wall has been completed. Four 12" drains run down the hill and underneath the fabric and drain out the Swale. It was emphasized that these drains handle a lot of water. Tri- State will be tying into a drain near the off -ramp. Outfall from the detention tank will drain out at approximately Station 19+50 (Plan Sheet 16). The Contractor will try to maintain the separation between the railroad and slope waters. Gary Sheets, Roadmaster for BNRR, is to be contacted whenever the Contractor gets close (within 25 feet of the tracks). A 6" ABS comes out of the base of the gabion wall. Tri-State Construction's plans (WSDOT SC&DI) indicate a pipe arch in the north end. It was clarified the current conversation is dealing primarily with the area south of N. 8th Street. 12/14/95: Intersection drainage at 8th and Houser: The existing 36" drain will remain until the two new 36" units are in place, at which time the water will be re-routed. Also, the location for the manhole at 8th and Houser, HW line, station 250+57.32 (Plan Sheet 21) will be revised. 12/21/95: Most relocation details have been worked out. Discussion ensued concerning the two pay items involved with excavation (Unsuitahle Foundation and Excavation Within Two Feet). It was mutually decided that Dan Thompson, the City's Inspector, will note on the face of each ticket the percentage of Unsuitable X. This figure will be the basis for the quantity listed on pay estimates. 1/4/96: Eric noted Unsuitable Foundation in Schedule A and B has pay items listed, but Schedule C doesn't. The operation is basically the same, however the dump fees are more expensive. Joe Armstrong agreed and stated the City would like to negotiate with the SR-900 HOV / Houser Way Relocation Construction Meeting Minutes January 4, 1996 41 C. 0 � g 1L � r Page 2 5(� 6,a V C A ' Contractor and his subcontractor (KLB) downward from $20/yard to possibly $12/yard. Joe also commented the City wished to negotiate the cost of the head wall, saying that the $6,000 figure for two seemed too high. After some discussion it was determined that change order negotiations would be handled in a different meeting as a separate item from the construction coordination activities being covered during this meeting time. (Retired) 3. Water Schedule: Pipe is being delivered. Contractor is ready to start digging. The manufacturer (Pipe, Inc.) hasn't built the vaults yet and the butterfly valves won't be here until some time in January, 1996. Contractor estimates that by the third week of December they'll be ready to switch over. The question of the butterfly valves being changed from those specified came up. They haven't changed, the problem is that they are high pressure units. The excavation for the undercrossing can't be started until the water is completed. The subcontractor may need to check for another supplier of high pressure butterfly valves. The Contractor will advise if they wish to change butterfly valve suppliers. 12/14/95: Joe Armstrong advised he talked with Joe Morrow at the H. D. Fowler Company and learned they have four butterfly valves in stock. These are certified at 150, but Mr. Morrow states they can be certified to 250. H. D. Fowler will be contacting the subcontractor. Joe Armstrong and Ray Sled clarified these would be okay for the project if Abdoul Gafour in the City's V Water Department approves their use. 12/21/95: The butterfly valves have been received. The status of the tie-in was questioned. Ray Sled advised the water can only be shut off for one day at a time. After next week the City may be able to get by for two days with it down, but definitely not for four weeks. There are 5x7 vaults with deadman blocks and they will entail quite a bit of work. This work must be completed before channelization is done. The City may allow the tie-in to be moved a little farther back (10-30 feet may be possible). The problem of tying in (per the drawing) appears to be that the 90 degree ell wouldn't work. After some discussion it was decided the Contractor will relocate the tie-in to the back side of the channelization so they can start excavation for Wall #1. 12/14/95: The tie-in won't happen until sometime after the first of the new year. The water line work will be suspended and the crew will be moved down to Houser Way to start work on the bentonite pond. 12/21/95: Chlorination is being started today and the first tie-in has been scheduled for January 3rd. For more details please see Item 5, below. 1/4/96: This work is in progress and will be completed by 1/5/96. (Retired) Submittals: The State has not yet returned the first set of submittals. A 30-day turn -around from WSDOT is not acceptable. TransAid will be rattling their cages (in Olympia) to try to bust them loose. It was determined that Joe Armstrong and Entranco will be working on submittal approvals on the first level. The Contractor is willing to accept the City and Entranco's review and go with it, then if WSDOT has a problem they'll handle it at that time. Contractor needs to submit catalog cuts on shackle rods. 12/14/95: Shackle rod cuts were received via fax and are being reviewed. Joe Armstrong noted the soldier pile and tie back are approved. A verbal approval for the paint has been received from WSDOT. Joe Armstrong returned the handrail RAMS for signature and date by the Contractor (this was signed, dated and returned to Joe during the meeting). 12/21/95: The paint lot numbers are undergoing review by WSDOT. Wall 5 and 6 submittals are approved. Wall 1 and soldier pile submittals are still pending. (Soldier piles were approved by WSDOT in a 12/19/95 letter with comments.) Temporary shoring submittals have been approved as noted. Joe Armstrong will ask Amir to check Olympia for the paint status. 1/4/96: Wall 1 and soldier pile submittals were returned to the Contractor today. The paint lot numbers are under review by WSDOT (the first one has been approved, but the remaining two are currently under testing and the results are pending). The handrails on the slopes have been rejected. (Pending) Contractor will ask Totem Electric to submit their electrical in the near future along with the sign bridges. 12/14/95: Electrical submittal is pending. 12/21/95: Electrical submittals are in the mail to the Contractor. Joe Armstrong reminded the Contractor that WSDOT would be closely scrutinizing the electrical submittals, SR-900 HOV / Houser Way Relocation Construction Meeting Minutes January 4, 1996 Page 3 especially the items intended for use within the tunnel structure. 1/4/96: The electrical submittals have been received. (Pending) Contractor is expecting a submittal on waterproofing in the near future. It's not quite the same as what was specified, but it has been successfully used on WSDOT projects before. (Pending) 12/21/95: Water vault submittals by Pipe, Inc. were for phone vaults. KLB questioned the reasoning behind the type of vault specified by the City. Ray Sled explained placement within the vaults of the butterfly valves, etc. for ease and quickness of locating the shut -offs in the field under emergency situations. Joe Armstrong will fax a copy of the City's specs to the vault supplier. (Pending) Schedule: 12/14/95: Joe Armstrong requested a bar chart schedule for the entire project. Eric will provide one. The asphalt patching is backlogged with the subcontractor (Segale). Contractor will be starting Wall 6 in the near future. 1/4/96: The vaults and butterfly valves have been installed. The bar chart is in progress. 6. Sign Bridge: All five pieces are at the City Shops. The longest pieces are 20' long. These belong to WSDOT. Joe Armstrong left a message for Archie at WSDOT Bridge Maintenance, but received no return call. Dave Lindberg advised contractors normally deliver materials to the WSDOT Signal Shop at Spokane Street in Seattle and that Pat Moylan is the Superintendent at that office. Joe Armstrong will coordinate with WSDOT to have them picked up. (Pending) Discussion about removal and replacement of the signs ensued. The signs will be down for about one year. Temporary directional signs may be needed for the I-405 northbound on -ramp. (Pending) Incidentals: Entranco and Dan are compiling lists. Dan advised the only thing currently was the drainage and clean -outs. Wall #1 drainage with an 8" pipe, wall line pipe and clean -out aren't detailed. This will be discussed in greater detail at next week's meeting. 12/14/95: Entranco was not able to attend the meeting. This item will be discussed at a later date (after the first of next year). 1/4/96: Joe Armstrong advised Entranco is looking into the reasoning for requiring the clean -outs. (Pending) 8. Monitoring Wells: Directions for monitoring wells were requested. There are four monitoring wells which are to be abandoned and removed. 12/14195: Ray Sled cautioned the monitoring wells need to be abandoned by pouring a bentonite slurry down them if they are to be left in place. Jim Johnson (Golder Associates) will be asked to check with the Dept. of Ecology to determine if the wells operate under a permit which was granted through them. Any permits will need to be removed before abandonment can take place. 12/21/95: The well driller has been asked to check his records for a determination of requested/issued permits on these wells. 1/4/96: Joe Armstrong will try to contact the well driller again. The Contractor needs an answer by next week as to the status of any permits involved. (Pending) 12/14/95: There is a monitoring well in Houser Way (near the two wells which are to be abandoned) which has its gasket half out and it's leaking. Joe Armstrong is to advise Ray Sled if the City wishes to keep it, and, if so, Ray Sled will coordinate the repair activities for it. 12/21/95: It was also determined that the well located at 8th and Houser Way belongs to others. (Pending) Slope Ratios: The slope ratios are not consistent and it was asked if they can be evened out. This is on Plan Sheet 44, SW line, profile for the top of the wall. The subcontractor is having a difficult time trying to get his rail to match up with it. It was asked if this would change the concrete grade. 12/14/95: The shop drawings are pending. 12/21/95: The subcontractor ran a straight line for Wall 1. The Contractor will need to check SR-900 HOV / Houser Way Relocation Construction Meeting Minutes January 4, 1996 Page 4 grades and set it up for a consistent slope. The rail will be installed using pockets. 1/4/96: This is related to the SW line (sidewalk line). The wall is actually 3.8 % slope. (Pending) 10. Pay Estimates: Eric asked if they could submit for payment of stored materials. The steel should be in the State by the end of next week and ready for either painting or fabrication; the vaults have been ordered. Discussion ensued about verification, certified warehouse sites, etc. The Contractor will submit a letter formally requesting payment for materials on hand. 1/4/96: The letter has been received. (Retired) 11. The guy pole located on the northeast comer of Sunset Boulevard North at the I-405 overpass needs to be removed. 12/21/95: The Contractor needs the pole removed by January 15th. The guy pole is within WSDOT's right-of-way/easement. Puget Power and WSDOT will coordinate the removal. 1/4/96: Puget Power wants another permit but they will be able to remove it by the 15. (Pending) 13. Coordination Efforts: There is a slide developing up the hill (approximately station 23+50) where pieces of black visqueen have separated. This is in an area left over from the I-405 S-Curves Project (WSDOT) which is scheduled for eventual landscaping. The problem is that right now erosion has already occurred. It appears this may create ongoing slide problems for the Houser Way/SR-900 project down below, possibly bad enough to close down Houser Way. The Contractor is hesitant to move crews into the location until the hillside can be stabilized. will check on the hillside's current status with Joe Scanlon (WSDOT's I-405 S-Curves Project Manager). 12/21/95: The State will monitor the condition of the hill. The Contractor will issue a letter detailing their concerns to the City. 1/4/96: Dave Lindberg (WSDOT) has been assured by Joe Scanlon that the hillside is stable. (Retired) 14. 12/21/95: Wall 6 may need some temporary shoring. Will the design require WSDOT approval? No, Entranco can review and approve it. This will need quick turnaround on the approval. The Contractor will deliver the submittal on Friday (12/22) and Joe Armstrong will deliver it to Entranco on Wednesday (12127). 1/4/96: The Contractor will soil nail the shoring. (Pending) NEw BuswEss: 15. The lighting on I-405, east of the bridge, is no longer working. The Contractor has not done any work which would affect the lighting in this area. Consensus is this is probably a punchlist item left over from the I-405 S- Curves project. Joe Armstrong will contact Joe Scanlon (WSDOT) to verify the source of the problem. (Pending) 16. The Intent to Pay Prevailing Wage statements are delayed at L & I. TransAid is trying to help get them out. Payment can't be issued by the City until these documents have been received. (Pending) 17. Mark noted the City has not received the required information on the Contractor's training program. Mark has the forms and will go over the details with Eric. (Pending) The next construction coordination meeting will be held on January 11!t at 10 a.m., City Hall, in the 51 floor conference room. 1/11/96: The change for a new manhole was mandated by the City's drainage staff. Note 13 (Plan Sheet 21) shows an existing manhole is still to be removed. Entranco will be working out this revision during the upcoming week. Entranco will issue a revised plan sheet. Eric (Contractor) will check to see if hte manhole structure has been ordered. (Pending) Water Schedule: The question of the butterfly valves being changed from those specified came up. They haven't changed, the problem is that they are high pressure units. The excavation for the undercrossing can't be started until the water is completed. The subcontractor may need to check for another supplier of high pressure butterfly valves. The Contractor will advise if they wish to change butterfly valve suppliers. 12/14/95: Joe Armstrong advised he talked with Joe Morrow at the H. D. Fowler Company and learned they have four butterfly valves in stock. These are certified at 150, but Mr. Morrow states they can be certified to 250. H. D. Fowler will be contacting the subcontractor. Joe Armstrong and Ray Sled clarified these would be okay for the project if Abdoul Gafour in the City's Water Department approves their use. 12/21/95: The butterfly valves have been received. 1/11196: It was noted the permanent vault lids have not yet been received. Ray Sled noted the improtance of being able to access the butterfly valves in the event of an emergency situation. Ray questioned the sequence of work involved with the new water line, thrust block and deadman installations. Abdoul explained the City's concern about the changes authorized in the field and proper testing techniques not being followed. It was noted that none of the deadmans specified in the plans were poured, primarily due to the placement of the retainer walls. Dan advised a large thrust block was installed on the end of the `T' at both the north and west ends. Abdoul explained the reasoning behind the detailed method of installation. He noted the revised bends and lack of sufficient testing created the possibility of the water lines blowing out under full pressure, stating this is a great concern to the City. It was decided that Ray Sled's crew will test the line at 320 pounds of constant pressure for two hours to verify the integrity of the lines and their connections. (Pending) KULCHIN CONDON & ASSOCIATES, INC. SR 900 HOV/Houser Way North 3 WEEK LOOK AHEAD SCHEDULE subs9517•scned We -b2 DATE /�0/y SHEET / OF / MONTH 21a MONTH - MONTH DESCRIPTION WEEK 1 WEEK 2 WEEK 3 Day / D 2- 7 'e ✓ n /'- �� C. (. Lea. -) i1 a - --_ _.. __. �-• i ✓— s e U �10•, f C LL emu, j,•-. 8 = BEGIN X=CONTINUING OPERATION 1=INTERMITTANT C=COMPLETE S=SUSPEND EX WAD -------fir. Ar W -- ` �! ".- TAf LRAOOS BILK AND AND TIE AMS ON)ip EX ALLOW 7 L�NdiT[ rrYlr OASS AWL pM OArp r7MVST MOCK (r-rp.J K. TEE (AIM wo SLEEVE TL ADDS 11Z ro F F� Ao wo AV. (AW Ir W/coac VAL,(T �i: 5' . Fr. SFVOL a". w/QVC vAGLr AP. fAD J . wo Somm CAP r MIN, M► nnvsr a ocK O/r-N AND COWSrILCT A" Wo By ON EX. NY W OXSrILCr WO TEE AAO S0MM PIECES TM AVST BLOMM AS S OWK OMECT To EX. Ir. W TO rNAE MONTH wfrN Ar. SLEEVE. CWSTMXT F.^I M, SPOOL, EAD CAP. AND T-W ST BLOCK EAST OF EX. Ir. W. CMSTM-Cr AFW WO W CAST a EAO CAP. iWSERT -POLY-PAP Al AEW LAC. BEF W FNAL T,c-m �L'�tryt +&W. CLEARAMICE ro Tor OF NEV WATERLWE do7 7-0 i 5 067 /y5 i PEW (Mr N'AMIST SLXX .— WO CAP (AU/ . /r. LFFVF— Y AEW Ate. WATER LAIE CTARECT AEW Ir. W To £ASrEREr VALVE AAD SMM RN .f•L'r4 E AFTER COAMYETpw Cp 'PXY-PC6iRAG' PRESSLNE TESTMS Ap O'SALF PSTALL £MO CAP. PUX AND THRUST &OCXAM MWM a M. TEL PLAN V" SOUTH CONNECTION DETAIL A GRACE OR PROPOSED UTAITY IY OR U-1f VERrCAL J `rWUST BEAD (MJ 7 . P.) BLOICX (TYP.) L POT£CT EX7STnv Urwcs 0~ ALL STAGES OF COVSTRIACrev WM- ?. VE-CAL BEAD rmAv5T BLOLkMC SHALL BE PER OTT Of AENTON STA DETAIL 99ET MOM !. NEW DALT&C AWLW PN•E SMALL BE DEFLECTED vERrCALLY (USAIC FTrTAMW ABOVE OR BELOW EXISTAkC UrIL/TT AS KOMED Or ML LLvEA A. "AOA/STAFNTS AT UTk/T)" SHALL DOLT BE USED AS LWIECTED M rrt sSWLLUC AT PpE AMA DEFLECTEW A(TMOD ?ACT POSS�,E rKMAL AD -5—IMENT AT UTILITY Mrs (rYP.) FINAL TIE -AN CEADOW TIE BLOCp Y A � --- EX M W — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — G , 7ML LYAO�IY Atom MD r( ROADS OVER Er. � eF �. ALLOW T 6Ws MI. FQ* a~ rrwRvsr BLppA rTy?� s• ra: K. TEE ( /r. I. -.I Spm SLEEVE 4Er_Hr r------- - - ----- Ir. sPaoL TO FIT 5' . Hr. SO4ML TIC Aws (rrP.) /r. SPOOL Ir. AV. (AU) To FIT WICOMC VAULT r. j�ST Ar CAP w1 Ir. r£wwARY r TEN•CMARY PLUG (AC!) TAIL AND BI.AO11 Ir. VEMKAL O"S (AU.FL) w/ 8-0 FLAAGES (FU Top AAO Borrow A" wo wArER LAE CUT-* AND COWSTALCT AFb hr. M ON Er. Ir, W COwsrAULT Ir. TEE AAD SPOOL PECES TMAUST SLOCXMi AS SHOW, 000rs LCT m o M, sPODL. AND EAO CAP To rNE EAST. CONNECT To EX. Ir. W To THE SOUTH MTN Wo SLEEVE. CONSTIR,Cr AE7 Fr. W. VERTCAL CROSS, TEAPORARY PLLC AMC B;OWOFF To THE EAST. BEFORE FINAL TIE -AN ORAL AVrM C. LTrlY LOCATDNS SHOWW AAE APPAiXAVATE AAO BASED ON AWGAIVATA'Mi TW CCpD B/ TrME M[M+DUAL AGEACES ACTUAL LOCATOR, MAY VERY. FOA Urlj AHIArMC + CALL THE 'aw CALL" CENTER AT F-800-I14-5555 APARS AR ADVAACE Ov' AwY EXCAVATCW, L Clrr of NOTM Sra O£TALS ARE LOCATED WrrMW BWW D —jwr SPECXrXArA'M'S i OEFLEa rW P tAE AS IIEQMIED AT ALL AAi6YEs Rows wHER£ sPEpAL F"T'" OR SEM ARE ACT CALLED OUT. POE .oWT DEFLECTAOw MD'A L BE ATEpr M AM TMM ONE 'M'W HALF OF THE YAAK/FACTONiERS tw1jAQED L" CTAML POE SHALL ALSO BE Ec O]MFLX.TS TO PLACE THE NEW wATEIMIAM l TAE AEWOTS PIYAY 9`LA BE WSTALLED W(rhOX/T LOCAL qW SPAETHE COIF. WO CAP Hr. PUZ I/ TIwM/S SLEEVE n�c.N�vaN�noNA-rm.. sriA wRaccr Pao Tr 4rEA PROJECT- T• OPIM /IEAOVE "PAY-P16-r PWSSUW TEST Np D1SWFECr NEW /r► WATER LAkf EAST OF COWCTN7w. CONNECT OC r /I. W TO EASTERLY vALVE AAD SPOOL wrH Ir. SLFEYE AND SPtAOiL_ MSTALL END CAP. PUAr, AND TIARUST BLOCX" SOUTH of K. TrE PLAN VIEW NORTH CONNECTION DETAIL B Ars H t M 4 R A M C 0 90MUg ' MEWan - IAANWAS • mall "i—wTa NARLAAN cALsaw Ngvmw Y/A FINµ TIE-IN C rrY OF RENTON R ✓tLONW✓PIAILC VMS 0E►ARTNEN7 HOlJ6ER WAY N. WAFER MAIN XTAILS --- eti NON 10 t, 94 7. 2 •- _ N -- I SS 5* - --- 13 - w 4„ _. 6 SS 13 N SS-10e /Opx�g p �'OC �' 79.O2,Ess \ • r..-_ IT D.1. +.... (�I pt 1.6r'� ``I_-`_?S.c` :•c.""q ``` IY 5pp=29+36.6 t i - -106 58.02 PT X,t�` 300 k N'1��4.� D,I� f "y"_,1/~ -1`'- `:,,..1..•..l i�i`,` ` P� -- - A - 40 _ N 3Cr _..rrC PI Q - W.. Vl / - _---- ,,, 59 0 - IO Ar _ _ _ - - - - - �N I MOUSER - O 16 ID O CD L V) ss P ssNM AM Q ——T—max ACP 7 ACP �f ♦ W � w 0 z 53.6 DIP• 'SEE, SHEET BP-B� FOR DETA/LSJ — I A •, I I \ „� 10 i ACP \\ - I CAR TRENDS 1 x \ 1 Vim I I I 1 i � � � ------------ L------ L96 &AL AIDS. S-412 NOTE, CL "k R 1, ri EXISTING TOPMRAPMC- AND ANYSCAL ARE CASED ON A 00NENWAT{M NE 1l Sr- AND AVE. RECOWNA(SSANC£, Al FEUD SLAIVEM TITS AF HIT ACTUAL CGNXTIONS MAY ff MX FEIl M V,NArA'WS BETWEEN ACTUAL CONCIT,OIMS AND IMMIE WNL Mgr K r)F MASS FM A CLAM FQW £%T� — — — — — — _ b WALL z �S'L'T Q _ 5 11 _ 04m p /. 13 4a p......... 4 X1.2e - 12. SW 14 J. J9 src IJ.eI : e=, N. SCAtf, r-rp• E Y r � 111CADDIDilYIpp-201 0 CO)VSTRWTVN NOTES, / Aill ExKrAw all GUTTER. AND SIDEWALK. ? IAEADV£ EXIST- CLx'!4 G/rr£JL AND SCEW'ALI 5 NEN7VE EXISTING r)WFIC CTI/W AND (SLAAID. N cOWS7q,Cr CEAENr cowmerc a va, GLITTER, AND SAEIIALA. 5 CON'STRrr LENENT CONCRETE CURB GUTTER, AND ASPHALT CONCRETE S, ULAER. 6 COWSTMill TYPE / STAll WALL. SEE SHEETS 43AND Ii FOR DE7AILS. 7 EXISTING CLoft GUTTER AND S47EWALX TO REMAIN - a CTWSTALCT TYPE A PRECAST TRAFFC CUl PER GTY O, lJENTON STANDARD PLAN F002. 9 LTWSTRLAT SOLO" P" RETANN " WALL SEE SIEETS lS THRU ra FOR DETAILS. A C10WSTIl,CT RXQER P" NIETANNAI' ill SEE SWETS K, Tel 50. AND 51 FOR Dill 1I CONSTAl ASPHALT CONCRETE rRAFFC ISLAND. 12 PLANE B'rL`MNl PAVEMENT (?" AT GUTTER OR 4MB TO 0" AT Id Ol 13 AANIAENT CASE AND COVER PER OTY OF RE'NTON STANDARD PLAN Hill 14 REAOVE EX,STMG Sill smucrLAlE. /5 H-1 SA "i EXISTING ASPHALT CONCRETE PAYENENr. /6 SR900-2?•6d.60. - ADAIST EXISTING AOINAMENr TO GRACE, CDSTORM DRAINAGE NOTES: J H-12•J7 (12. 5' RT). CONSTRUCT NEW 7E Al CVWNECT TO ? LF l OF 12, DIAMETER REINFORCED Ca%CPi'TE SrQRW DRAW PIPE AT I.DoNEW CATC7I BASIN hill W/7H 2 J•J7. CONSTRUCT NEW CATCH BASIN TYPE / WIT SC.N/D METAL. COVER. CCWAECT TO NEW CATCH BASAr NO WITH AJ LF OF 12- CIAMETER REWCACED SOLAETE STORM ORAAI PIPE AT 7. N J CONSTRUCT 6" PVC UAt(X"'IDRAN' FOR WALL AS SHOWN. SEE TYPICAL SEC7LW, ShEfr H, FOR DETAILS. A CONSTRUCT 6" PVC UWL>E/ILNIA.W FOR WALL AS SI+OIIM. SEE WALL 2 AND J rYACAL SECTION. FOR DETAIL, CONNECT TO .YETI CATCH BASIN Ill WITH I LF OF 6" PYC DRAW PIPE. SHEET y, 5 CONSTNACr 6" PVC UrDEACRAIN FOR WALL AS SPAWN. SEE WALL 2 AND J _prAt SECTION. SHEET Ia, FOR DETAIL CONNECT TO NEW CATCH BASAL H-l?•37 WITH 15 LF U, Ir PLAN IXXYCRE1, STORY GRAIN PIPE, 6 CONNECT A WALL UYLXEPYXRANI 70 NEW CATCH BASIN SW-50.OU 121 Cr RTl WITH 25 LF OF a- FORRL DRAIN PIPE AT O. s% PLACE STORY ORA/M CYEANCXUT AT CONNECr.QR SEE TYPICAL SEPLAM CTION, CONCRETE EI.I, FOR UNDERDRANr DETAIL 7 STORMCONNECT 6" WALL UAT 0. ;, TO MEW CATCH BASIN SS-POO.58 (O.5' LT) W17H 27 LF OF a- PLKN CONCRETE STORM DRAIN PIPE AT O.5% PLACE STORY DRAIN CLEANOUT AT CONNECTA]N SEE TYPICAL SECTION, FOR UNDERORA/M (TETA.� SHEET H, 8 commSTORM 7 A WALL UAT o'5RAIY TO NEW CATCH BASIN sS-AO/.p r0.5' LTl W/rH 2d (F OF 8' PLAIN CONrR£rE STORM DRAIN PIPE T L PLACE STORY DRAIN CLEANOUT AT C17N'NECTVX SEE TYPCAL SECTION, SHEET H, FOR LINDEROHA/M RETAIL 9 CONNECT 6" WALL UND041DRAW TO NEW CATCH BASIN SS-A2+90 (O. 5' LT) WITH ?7 LF OF 8- PLAIN DRAM PIPE T O.5% PLACE STORM DRAIN CLfAAOLIT AT COMNECTIXK SEE rYPCK SECTION. SHEET N, FOR UNDfRQRAMr DETAIL 1Lw/N COACR£Tf I /O SW 50.G CATCH RTJ. CWITH j,CT NEW CATCH B,ISIN 1YPE JI-Ia'• WTrH SOLID Al COVER CONNECT TO £OUST/NO CATCH BASH' W/iN A79 LF pr /2" D[AMETER REINFORCED CO CRdETE STORY DRAIN PIPE N T TO SS-/O RT) WITH 1 1. LF OF 12-UCT NAM CATCH BASIN TYPE N-Ia., CONNECT 70 AEII CATCH BASIN SW-50.00 r?l.d RTJ WITH /07 LF pr /?- DIAMETER /iEgFp/{,�D COW STORM DRAW pfp AT BIDS 12 SS -rot Tj /0.5'LTI. CONSTRUCT NEW CATCH BASAL TYPE ill CONNECT TO Ni CATCH BASIN SS-100.50 l0.5' LTl WITH a? LF OF 12" DIAMETER REN 011 roACRE7E SToll DRAW PIPE AT BAST /J W/TH 7 90 (0OF rl. CONSTRUCT ANEW CATCH BASIN, TYPE I. CORRECT To MEIN CATCH BASIr Ss-A2•l7 f0. s'LTI WITH TJ LF OF /2" pArETER PENVFO D CO NL)ll STORY CRANN PYRE AT 729% 14 ABANDON EXl$TIAG CATCH BASIN AND LF Cw. 15 PLUG AND ABANDON EXISTING 12- O7NCR£TE PPE. 16 CONSTRUCT 6' PVC UNOER(yPy FOR WALL, SEE WALL 2 AND 3 TYPICAL SECT.pY, SHEET Ia, FOR DETAIL 17 SS-/02•/7 WITH 7 7J. CONSTRUCT NEW CATCH BASH TYPE /l-4&. CONNECT TO NEW CATCH BASIN SS_l l0.5'Lrl WITH 77 LF OF 12' pANE•TER fE/M`ORC£D OOMCR£Tf STORM LNPA/M pp,E AT 7.297 WATER NOTES: 1 AND PLUGS. (Ja.d C7J. INSTALL 2-W BV INA 1-Ir TEE (M 1. I -lam SLEEVE. SPOOLS, END CAPS AND PL(. A AND TFN7IUST Bf1X7N� LX comsro ,T 63 LF, p� /N- DL,SP CLASS O CUC7/(E /NON WATER YA,W TO BE— SEE COAWfCrVN DETAN A SIi IQ52 2 S S1100-23-251524. OF / Il NST AU "o"O' BEND LW/ W" rMgUST BLOCX/NG DIAIL CLASS 52 DUCTILE /RAY WATER MAIN TO NORTH, J ABANDON EXISTING WATER MAW- PLUG AND CAP EXISTING LIME AS SIAWAL SEE OETALL A SHEET /0. • SFSFF An,—(-0' DTI. Ni F/� �SIIEEEp70.AL BENDS lALJI PROPOSED 12' STORY CRANK. _.fry LErAN ON AAOVMD �• NNI CITY OF RENTON PL NNNKipL/CaKiPtlLlC —S DEPARiNENT o MOUSER WAY N. t (•C, S1 CN WROIep11 WAr FORTH TO NORM M XTIIi �A PLAN h:cAWNSE I14, SEC 23, T 23 N, R 5 E. W.M. "'°' ------------ 0 CONSTRUCT/ON NOTES: KTEA PppJEcT• yp_� TIA PROJECT 9p - �'•�'yp1� +.,. KTEA PROJECT• p►hOp7{�/` I RELOCATE EXISTING GUY PoLf 8Y OTHERS. -- 2 REMOVE EXISTING TRAFFIC CURB AND ISLAND, J CONSTRUCT CEMENT CONCRETE CURB, GUTTER. AND SIDEWALK. . 4 CONSTRUCT CEMENT CONCRETE SIDEWALK, SEE TYPICAL ROADWAY SECTIONS K AND 0 ON SHEET 7 FOR DETAILS '. _ B. _ - ---� _ - - � 1. ��- 5 CONSTRUCT CEMENT CONCRETE BARRIER TYPE ? PER CITY OF RENTON STANDARD PLAN CO3G 6 CONSTRUCT TYPE I STANDARD wAU.. SEE SHEETS 13 AND 44 FOR DETAILS. _------------ 7 CONSTRUCT CEMENT CONCRETE CURB. GUTTER, AND ASPHALT CONCRETE SHOULDER. .�.P q� - - 8 CONSTRUCT LANDSCAPE ISLAND. SEE LANDSCAPING PLAN SHEET 87 FOR DETAILS, j _ q _ 9 CONSTRUCT CEMENT CONCRETE CURB AND GUTTER W/ ASPHALT CONCRETE ISLAND. } - • --- - l0 FOR TUNNEL CONSTRUCTION SEE UNDERCROSSIMG PLAN AND DETAIL SHEETS 58 THRU Bp r_<\= Q \..'i u ...` __ -• -_ _ ll EXISTING CURB. GUTTER, AN 0 SIDEWALK TO REMAIN. Y --. 12 SAWCUr EXISTING PAVEMENT I• FROM FACE OF GUTTER. C .......... - '...k� c^� \ �_=�, , t •m _ !J CONSTRUCT CEMENT CONCRETE CURB AND GUTTER. Jl, EDi(/LE A � - � _ r - 14 CONSTRUCT SOLDIER PILE RETAINING W RI/ B DETAILS. SW---4.3? SCHEDULE ALL. SEE SHEETS 45 TH I FOR ' SIOS4.O?•4J PT j0 AU' B `� 1 �� 15 CONSTRUCT SOLDIER PILE RETAINING wALL SEE SHEETS 45, 4Q 50. AND 51 FOR DETAILS. b 6 /7%'----------- 16 CONSTRUCT SOLDIER PILE RETA/M/AG WALL. 5£E SHEETS 52 THOU jf FOR DETAILS. 55 04.19.9 PT -1 ! Tl �� _t END CURB AND GU E �� --,� F --- 17 CONSTRUCT W/NGWALL SEE SHEET 76 FOR DETAILS. I BEGIN CEMENT CONCRETE - l8 PLANE BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT 12' A7 COTTER OR CURB TO 0' AT l0' OU7l, If 4 ,U BARRIER ` _- - f :. _ _ WALL 1 0 lO 19 INSTALL MONUMENT CASE AND COVER PER CITY OF RENTON STANDARD PLAN hG31. •,~ 7 _ 61N - 4 •\ 20 CONSTRUCT BEAM GUARDRAIL TYPE I w/TH TYPE ! POSTS, TYPE E EASTERNER AND { SS-/03.y 61 !? - A' J976'Ir £ FgyA,T PT l' ( / - - I,_LIN FACE /9 BEAM GUARDRAIL ANCHOR TYPE ! PER CITY OF RENTON STANDARD PLANS LOON, 1 ~ I � is C002, COB, AND CO2?. - I r /O L) 21 ADJUST EXISTING MANHOLE TO GRADE. _ Y 22 SEE STRUCTURE PLAN SHEET 79 FOR DETAILS OF FIRE PROTECTION SYSTEM. d l /I IJ /�'p Q _ 4. 17 C' W O / w'ILC ? 'T 5 /0 �L,j 23 REMOVE EXISTING CURB, N FUSER k, ss:58 B 15 AE J619 O STORM DRAINAGE NOTES: - - - \ _ _ - - - _ _ �+ l M-13•40, CONSTRUCT NEW CATCH BASIN TYPE l WITH SOLID METAL COVER. CONNECT TO NEW CATCH mw 14 - - - - - _ s' ti BASIN H-14.42 WITH 102 LF OF 12' DIAMETER REINFORCED CONCRETE STORY DRAIN PIPE AT 2.57%. lE SJ.O _ 1Q /r -0 12' _ �ME 6 = 2 H2-1 � (12.5' RT), CONSTRUCT NEW CONCRETE INLET, CONNECT TO NEW CATCH BASIN H-13.40 WITH n D -.,H - 2' DIAMETER REINFORCED CONCRETE STORY DRAIN PIPE AT 1.007. _ _ WALLA J-I4.42. T N C BASIN / WITH METAL COVER. CONNECT TO NEW CATCH H CONS RUCT NEW CATCH BAS TYPE H SOLID M ` J - BASIN H-15 WITH /IJ F f AM T R NFO NCR STORM DRAIN PP T _ wALt _ � � _ _ r4' 1 _ -� `� �. _ -55 LF 0 2' p E f aEl RCfD CONCRETE S OR PIPE A L72Y,. 7 3 i - - 4 H-N•4? (12.5' LT), CONSTRUCT NEW CONCRETE INLET, CONNECT TO NEW CATCH BASIN H-14-42 WITH +-._..� - - " S,f 6? - - 5 G i _ -' -- - - ~ _ l2 LF OF l?" DIAMETER RfINfOACED COACR£TE STORY DRAIN PIPE AT I,00%, 20 - - - - - - - �-- 5 H-15.55. CONSTRUCT NEW CATCH BASIN TYPE I WITH SOLID METAL COVER. CONNECT TO NEW CATCH 7 - _ IN BASIN H-16.76 WITH 121 LF OF 12' DIAMETER REINFORCED CONCRETE STORM DRAIN PIPE AT I.53Y. _ 1- '-.�A JU� - 'g S•S,/ y �I L _ �7 6 H-16.76. CONSTRUCT NEW CATCH BASIN TYPE l WITH SOLID METAL LOVER• CONNECT TO NEW CATCH S /6 l6 BASIN N-18•17 (12.5' LT) WITH 138 LF OF 12" DIAMETER REINFORCED CONCRETE STORY DRAIN PIPE AT 1.00%. V L. ll �``�� -BAH T -- 22 � / � � • � - - .. _ _ 13 f 7 H-16.76 (12.5' LTI. CONSTRUCT NEW CATCH BASIN TYPE 1. CONNECT TO NEW CATCH BASIN H-16.76 r lrO'^ 4 _ __- WITH l2 LF OF I?" DIAMETER REINFORCED CONCRETE STORY DRAIN PIPE AT /.DO% �/" �. _ /E l3 N `. - ( APT .K_ _ 8 �`�'' /W" / .* 79.OP E 8 CONSTRUCT 6" PVC UNDERDRA/N FOR W �A g,8 SIw. SS-/06-6 90 !2 - CTL ALL AS S/•pwN (SEE TYPICAL VERTICAL SECTION, SHEET 46, FOR DETAIL). _ _ �•J` A 1 - 2 ti J L !I CONNECT TO NEW CATCH BASIN H-13•40 WITH 15 LF OF 8- PLAIN CONCRETE STORY DRAIN PIPE. 1 71 + i e v 9 CONSTRUCT 6' PVC UNOERORAIN FOR WALL AS SHOWN (SEE TYPICAL VERTICAL SECTION, SHEET �` l F - (18' T) n� CONNECT TO NEW CATCH BASIN H-I3•40 WITH 4 LF OF 6" PVC DRAIN PIPE 48. FOR DETAIL!. � y V `+ q; r e e� �?• 2J l0 CONSTRUCT 6" PVC UNDERORAIN FOR WALL SEE WALL 2 AND J TYPICAL SECTION, SHEET 48. FOR DETAIL 2 / N Il CONSTRUCT 6' PVC UNDERDRA/N FOR WALL- 5£E WALL 2 AND J TYPICAL SECTION. SHEET 48, FOR DETAIL `v CONNECT TO NEW CATCH BASIN H-/HI WITH 4 LF OF 6- PVC DRAIN PIPE. d _ r 2 1 - _ .ar, _ l2 R DETAIL / � CONSTRUCT 6' PVC UNDfRORA/N FOR WALL SEE WALL ? AND J TYPICAL SECTION, SHEET 48, f0 L !1 p• CONNECT 70 NEW CATCH BASIN H-/4.12 WITH 15 LF OF 8' PLAIN CONCRETE STORY DRAIN PIP£. "- - - - - l PF f7`/ IJ 55-/01.40 (0.5' LT). CONSTRUCT NEW CATCH BASIN TYPE 1, CONNECT TO NEW CATCH BASIN 55-02.90 10.5' LT) WITH l50 LF OF 12' DIAMETER REINFORCED CONCRETE STORY DRAIN PIPE AT 2.95%. Y 14 CONNECT NEW CATCH BASIN H-15.70 117.0' LT) TO EXISTING CATCH BASIN WITH 127 LF OF /B` DUCTILE IRON PIPE - - } `9 - _0 _ ISO 15 58-100.21 (25.5' LT). CONSTRUCT NEW CATCH BASIN TYPE II-48' WITH _ - r r SOLID METAL COVER. CONNECT TO WTFALL - - - - - - -- - - �- H-16.00 176.0' L71 WITH 67 LF OF IB' DUCTILE IRON PIPE AT 32.937. HAND PLACE RIPRAP 2' DEEP. 7.5'XI? PAD. SEE RIPRAP PAD DETAIL SHEET 8. _ - - _ _ `• \\ 1 `� _ 16 REMOVE EXISTING CATCH BASIN AMD ABANDON CONNECTING PIPES. e 17 CONSTRUCT 6' PVC UMDERDRA/N FOR WALL SEE TYPCAL SECTION, SHEET II, FOR DETAILS. • ` _ y - - _ _ - - = -- �+ .. _ - - r 18 M-116-76 137,0' LT). CONNECT STORY DRAM CLfANDUT TO 6" PVC UNDERDRA/M WITH 6 LF OF 6- PVC DRAIN APE. -fir` , ` v CONNECT 6" PVC UNDERDRA/N TO NEW CATCH BASIN H-/6.76 !/2.5' LTl WITH 4 LF OF 6' PVC DRAIN PIPE. _ -- , J _ - _ _ _ _ - --�� - •` ` ` ' aP� 19 H-16.23 (42.0' LTI. CONNECT 36 L� OF 6" PVC STORM DRAIN PIPE TO WALL UNDERDRAW AT END OF WALL ! -LINE 0 WATER NOTES: 20 PLUG AND ABANDON EXISTING IS- CMP WEST OF EXISTING CATCH BASIN. ArgM CURVE DATA - - - - - - - - - - `N'r?•5? J? DELTA RADIUS TAATr£Nr LENGTH -- - - - - - _ _ . - . - �y - - - - - + I SR9i00-28.58 (22.0' RT). CONSTRUCT 14-22.5' BEND rMI WITH THRUST BLOCKING. CONSTRUCT /J'09'40' 770.00' 8d.8J' 176.87' 60 LF OF NEW 14' DIAM. CLASS 52 DUCTILE IRON WATER MAIN TO 22.5' BEND. ' N'K•2J,5d J7-pry2T 671• j0• 224.73' 4J3.72• ` y " j` s` E - - - - c�j _ _ 2 SR900-29•15 (2.O RT), CONSTRUCT 1r-12.S BEND IYJXYJI AND lI'-45' BEND IYJXYJI •J6 B'18'00' 957.4I' 5y.72' 188.BJ' C' - - - - - - WITH THRUST BLOCKING, CONSYLCT J9 LF OF NEW I4 GAY. CLASS 52 DUCTILE /AGM 56H7'J2 02'223r 1000.00• Po•73' N -4. � _ - - -• - - _ - - l.I WATER MAIN TO VERTICAL CROSS IO'•J7 96 2PIY/0' 2d5.3'r 37.19' IIO.%'-- -- - - - 3 5R900-29•15 136.0' LT). CONSTRUCT /r VERTICAL CROSS (MJXFU. 14' �� , �ASp�`0 CITY OF RENTON J9'?9'/6' 381,38' IJ7,%' 264,9r - - - - - - r�, _ _ _ _ GAM. SLEEVE, 2-14' BV (mi), l4• TEE (M I, END CAPS AND PLUGS, SPOOLS, ` , a.�0517.5 73 _ - - - - - - -'Q AND THRUST BLOCKING A$ REQUIRED 5£E CONNECTION DETAIL B SHEET 10. 90SJ' 600 00' 9/•47' /d2.76- _ _ _ - - CONTRACTOR SHALL FIELD VERIFY EXISTING WATER LINE LOCATION. PLAWNIG/8ULDMAG/PUBLIC MOIRES DEPARTMENT 27•ITl6' 600.00' N5.6w' 2d5.76' y - - O �"3d,82 - - - - - 4 ABANDON EXISTING lI' GAY, MITER LINE 1N PLACE. HOUSER WAY N. • "� •��s�� •9r z p4.',� BR011BON MMV TO NORTH Nh dir�T tip.=2aa- I St E NORTH j eMvrE, 120 10 0 20 40 I•••ro"a. •�• _ /�� PLANWTI �" �y� /. ARE EXIST/AG TOPOGRAPHIC' AND PHYSICAL FEATURES SHOWN ON THESE PLANS SCAL£r r ZO' ivn,Es H-I3+OO TO H-17+OO Sr SS'IOT+dB. ��,ER A/'r£ BASED ON A AND FIELD OF RECORD DRAWINGS, ASBUILTS, FIELD RECONNAISSANCE. AND FIELD SURVEY$, THIS IS THE BEST AVAILABLE INFORMATION. E N T R A Jd C O aslamr ' AVE. BUT ACTUAL COMpTION$ MAY BE DIFFERENT. THE.C7NTRACTOR WILL ENCOUNTER WTG rAII YaL �Ea 1 v VARIATIONS BETWEEN ACTUAL CONDITIONS AND THIOSE PENS THESE VA AT XINS lM4AM WILL MDT BE TNf BAST$ FOR A CWY FC4 EXTRA COMPENSATION. £ACAKERS SLIEAT/STT PL,M"IENS 57KWlY17P5 ctcam, SCAT AS. S1Uw1 -- rAar. i fTASINOTON ARIZONA CALIFORNII _ - Io. Ncvlslo" er. .rrw_ ".rr AII ..�_ .. - ... Laucks Testing Laboratories, Inc. 940 S. Harney Seattle, WA 98108 WATER BACTERIOLOGICAL ANALYSIS SAMPLE COLLECTION: READ INSTRUCTIONS ON BACK OF GOLDENROD COPY If Instructions are not followed, sample will be rejected. DATE COLLECTED TIME COLLECTED COUNTY NAME MONTH CDAY YEAR 1 4 /�4' /-) c ❑ AM ❑ PM TYPE OF SYSTEM IF PUBLIC SYSTEM, COMPLETE: ❑ PUBLIC CIRCLE GROUP ❑ INDIVIDUAL LD. N0. ��-TTI A B (serves ony 1 residence) NAME OF SYSTEM SPECIFIC LOCATION WHERE SAMPLE COLLECTED TELEPHONE NO. Z'r -&Low d r'1' n/02Tw DAY ( ) oFJ-1A1 5 �°�GAL. 4 a 5R. EVENING ( ) SAMPLE COLLECTED BY: (Name) SYSTEM OWNER/MGR.: (Name) I - �i - I ---c.. crime SOURCE TYPE ❑ GROUND WATER UNDER SURFACE INFLUENCE ❑ SURFACE ❑ WELL or ❑ SPRING ❑ PURCHASED or []COMBINATION WELL FIELD INTERTIE or OTHER SEND REPORT TO: (Print Full Name, Address and Zip Code) /<'— /V / CJ /V WAW NWON rj C: TYPE OF SAMPLE (check only one in this column) ❑ ROUTINE ❑ Chlorinated (Residual: DRINKING WATER check treatment ❑ Filtered ❑ Untreated or Other_ ❑ REPEAT SAMPLE Previous coliform presence Lab ft Date Total Free) ❑ RAW SOURCE WATER Source N FS] m ❑ Total Coliform NEW CONSTRUCTION or REPAIRS ❑ Fecal Coliform ❑ OTHER (Specify) REMARKS: (LAB USE ONLY) DRINKING WATER RESULTS ❑ UNSATISFACTORY, Coliforms present ❑ SATISFACTORY, Coliforms absent REPEAT ❑ E. Coli present ❑ E. Coli absent SAMPLES Fecal resent Fecal absent REQUIRED ❑ P ❑ OTHER LABORATORY RESULTS TOTAL COLIFORM /100 ml E. COLI " /100ml FECAL COLIFORM /100 ml PLATE COUNT /ml ANOTHER SAMPLE REQURED SAMPLE NOT TESTED BECAUSE: TEST UNSUITABLE BECAUSE: ❑ Sample too old ❑ Confluent growth ❑ Wrong container ❑ TNTC ❑ Incomplete form ❑ Turbid culture ❑ ❑ Excess debris SEE REVERSE SIDE OF GREEN COPY FOR EXPLANATION OF RESULTS LAB NO. (7 DIGITS) DATE, TIME RECEIVED RECEIVED BY DATE REPOR ED LABORATORY: IZ�7ei REMARKS DOH 306-002 (REV. 4192) WATCD CHOD] ICD !` OV INTERPRETATION OF RESULTS FOR DRINKING WATER The analysis perforrne,.r on this drinking water sample is an examira- tion for the presence of coliform orgy^'sms in the wager -id ^dicates the bacteriological quality f the sample. The presence of coliform organisms is used by health organi_ ations worldwide as ar ndic.ator for the possible presence of other disease causing organisms. REPORTING OF RESULTS. Group A Public Water Systems must report the reF-ults of urinK;ng Water Analysis to the State as specified in WAC � 46- _90 190. SATISFACTORY RESULTS: The absence of coliforms from any sample it, !atlsf,ctc ry Proper system maintenance and bacteriological monitoring should to cnn- tinued routinely to insure the safety ct the water suppiy UNSATISFACTORY R-�S_ljLTS: Any coliform presence is unsatisfactory. The presence of culiforms indicates the system is not properly protected against contamination. and may be unsafe for ­Iu�•..:n n sumption . Unsatisfactory ,, m.p!es should oc ­vc-sticr, red IMIVILDl- ATELY and .repeat samples submitted. Contact your local health department or DOH Regional Office for assistanc _ -n-rete'r,inmg the source of contamination and corrective procedures. When fecal culiforms or E.coli are reported present m a sample. ie IMMEDIATE ACTION REQUIRED by a Public System rsi 1. Investigate to determine the cause and ccrre,'the situation. Your local health department er DOH Regional Gffic� can assist you. 2. Submit repeat samples as specified ^1 WAC 24t-2 +_,-4Er2. 3. Publicly notify the users of public water systems as speci- fied in WAC 246-290-480. 4. Contact your local health department or DOH Regional Office as specified in WAC 246-290-480. TEST UNSUITABLE: Resample Immediately "Confluent Growth" means bacteria have grown into a continuous mass which makes counting impossibie. "TNTC" means uactaria are too numerous to count "Excess Debris" means that particulat"_ s i•i the water interfere with the interpretation of test result;. "Turbid Culture" means an overgrowth of other bacteria c:an interfere with coliform analysis. If any box indicating an unsuitable test is checked, the presence of coliform bacteria could not be determined and a new sample must be obtained for testing. RESAMPLE: Sample too old. (Sample to be tested must be received within 30 hours). Not in proper container. (Bottle to be used for testing must Le purchased from a certified lab within 6 months.) Insufficient volume. (Sample must be at least 100 ml) If not tested, a new sample must be submitted for analysis FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Contact your local health department OR the laboratory where this sample was tested OR the Department of Health, Drinking Water Program Regional Office. 01/02/96 13;20 $`206 767 5063 LALICKS TESTING --- RENTON P/H'FP% Uucks Testing Laboratories Inc PO S, Harney Seattle, WA 98108 WATER BACTERIOLOGICAL ANALYSIS SWPLE Mir: RW ItOXM ON aaac op aDgj p�o cry 11U I t» not fQ11"Id, i+mPh *111 N f**tbd. GATE ED TIME CQL1,E 70 (oUhTY KWE uO. u TTJA iz'Ig5 ❑Ail ❑P)A f�Cr TYPE OF SYSTFl,1 IF PUBLIC GY6Tfl.1, COMPLET[; f (10UC F] INDIVIDUAL GR GROUP uAr.e �,+,� + —id—)I.D. No. A 8 O E OF SYSTEM S?ECIFf I CC�TION k'F�RE f tFtF.E �l Lr� TEL EVHLINE NO. i�� aLO.aJ Circe P10PTV DAY( %i� O �F1A1C 5 iz. `iOC� �'S1 rCNING SAIIDLE COLLECTED BY. (Name) $Y$TEM OWNERw(;R - (Namo) iZ)a y SLa-a > SOURCE TYPE ❑ GROUND WATLR UNDER SURFACE INI-L.UENCE O SURFAL,L Or ❑ SPRING PURCHASED or COMBINATION WELL FIELD u: EPmE or OTHER SFND REPORT TO: (Print Full Wuro, AOCreSS &M Lq CW@) C, O F &!; /k l� � /i�/GG A l SO TYPE Or SA-MF`i E (dvk* only oft In eis wk m) ROUTING ChlwSr+amd (RoaauaL� _Tpal^ Flee) DRINKING WATER shock tr bmnr r-, t,Imrad Unftatad w Omer ❑ P,zPEAT6AIAPLE Prwb-c Wiiform proserrce LAD i i1Gto / ❑ RAW SOURCE WATGR Sour® II S ❑ Teta) Colowm NEW CONSTRUCTION or RGPAIM& L J F*= (Worm OTHER (Spat ry) Q.AD USE OKY) DatNPONa WATER Rr5UL15 DUN BSFAL—TOWYCoP,-w F,�t jiEPEATo PLFS E Cdlp eaon; QUIRED ❑ Fovrasent 8 G CnlepaBnr tI aflsont ❑ M'T IAGTORY, fin: OTHER LA OPATOrtY RESULTS TOTAL COLIFORM A00 no t "I A I100m1 FECAL GOLIFORM 1100 ml P(ATG COUNT Am ANOTTIER SAMPLE REQURED &WPLE NOT TESTED RFr.AUSE: TL3T UNSUITABLE BECAUSE; ❑ Gamplo 700 QQ ❑ Confhler.t Qrrtith ❑ Wrwy container ❑ TNTC i] tnoSrnpbu ta... ❑ Turfld nrfhuo ❑ DCstaaa OBDPts WE "YMSE SIUL OF GREEN DOPY FOR EXPI ANATICW OF RFGULT LA8 NO. (r OICUTc) GATE TLE I1EC{iveL RECEPVED BY I�pm �'� [SATE 1) IAAf,YyAT04T: UI V([ UU- y6r,Q�� I-IP6-- YO 76 ,42 -7�D jq�;i,� "'- �, V4 �� m CITY OF RENTON WATER DEPARTMENT Pressure Test $ Purification Test Form PROJECT NO. NAME OF PROJECT L PRESSURE TEST TAKEN BYfif._ ON00 �© AT A PRESSURE OF PSI, FOR % % MIN. TEST ACCEPTED ON PURIFICATION TEST TAKEN BY ON PURIFICATION TEST RESULTS, SAMPLE #1 SAMPLE #2 SAMPLE #3 REMARKS: wl DIST. . _.--.__._._. 1031 vtv as+�+�,i.Lii dte?yiJi� p�)� �y2r��•9 g�,ye,p ^ { i D JOB NUMBEfl .' (� �� DepaG 1S 1 e t i o TC a spo wa-i-ion � /j NGR. CONTPACT NO. I __ ^ 1 �, 1 )tA DATE REVISION BY APP'D d R�NToN AV�• PoN� —• s� DOT FORM 221-029 Revised 9/82 SCALE W FEET WGION STATE FED. AID. PROJ. NO. HIGHWAY DIVISION SR 405 >IGNED BY ROBYNTEVE LLINOYD 10 WASH WashrnDepartment ton State Transportatton S0. RENTON I /C TO SUNSET BLVD. -ERED BY STEVE OLLING :CKED BY BOYD/WEBBER JOB MLOMER sNEET H.O.V. LANES )J. ENGR. D. J. MARTIN ,T. ADM. R.E. BOCKSTRUCK CONTWT NO. OF DRAINAGE PLANS DATE DATE REVISION JBYJ I I I SHEETS 63 62 61 60 59 58 57 56 55 54 53 52 51 50 49 48 47 46 45 44 43 42 41 ~ 40 c 39 38 w T O1 37 � m M a 36 L� w o " 35 34 33 N 32 31 30 29 PLOT4 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 TERED BY ENGR. M I C J IV 9 rt� t o w o ICI o IV ---------- A—•- \\ --1 --- s., 1 � 'W^"•+�""'••••'�"'- __-_--__-. ���\ \ \ t a kk \ '\ 4 ------Q ii'---- y/'/ C`rS;bz� '�� �`- \-�---- \- - \ --� - - - - - OO \ - - - _ ----15°-PCBs-P---------- ----- ----------- --� ----------------------- t2 PCSSP TAPER I:so--- -- ----- ---- --------------------- s __ _-- ------- TAPER__ 1.50 '_ ------------- --------------------- --------- --- -'- - ------ Q -1 n m (0 lV N - ly N - - ----ate - - - m N --- ' N `-------------------------- ______—___ -----fr��cssP_--------------------- °------------------- __--____ _ _________ ' - d _ l' ^ ___ _______ __ _____-__� _--______-____ 1--__--_-���-------- 2+ PCSSP A P SSP - - _--- _ --------- m- ------= ---------- — -- -- - -- ' �' 1 TAPER 1:10 - _ m ---- -----_ - __ --- -T-A-'R J:25 /12 6 _ I I Tao R 1.50 SSA' f GCJGJQ 2V PCSSp ors ; \\ _�O - - r' , /cl) Ili 10 IWASH ; 50 0 50 100 150 200 SCALE IN FEET FED.AID PROJ.NO.I HIGHWAY DIVISION l i lIf ' 'ri Washington State Department of Transportation W F w0 41 to x + N ,- w 1" Z N J = = J SR 405 SO. RENTON I/C TO SUNSET BL H.O.V. LANES flDATNIA(`C DI ANIC I DRAWN CHECKED PHOJ. ENGH. _ oisT. ADM.. _ L.�...�- ®�..s. DOT ;-ORM 221-020 0/82 10 I WAS CONTR nCT NO. ----" �" � — APPROVED P.EVISION t3Y APP'D G '-. J tit :department of Tranpoi Cation OF 1 Engineers - Planners Economists - Scientists November 21, 1989 SEA20080.B0 City of Renton 200 Mill Avenue Renton, Washington 98055 Attention: Ron Olsen, Utilities Engineer Subject: Pipeline Materials for the Aquifer Protection Ordinance Following our meetings of the past two weeks, we have prepared the attached Table 1 which shows Pipeline Material Alternatives for pipelines crossing the City of Renton's Aquifer Protection Area, Zone 1. The accompanying Table 2 contains a list of considerations which should be evaluated when selecting alternative pipe materials from Table 1. These materials are intended to be used in pipelines carrying storm sewage, sanitary sewage, or landfill leachate. They are not intended for more specialized pipeline service such as transmission of petroleum products. All materials listed in Table 1 are generally considered suitable for the service indicated, based on accepted practice and their commercial availability. Some materials are better suited than others; however, there is no clearcut best choice of pipeline material for a given service. For brevity, the list of suggested material specs does not include the many specifications which cover details such as gaskets, coatings, etc. It is our understanding that the City will incorporate this list by reference into the Aquifer Protection Ordinance to provide guidance concerning allowable pipeline materials within Zone 1 of the Aquifer Protection Area, for both new construction and rehabilitation or replacement of existing pipelines. As we have emphasized in our meetings, this list is likely not all-inclusive; it is only a guideline. It is impossible to condense all pipeline materials selection information into a short table or text. It is essential CH2M HILL Seattle Office 777 108th Avenue, N.E., Bellevue, Washington 206.453.5000 P.O. Box 91500, Bellevue, Washington 98009-2050 City of Renton Page 2 November 21, 1989 SEA20080.B0 that each pipeline project be fully evaluated on a case -by - case basis to arrive at the optimum engineering solution. Please call us if you have any questions. Sincerely, CH2M HILL Arthur L. Storbo, P.E. Attachment TABLE 2 CONSIDERATIONS ON SELECTION OF PIPE MATERIALS The following considerations are to be used in conjunction with Table 1 for tentative selection of pipe materials. a. Rubber gaskets may be severely damaged by petroleum products, particularly in prolonged exposures to concentrated flows containing little or no storm water or sanitary sewage. b. Gasketed joints are not considered leak -proof at zero or low pressures, and may not be leak -proof at higher pressures. C. Mechanical joints may be less likely to leak at low pressures than push -on joints. d. May need protective coatings and/or cathodic protection against external corrosion. e. Considered most reliable gasket and lining material for ductile iron leachate pipeline. f. Very difficult to repair linings on inside of joints in pipe smaller than 24-inch diameter. g. Almost always needs protective coatings and cathodic protection against external corrosion. h. Properly made joints are considered leak -proof. i. Polyethylene, although corrosion resistant, can be severely affected by prolonged exposures to petroleum products. j. Viton (or nitrile) gaskets may require long delivery time. k. Concrete pipe not recommended without "liquid -tight" lining of another material. 1. Potential to develop leaks at joints due to structural or gasket failures. M. Limited to low pressure applications. n. Pipe not available over 15-inch diameter. o. Requires special attention to bedding and backfill depth to avoid structural failure of pipe. p. Large thermal expansion coefficient. May need to limit solvent welded joints to 4-inch and smaller pipe. May require careful evaluation of pipe installation temperature and temperature of piped liquids to ensure joint integrity. q. Pipe not available over 12-inch diameter. r. Insituform lining is available in 6-inch through 60-inch diameter for almost any pressure, if sufficient pipe cross -sectional area is available s-u. Not used. V. Suitability of pipe lining and gasket material to resist chemical attack by conveyed fluids must be determined for each pipeline service considered. W. All storm and sanitary sewer manholes, catch basins, and inlets should be equipped with precast concrete bottom and sidewalls with rubber gasketed joints between sections, water -tight epoxy grout pipe entrances through walls, and bitumastic coating of all interior floor and wall surfaces. Manholes, catch basins, and inlets should have no leakage when hydrostatically tested at atmospheric pressure. X. Has good resistance to chemicals, petroleum products, and hydrogen sulfide corrosion. y. Not recommended for buried applications due to limited experience and high cost. Z. "Zero leakage" test requirement may be impossible to achieve under the best conditions for any pipe material because trapped air may distort test results, even in a drop -tight pipe. Pressure and leakage test requirements should consider whether the pipe has steep slope or will stand full of liquid. Pipelines should be tested with the intent to prevent or minimize leakage. Air testing should not be allowed; hydrostatic testing should be as stringent as any found in the industry. Pipe materials, without regard for chemical attack, corrosion, or puncture, are generally ranked as follows, in decreasing order of liquid -tight reliability: welded steel with welded joints high density polyethylene with thermal -fusion joints PVC with solvent welded joints fiberglass with welded joints Insituform liner ductile iron with viton or rubber gaskets concrete cylinder with gasketed joints welded steel with rubber gasketed joints PVC with viton or rubber gasketed joints concrete pipe with rubber gasketed joints rentaipa.wrl 21 Nov 89 PIPE MATERIAL Ductile Iron, Rubber Caskets Cement Mortar -Lined Polyethylene -Lined Ductile Iron, Viton Gaskets Cement Mortar -Lined Polyethylene -Lined ---------------------------- Welded Steel, Rubber Gaskets Cement Mcrtar-L i ned Dielectrlc-Lined Welded Steel, Welded Joints Cement Mortar -Lined Dielectric -Lined ---------------------------- PVC, Rubber Casket joints SDR-35 Sewer Pipe Blue Brute Cl 150 or 200 PVC, Viton Gasket Joints EDR-35 Sewer Pipe Blue Brute Cl 150 or 200 PVC, Solvent Welded Joints Sch 80 ---------------------------- High Density Polyethylene Thermal -Fusion Joints ---------------------------- Concrete, Rubber Gasket Jts Standard Concrete Lining With Insituform Lining With HDFE Insert ---------------------------- Conc Cylinder, Rubber Gasket Std Cement Mortar Lining With Insituform Lining With HDFE Insert ---------------------------- Fiberglass, W/ Welded Joints ---------------------------- Insituform Liner HDPE Insert ---------------------------- PIPELINE SERVICE TABLE 1 PIPELINE MATERIAL ALTERNATIVES City of Renton, Washington WIPE DIAMETER <'4 4-8 10-12 14-20 24-30 36-54 ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- 1,2 1,2 1,2 1,2 1,2 1,2 1,2 1,2 1,2 1,2 2 2 1,2 1,2 1,2 ---------------------------------- 1,2 1,2 1,2 1,2 1,2 1,2 1,2 1,2 1,2 1,2 1,2 1,2 7. �.---------------------------------- 1,2 1,2 1,2 1,2,= 1,2 Q 2 1,2 1,2 2 Q 1,2Q. 2,3 n ----------------------------- 1 1 2 1 2 1,2 ----------------------------------- 1,2,3 1,2,3 1 ,2,3 1 ,2,3 112 ----------------------------------- 1,2 1,2 2 1 1 3 1 1 7 �7 7 t7 � 1 "-7'1 7 �- 7" !'- ------------- ------ - - -------------- 2,3 ----------------------------------- 4,5 4,5 4,5 4,5 4,5 4,5 4,5 4,5 4,5 4,5 4,5 ----------------------------------- 1. Storm Sewer 2. Sanitary Sewer Leachate Pipeline. 4. Rehab Existing Stcrm Sewer 5. Rehab Existing Sanitary Sewer SUGGESTED MATERIAL SPEC ---------------------------- AWWA C151, C104 AWWA C151 AWWA C151, C104 AWWA C151 --------------- AWWA C200, C205 AWWA C200, C210 AWWA C200, C205 AWWA C200, C210 ---------------- ASTM D3034 AWWA C900 ASTM D3� �34 AWWA C900 ASTM ----------------- D17841 D17S5 ASTM D3350 ASTM C76 ASTM C76, U67B ASTM C76, D=50 --------------- AWWA C301 , C303 AWWA C001 , CZ03 AWWA ---------------------------- C301, C-OS, ASTM U3350 ---------------------------- ASTM D638 ASTM ---------------------------- F585 CONSIDERATIONS (See Table 2) ----------------- a b c d v w z a b c d v w z b c d i v w z b c d e i v w z ----------------- a b f g h v w z a b f g h v w z f g h v w z f g h v w z --------------- a b m +n o v w z a b o g v w z b j m n o v w z b o g v w z h +_' p g v w z --------------- h i o v w z a b k l m v w z h r v x w z h i v w z --------------- a b f g k v w z g h r v x w z g h h v w z - -------------- -- c v w ., y ----------------- h r v w x z h i v w z ----------------- Engineers Planners Economists - Scientists November 21, 1989 SEA20080.B0 City of Renton 200 Mill Avenue Renton, Washington 98055 Attention: Ron Olsen, Utilities Engineer Subject: Pipeline Materials for the Aquifer Protection Ordinance Following our meetings of the past two weeks, we have prepared the attached Table 1 which shows Pipeline Material Alternatives for pipelines crossing the City of Renton's Aquifer Protection Area, Zone 1. The accompanying Table 2 contains a list of considerations which should be evaluated when selecting alternative pipe materials from Table 1. These materials are intended to be used in pipelines carrying storm sewage, sanitary sewage, or landfill leachate. They are not intended for more specialized pipeline service such as transmission of petroleum products. All materials listed in Table 1 are generally considered suitable for the service indicated, based on accepted practice and their commercial availability. Some materials are better suited than others; however, there is no clearcut best choice of pipeline material for a given service. For brevity, the list of suggested material specs does not include the many specifications which cover details such as gaskets, coatings, etc. It is our understanding that the City will incorporate this list by reference into the Aquifer Protection Ordinance to provide guidance concerning allowable pipeline materials within Zone 1 of the Aquifer Protection Area, for both new construction and rehabilitation or replacement of existing pipelines. As we have emphasized in our meetings, this list is likely not all-inclusive; it is only a guideline. It is impossible to condense all pipeline materials selection information into a short table or text. It is essential CH2M HILL Seattle Office 777 108th Avenue, N.E., Bellevue, Washington 206.453.5000 P.O. Box 91500, Bellevue, Washington 98009-2050 City of Renton Page 2 November 21, 1989 SEA20080.B0 that each pipeline project be fully evaluated on a case -by - case basis to arrive at the optimum engineering solution. Please call us if you have any questions. Sincerely, CH2M HILL lt� Arthur L. Storbo, P.E. Attachment TABLE 2 CONSIDERATIONS ON SELECTION OF PIPE MATERIALS The following considerations are to be used in conjunction with Table 1 for tentative selection of pipe materials. a. Rubber gaskets may be severely damaged by petroleum products, particularly in prolonged exposures to concentrated flows containing little or no storm water or sanitary sewage. b. Gasketed joints are not considered leak -proof at zero or low pressures, and may not be leak -proof at higher pressures. C. Mechanical joints may be less likely to leak at low pressures than push -on joints. d. May need protective coatings and/or cathodic protection against external corrosion. e. Considered most reliable gasket and lining material for ductile iron leachate pipeline. f. Very difficult to repair linings on inside of joints in pipe smaller than 24-inch diameter. g. Almost always needs protective coatings and cathodic protection against external corrosion. h. Properly made joints are considered leak -proof. i. Polyethylene, although corrosion resistant, can be severely affected by prolonged exposures to petroleum products. j. Viton (or nitrile) gaskets may require long delivery time. k. Concrete pipe not recommended without "liquid -tight" lining of another material. 1. Potential to develop leaks at joints due to structural or gasket failures. M. Limited to low pressure applications. n. Pipe not available over 15-inch diameter. o. Requires special attention to bedding and backfill depth to avoid structural failure of pipe. p. Large thermal expansion coefficient. May need to limit solvent welded joints to 4-inch and smaller pipe. May require careful evaluation of pipe installation temperature and temperature of piped liquids to ensure joint integrity. q. Pipe not available over 12-inch diameter. r. Insituform lining is available in 6-inch through 60-inch diameter for almost any pressure, if sufficient pipe cross -sectional area is available s-u. Not used. V. Suitability of pipe lining and gasket material to resist chemical attack by conveyed fluids must be determined for each pipeline service considered. W. All storm and sanitary sewer manholes, catch basins, and inlets should be equipped with precast concrete bottom and sidewalls with rubber gasketed joints between sections, water -tight epoxy grout pipe entrances through walls, and bitumastic coating of all interior floor and wall surfaces. Manholes, catch basins, and inlets should have no leakage when hydrostatically tested at atmospheric pressure. X. Has good resistance to chemicals, petroleum products, and hydrogen sulfide corrosion. y. Not recommended for buried applications due to limited experience and high cost. Z. "Zero leakage" test requirement may be impossible to achieve under the best conditions for any pipe material because trapped air may distort test results, even in a drop -tight pipe. Pressure and leakage test requirements should consider whether the pipe has steep slope or will stand full of liquid. Pipelines should be tested with the intent to prevent or minimize leakage. Air testing should not be allowed; hydrostatic testing should be as stringent as any found in the industry. Pipe materials, without regard for chemical attack, corrosion, or puncture, are generally ranked as follows, in decreasing order of liquid -tight reliability: welded steel with welded joints high density polyethylene with thermal -fusion joints PVC with solvent welded joints fiberglass with welded joints Insituform liner ductile iron with viton or rubber gaskets concrete cylinder with gasketed joints welded steel with rubber gasketed joints PVC with viton or rubber gasketed joints concrete pipe with rubber gasketed joints rentpipe.wri 21 Nov 69 PIPE MATERIAL Ductile Iron, Rubber Gaskets Cement Mortar -Lined Pol yethylene-Lin_d Ductile Iron, Viton Gasket_ Cement Mortar -Lined Polyethylene -Lined ---------------------------- Welded Steel, Rubber Gaskets Cement Mortar -Lined Dielectric -Lined Welded Steel, Welded Joints Cement Mortar -Lined Dielectric -Lined ----------------------------- PVC, Rubber Gasket joints SDR-:�5 Sewer Pipe Blue Brute Cl 150 or 200 PVC, VitOn Gasket Joints SDR-35 Sewer Pipe Blue Brute Cl 150 or 2.'0 PV--, Solvent nt Welded Joints S_h 000 ---------------------------- High Density Polyethylene Thermal -Fusion joints ---------------------------- Concrete, Rubber Gasket Jts Standard Concrete Lining With Insituform Lining With HDPE Insert ---------------------------- Conc Cylinder, Rubber Gasket Std Cement Mortar Lining With Insituform Lining With HDPE Insert I ---------------------------- ' Fiberglass, W/ Welded Joints ---------------------------- I n s i t u T -_ r m Liner HDPE Insert ---------------------------- ' PIPELINE SERVICE TABLE 1 PIPELT•NE MATERIAL ALTERNATIVES City of Renton, Washington PIPE DIAMETER e4 4-8 10-12 14-20 24-30 36•-54 1,2 1,2 1,2 1,2 1,2 2 1 ? 1 1 ' '' ' a 2 1 '' 1 _ 4� 77� 7"' 1,2,= 1,2,-_ 1,2,3 1 , 2 , 3 1,2 1,2 1,2 1,2 1,2 1,2 1,2 1,2 ---------------------------------- 1,2 1,2 1,2 1,^,.' 1,_, 1 1,2 1 �- 9--' i , - 27 1 -r= 77-" 1,2,' 1,2,= ----------------------- 2 1 1 22 1 21 1,2213 1 7 ----------------------------------- 1 ' ' 1 1 �,'=T-- �,27-= ,�7-1 72 1729' 17*1�13 ---------------------------.-------. 1 '' 1 1,2,3 1,2,3 1,2,3 1,2,3 1,2 1,2,3 1,2,3 1,2,3 1,2,-1 1,2 ----------------------------------- 2,' ----------------------------------- 4,5 4,5 4,5 4,5 4,5 4,5 4,5 4,5 4,5 4,5 4,5 ----------------------------------- 1. Storm Sewer �. Sanitary Sewer Le -chats Pipalin?. 4. Rehab Exist'-g Storm Sewer 5. Rehab Existing Sanitary Sewer SUGGESTED MATERIAL SPEC AWWA C151, C104 AWWA C151 AWWA C151, C1O4 AWWA C 151 AWWA C200, C205 AWWA C200, C210 AWWA C200, C205 AWWA C20O, C210 ASTM D3034 AWWA C90O ASTM D3034 AWW A C900/� 7� ASTM Mf D 1734 , D 1 785 ----------------- ASTM D.'.350 ------------- ASTM C76 ASTM C76, D6_8�y ASTM C76, D3350 ------------------ AWWA C301 , C30.3 AWWA C301, C303 AWWA C301, C303, ASTM D3350 ---------------------------- --------------- ASTM D636 ASTM F585 CONSIDERATIONS (See Table 2) a b c d v w Z a b c d v w z b c d i v w z b ----------------- c d e i v w z a b f g h v w z a b f g h v w z f g h v w z f ----------------- g h v w z a b m n o v w z a b o g v w z b i m n o v w z b o g v w h ----------------- o p g v w z h ----------------- i o v w z a b k 1 m v w z h r v x w z i--------------- 1 a b f g k v w z ' g h r v x w z g h Ji v w z '--------------- o v w ,, y --------------- h r v w x h i v w Pacific Groundwater Group t 2377 Eastlake Ave. E., Suite 200 Seattle, Washington 98102 206.329.0141 FAX 329.6968 GROUNDWATER MONITORING PLAN CEDAR VALLEY AQUIFER AT I-405 CROSSING REVISED JULY 31, 1990 PREPARED FOR: CITY OF RENTON PREPARED BY: PACIFIC GROUNDWATER GROUP The purpose of this document is to recommend sampling locations, methods, and analytes for monitoring groundwater during I-405 reconstruction activities over the Cedar River aquifer in Renton Washington. The plan includes monitoring water quality at MW-28(a and b), MW-29 (a and b), RW-1,2,3, and PW-8. Wells MW-1, MW-7, and MW-20 will also be sampled as background monitoring wells. The analytes to be used in this monitoring are selected to indicate the presence of contaminants resulting from: 1. Construction activities, 2. Rupture of the METRO sewer line, and 3. Other local sources associated with I-405 reconstruction. The plan does not provide procedures necessary to monitor the entire aquifer nor monitor pollution from any possible source. Also, the plan does not provide for general observation of construction activities and equipment. Sampling frequencies reflected in this plan are Groundwater Monitoring Plan Page 2 Sampling Locations Figure 1 shows the locations of monitoring wells, production wells, and I-405. Table 1 indicates the monitoring wells and production wells to be sampled. Table 1 also lists key well construction, sampling, and analytical data. Sampling Frequency and Analytes Monitoring will be performed in two levels of detail as follows: Indicator Parameter Monitoring (Level 1): Sampling shall be performed weekly during periods of little activity and three times per week during active construction periods for a suite of indicator parameters (Table 1). Wells MW-28 (a and b), MW-29 (a and b), PW-8 and RW-1,2,3 will be used in indicator monitoring. Wells PW-8 and RW-1,2,3 need to be sampled only when they are operational, have been operational within the last 2 days, or will be operational within the following 2 days. Verification Parameter Monitoring (Level 2): Sampling shall be performed monthly during construction periods for a more extensive suite of tests (verification suite - Table 1). The verification suite will also be used to verify water quality anytime results from the indicator suite warrant further assessment. Initial background samples will be analyzed for verification parameters also. All wells listed in Table 1 will be used in verification monitoring. Establish New Sampling Notebook A notebook will be established to record all sampling data. The notebook will be bound. Each successive notebook will be numbered and the period of time it was used will be recorded on the cover. The notebooks will be permanently filed with the City of Renton. Initial sampling rounds may be recorded on field activity logs or in other field notebooks pending preparation of the dedicated sampling notebook. Groundwater Monitoring Plan Data to be recorded in the notebook includes but is not limited to: purpose of event date of event time of event weather conditions name of sampler well designation condition of well head depth to water measurement method of depth to water measurement calculated casing storage volume pH and specific conductance instrument calibration purge method and equipment volume purged pH, temperature, and specific conductance measurements sample bottles in the order filled, with treatment or filtration total number of bottles shipping information Page 3 Contents of the notebook will be tailored to the event being recorded and will not include unnecessary data. The sampler will sign each page as it is filled out. After each sampling event, the newly -filled -out notebook pages will be photocopied and stored in a separate location from the field notebook. Sampling Methods Table 1 lists the sampling methods to be used at each well. The following generic sequence of tasks should be performed at each well: 1. Record appearance and condition of well head. 2. Calibrate field water quality instruments and record calibration data (once at beginning of day, once at mid -day, and once at end of day). Record calibrated and non -calibrated readings. 3. Measure and record static water level three times (may not be possible or recommended for operational production well). Groundwater Monitoring Plan Page 4 4. Calculate and record casing storage volume (see Table 1). Considerations of casing storage volume and purge volume are not applicable to operational production wells. 5. Purge at least 3 casing storage volumes from the well and monitor water temperature, pH, and specific conductance at least 3 times during the purging period. Record purge water volume and field parameter values. The collected purge water should be discharged into the sewer or to the ground at a location remote from the well head as long as no indication of contamination is present. If contamination is suspected, the City should await disposal until the well water and/or purge water have been analyzed and then determine an appropriate disposal method (probably the sanitary sewer). 6. If, after 3 casing volumes, the temperature, pH, and specific conductance are reasonably stable, sampling may begin. If the field water quality parameters continually change in an upward or downward trend, purge until reasonable stability is achieved, then sample. In our opinion, reasonable stability means specific conductance that dosn't trend and dosn't vary by more than 10% from reading to reading (for the low conductance values in this aquifer). Reasonably stable pH measurements would likewise be defined by having no trends and by not varying by more than 0.1 pH units between readings. These criteria assume equivalent sample handling techniques and a properly operating field instrument. 7. Collect samples of water for analysis of parameters listed on Table 1. Collect samples in a manner that minimizes volatilization of potential contaminants from the water into the air. Collect samples in the following order: volatile organic compounds, other organics, then inorganics. Hands and clothing shall be clean when handling the sampling equipment and when sampling. Clean, disposable, latex gloves shall be worn when filling bottles for trace organic analyses. Samples will not be filtered. Follow individual sample container requirements for sample collection, handling, preservation, and shipment. 8. Record sample identification data on container, in field notebook, and on sample chain of custody record. Groundwater Monitoring Plan The sample label shall include at least the following information: o Project name and number o Name of collector o Date and time of collection o Place of collection o Sample designation/number Page S The sample number sequence shall not indicate to the laboratory which samples are duplicates, replicates or field blanks. Well names may be used as sample numbers. 9. Custody of samples should be maintained from time of sampling to receipt at the laboratory. Custody means that samples should remain in direct possession of a person (who is recorded on the chain of custody form), or are locked in secure vehicles or offices. Samples should be shipped to a laboratory accompanied by Chain -of -Custody forms and any other pertinent shipping/sampling documentation. One Chain -of -Custody form will be used per laboratory shipment. Sample container custody seals should be used if the containers are mailed. Special Sampling Instructions - Brainard-Kilman (TM) Pumps The monitoring wells may be sampled with Brainard-Kilman sampling pumps. A single pump may be carried from well to well, or dedicated pumps may be installed in selected monitoring wells. The wells can be purged and sampled by the pumps operated by hand. Discharge of the pump will be directed to a bucket to measure volume discharged. After purging, the pumping rate will be lowered, if necessary, to minimize turbulence and aeration of discharge water. Sample bottles should then be filled. Between wells, the pumps will be decontaminated using the procedure described in a following section. Special Sampling Instructions - Hydrostar (TM) Pumps The monitoring wells may be sampled with dedicated Hydrostar (TM) sampling pumps. The wells can be purged and sampled by the pumps operated by hand or air motor. Discharge of the pump will be directed through a hose to a bucket to measure volume discharged. After purging, the pumping rate will be lowered, if necessary, to minimize Groundwater Monitoring Plan Page 6 turbulence and aeration of discharge water. Sample bottles should then be filled. Each well should have a dedicated sampling hose. If a compressor is used to actuate the air motor, it should be placed as far from the wells as feasible. The air supply to the pump from the compressor should be filtered to remove any lubricants. Compressor servicing should be performed outside aquifer protection zone one. Quality Assurance/Quality Control (QA/QC) Quality assurance and quality control measures will be required of laboratories performing analyses for this project. The procedures discussed below will only be required during the verification suite analyses. It is not necessary to collect duplicates or blanks for indicator suite analyses. The US Environmental Protection Agency's Contract Laboratory Program (CLP) QA/QC procedures or similar efforts are required of the laboratory performing verification suite analyses. Detailed field QA/QC procedures are not provided in this document; the City should assign people experienced with groundwater sampling to this task. Under the CLP, the laboratory will run the following QA/QC samples: o One field blank per round. A field blank is collected by pumping deionized water from the deionized water spray container using the Brainard-Kilman pump. Pump into a sample container. Collect samples for inorganic and organic analytes. Label and treat the sample like monitoring well samples. o One field duplicate per round. A field duplicate is collected by filling two sets of sample bottles from the same well. Collect samples for inorganic and organic analytes. Label them as if they were two different wells and treat the samples similarly. o One lab method blank per round. This should be performed by the laboratory and field staff do not need to collect extra samples for the work to be done. Analyses will be done for inorganic and organic analytes. o One lab matrix spike and matrix spike duplicate per round. This should be performed by the laboratory and field staff do not need to collect extra samples for the work to be done. However, the lab should be instructed to perform these analyses on samples from well MW-28b. Analyses will be done for inorganic and organic analytes. o Laboratory surrogate spikes for every VOC sample. These should be performed by the laboratory and field staff do not need to collect extra samples for the work to be done. Analyses will be done for organic analytes only. Groundwater Monitoring Plan Page 7 Prior to sampling, the City shall discuss analytical methods, sample containers, holding times, laboratory QA/QC, and other project requirements with the laboratory. After receipt of the analytical data, a QA/QC review of the data will be performed by a qualified person. Decontamination of Sampling Equipment Any non -dedicated and non -disposable equipment will be decontaminated between wells. It is recommended that The City establish a clean area with available water and drains to use in decontamination. The Brainard-Kilman pumps need to be broken-down into individual components (pipe sections and pump). A clean, 5-foot-long drained area or drum is recommended for decontamination of the pumps. Decontamination under normal conditions (non -contaminated) will consist of the following steps: 1. The City should purchase a pressurized spray bottle (such as used for yard chemical spraying) and mix into it a dilute solution of tap water and Alconox (TM) or other biodegradable detergent. The equipment to be decontaminated should be sprayed with the solution and any visible dirt should be knocked -off. 2. The detergent solution should be thoroughly rinsed -off using tap water. 3. The City should purchase an additional spray bottle for deionized final -rinse water. The equipment should be rinsed by spraying with deionized water. If contamination is verified by sight, smell, or chemical analysis, further decontamination measures should be used and tailored to the problem chemicals. Modification of Sampling Plan This plan may require modification to respond to field conditions and events. We recommend that Pacific Groundwater Group be consulted prior to modification of sampling procedures or other monitoring program elements. TABLE I - PHYSICAL WELL DATA AND ANALYTICAL PARAMETER SUITES Revised July 31, 1990 PHYSICAL DATA CHEMICAL ANALYSES WELL OR PIEZOMETER DESIGNATION TOTAL DEPTH (ft) CASING SAND PACK CASING DIAMETER STORAGE VOLUME CONSTANT (in) (gal) (gal/ft) (Note 1) SAMPLING METHOD INDICATOR MONITORING ER MONITORING Field Inorganic Organic Biological Measurement Laboratory Laboratory Laboratory Set Set Set (Note 2) (Note 3) (Note 4) (Note 7) (Note 8) (Note 8) (Note 8) Inorganic Organic Laboratory Laboratory Set Set (Note 5) (Note 6) (Note 8) (Note 8) Biological Laboratory Set (Note 7) (Note 8) MW-20 60 2 6 0. 16 Sample Pump MW-2 50 2 9 0.16 Sample Pump M - Samp a Pump j MW-28a deep 68 2 10 0.16 Sample Pump I1 MW--18b 30 2 9 0.16 Sample Pump I1 MW-29a deep 83 2 9 0.16Sample Pump I1 1 MW-29b 35 2 to 0.16 Sample Pump R - Prod. Pump PW-8 102 24 0 23.49 Prod. Pump IFIELD BLANK FIELD DUPLICATE AB METHOD BLANK MATRIC SPIKE D MATRIC SPIKE DUPLICATE1 .LABORATORY SURROGATE SPIKES TOTAL ANALYSES 6 0 4 6 13 14 9 NOTES: 1. Water storage volume in gallons = V=SPS+((TD-DTW)+CVC) Where: TD=total depth in feet; DTW=depth to water in feet; SPS=sand pack storage CVC=casing volume constant NOTE PURGE AT LEAST 3 TIMES THE STORAGE VOLUME - SEE TEXT Example of calculation method: measured depth to water in MW-20=20 ft; then total storage volume=6+((60-20)x0.16)=12.4 gallons; purge at least 36 gallons. 2. Field observation, smell, pH, temperature, specific conductance, turbidity (in City shop). 3. None currently assigned. 4. Benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, and xylene (BTEX) by gas chromatograph. S. Chemical Oxygen Demand, Na, Cl, SO4, NO3, NH4, Ca, Mg. 6. EPA method 8240 (VOCs by gas chromatograph/mass spectroscopy) 7. Total Coliform. 8. Both production wells may not require sampling, see text. ,, r- -1 1 - - _+ " 1 1-1 U 1 � = 4 0 SECOND DRAFT SAMPLING AND ANALYSIS PLAN CEDAR RIVER AQUIFER AT I-405 CROSSING APRIL, 1990 PREPARED FOR: CITY OF RENTON PREPARED BY. - PACIFIC GROUNDWATER GROUP The purpose of this document is to recommend sampling locations, methods, and analytes for monitoring groundwater during 1-405 reconstruction activities over the Cedar River aquifer in Renton Washington. The plan includes monitoring water quality at MW-28(a and b), MW-29 (a and b), RW-1,2,3, and PW-8. Wells MW-2, MW-7, and MW.20 will also be sampled as background monitoring wells. The analytes to be used in this monitoring are selected to indicate the presence of contaminants resulting from: 1. Construction activities, 2. Rupture of the METRO sewer line, and 3. Other local sources associated with I-405 reconstruction. The plan does not provide procedures necessary to monitor the entire aquifer nor monitor pollution from any possible source, Also, the plan does not provide for general observation of construction activities and equipment, Groundwater Monitoring Plan Page 2 Sampling Locations Figure 1 shows the locations of monitoring wells, production wells, and general areas of construction activity. Table I indicates the monitoring wells and production wells to be sampled, Table 1 also lists key well construction, sampling, and analytical data. Sampling Frequency and Analytes Monitoring will be performed in two levels of detail as follows: Indicator Parameter Monitoring (Level X): Sampling shall be performed weekly during periods of little activity and daily during active construction periods for a suite of indicator parameters (Table 1). Wells MW-28 (a and b), MW-29 (a and b), PW-8 and RW-1,2,3 will be used in indicator monitoring. Wells PW-8 and RW-1,2,3 need to be sampled only when they are operational, have been operational within the last 2 days, or will be operational within the following 2 days. Verification Parameter Monitoring (Level 2): Sampling shall be performed monthly during periods of little activity and weekly during active construction periods for a more extensive suite of tests (verification suite - Table 1). The verification suite will also be used to verify water quality anytime results from the indicator suite warrant further assessment. Initial background samples will be analyzed for verification parameters also. All wells listed in Table 1 will be used in verification monitoring. Establish New Sampling Notebook A notebook will be established to record all sampling data. The notebook will be bound. Each successive notebook will be numbered and the period of time it was used will be recorded on the cover, The notebooks will be permanently filed with the City of Renton, Initial sampling rounds may be recorded on field activity logs or in other field notebooks pending preparation of the dedicated sampling notebook. Data to be recorded in the notebook includes but is not limited to: purpose of event date of event time of event weather conditions name of sampler well designation condition of well head depth to water measurement method of depth to water measurement calculated casing storage volume pH and specific conductance instrument calibration purge method and equipment volume purged pH, temperature, and specific conductance measurements sample bottles in the order filled, with treatment or filtration total number of bottles shipping information Contents of the notebook will be tailored to the event being recorded and will not include unnecessary data, The sampler will sign each page as it is filled out. After each sampling event, the newly -filled -out notebook pages will be photocopied and stored in a separate location from the field notebook. Sampling Methods Table 1 lists the sampling methods to be used at each well. The following generic sequence of tasks should be performed at each well; 1. Record appearance and condition of well head. 2. Calibrate field water quality instruments and record calibration data (once at beginning of day, once at mid -day, and once at end of day). Record calibrated and non -calibrated readings. 3. Measure and record static water level three times (may not be possible or recommended for operational production well). i _ ti-, i I I i-i 1� - 4 Groundwater Monitoring Plan Page 4 4. Calculate and record casing storage volume (see Table 1). Considerations of casing storage volume and purge volume are not applicable to operational production wells, 5. Purge at least 3 casing storage volumes from the well and monitor water temperature, pH, and specific conductance at least 3 times during the purging period. Record purge water volume and field parameter values. The collected purge water should be discharged into the sewer or to the ground at a location remote from the well head as long as no indication of contamination is present. If contamination is suspected, the City should await disposal until the well water and/or purge water have been analyzed and then determine an appropriate disposal method (probably the sanitary sewer). 6. If, after 3 casing volumes, the temperature, pH, and specific conductance are reasonably stable, sampling may begin. If the field water quality parameters continually change in an upward or downward trend, purge until reasonable stability is achieved, then sample. In our opinion, reasonable stability means specific conductance that dosn't trend and dosn't vary by more than 1017C from reading to reading (for the low conductance values in this aquifer). Reasonably stable pH measurements would likewise be defined by having no trends and by not varying by more than 0.1 pH units between readings. These criteria assume equivalent sample handling techniques and a properly operating field instrument. 7. Collect samples of water for analysis of parameters listed on Table 1. Collect samples in a manner that minimizes volatilization of potential contaminants from the water into the air. Collect samples in the following order: volatile organic compounds, other organics, then inorganics. Hands and clothing shall be clean when handling the sampling equipment and when sampling, Clean, disposable, latex gloves shall be worn when filling bottles for trace organic analyses. Samples will not be filtered, follow individual sample container requirements for sample collection, handling, preservation, and shipment. 8. Record sample identification data on container, in field notebook, and on sample chain of custody record. The sample label shall include at least the following information: o Project name and number o Name of collector o Date and time of collection 0 Place of collection o Sample designation/number The sample number sequence shall not indicate to the laboratory which samples are duplicates, replicates or field blanks. Well names may be used as sample numbers. 9. Custody of samples should be maintained from time of sampling to receipt at the laboratory. Custody means that samples should remain in direct possession of a person (who is recorded on the chain of custody form), or are locked in secure vehicles or offices. Samples should be shipped to a laboratory accompanied by Chain -of -Custody forms and any other pertinent shipping/sampling documentation. One Chain -of -Custody form will be used per laboratory shipment. Sample container custody seals should be used if the containers are mailed, Special Sampling Instructions - Brainard -Kalman (TU) .Pumps The monitoring wells may be sampled with Brainard -Kalman sampling pumps. A single pump may be carried from well to well, or dedicated pumps may be installed in selected monitoring wells. The wells Can be purged and sampled by the pumps operated by hand. Discharge of the pump will be directed to a bucket to measure volume discharged. After purging, the pumping rate will be lowered, if necessary, to minimize turbulence and aeration of discharge water. Sample bottles should then be filled. Between wells, the pumps will be decontaminated using the procedure described in a following section. Quality Assurance/Quality Control (QAIQC) Quality assurance and quality control measures will be required of laboratories performing analyses for this project. The procedures discussed below will only be required during the verification suite analyses. It is not necessary to collect duplicates or blanks for indicator suite analyses. The US Environmental Protection Agency's Contract Laboratory Program (CLP) QA/QC procedures or similar efforts are required of the laboratory performing verification suite analyses. Detailed field QA►/QC procedures are not provided in this document; the City should assign people experienced with groundwater sampling to this task. Under the CLP, the laboratory will run the following QA/QC samples: Groundwater Monitoring Plan Page 6 o One field blank per round. A field blank is collected by pumping deionized water from the deionized water spray container using the Brainard-Ki.lman pump. Pump into a sample container. Collect samples for inorganic and organic analytes. Label and treat the sample like monitoring well samples. o One field duplicate per round. A field duplicate is collected by filling two sets of sample bottles from the same well. Collect samples for inorganic and organic analytes. Label them as if they were two different wells and treat the samples similarly. o One lab method blank per round. This should be performed by the laboratory and field staff do not need to collect extra samples for the work to be done. Analyses will be done for inorganic and organic analytes. o One lab matrix spike and matrix spike duplicate per round. This should be performed by the laboratory and field staff do not need to collect extra samples for the work to be done. However, the lab should be instructed to perform these analyses on samples from well MW-28b. Analyses will be done for inorganic and organic analytes. o Laboratory surrogate spikes for every VOC sample. These should be performed by the laboratory and field staff do not need to collect extra samples for the work to be done. Analyses will be done for organic analytes only. Prior to sampling, the City shall discuss analytical methods, sample containers, holding times, laboratory QA/QC, and other project requirements with the laboratory. After receipt of the analytical data, a QA/QC review of the data will be performed by a qualified person. Decontamination of Sampling Equipment Any non -dedicated and non -disposable equipment will be decontaminated between wells. It is recommended that The City establish a clean area with available water and drains to use in decontamination. The Brainard -Kilman pumps need to be broken-down into individual components (pipe sections and pump). A clean, 3-foot-long drained area or drum is recommended for decontamination of the pumps. Decontamination under normal conditions (non -contaminated) will consist of the following steps: 1. The City should purchase a pressurized spray bottle (such as used for yard chemical spraying) and mix into it a dilute solution of tap water and Alconox (TM) or other biodegradable detergent. The equipment to be decontaminated should be sprayed with the solution and any visible dirt should be knocked -off. Groundwater Monitoring Plan Page 7 2. The detergent solution should be thoroughly rinsed -off using tap water. 3. The City should purchase an additional spray bottle for deionized final -rinse water. The equipment should be rinsed by spraying with deionized water. If contamination is verified by sight, smell, or chemical analysis, further decontamination measures should be used and tailored to the problem chemicals, Modification of Sampling Plan This plan may require modification to respond to field conditions and events, We recommend that Pacific Groundwater Group be consulted prior to modification of sampling procedures or other monitoring program elements. TABLE I - PHYSICAL WELL DATA AND ANALYTICAL PARAMETER SUITES PHYSICAL WELL DATA WELLOR TOTAL PIEZOMETER DEPTH DESIGNATION fR) CASINO SAND PACK CASING DIAMETER STORAGE VOLUME CONSTANT Cm) (gall (gwft) (2) SAMP JrNG METHOD (1) 7=FWdInorgalo Organic Iaborelnry Laboratory Set Set (3) (4) (5) Inorganic Orgaaie Biahmicsl Labor" iabomtory Tabor tore Set Set Set (6) Cn (a) Sample _ Mp Pump MW - S a O - a IDW 0 2 9 OA6 Sample -Plump 1 0 l -Pump ) - . pomp BLANK DUPLICATEFIELD FIELD MATRIC SPIKE XND MATRIC SPIK DUPLICATE T_AB0rt_AT5KY SURROGATE ?DOTAL ANALYSES 6 0 6 13 14 9 NOTES: 1. no = not owicnble. (2� Water storage wulama in gallons = V=SPS+((rD-DTW)*CVC) Wbera TD=oral depth m fed: DTW=depth to water is feet; SPS--sand Peck storage CV0- v volume cow NOTE PURGE AT LEAST 3 'TIMES TH 6 STORAGE VOLUME -SEE TEXT Example of calculation method: tmeamued depth to avatar in MW-20--20 It; then total stmagc volumc=6+((64-20)*0.I6)=12.4 gallons: poige at leant 36 gallons. 3. Field obsetvatim smell, pH. temperatum specific coadDdance, dnbiedity (in City shop). Mona cunrntly assigned. 8a�, toluene. -thl'IbenTent. and aykne (9TEX) by gas ch—stagreph. Chmnical Oxygen Demand, Na, Cl. SO4. NO3. NH4. Ca. Mg. ? EPA matted 8240 (VOCs by gas chtnma63graWmass qwboscoPy) Total Coliform. 9. Both prodactioe wells may rat require sampling, we text_ YSICAL WELL DATA �%T-LL OR PIEZOMETER DESIGNATION MW-20 MW-2 M W-7 MW-28a MW-28b MW-29a MW-29b RW-1,2,3 PW_$ FIELD BLANK FIELD DUPLICATE LAB METHOD BLANK MATRIC SPII`E AND MATRIC SPIKE DUPLICATE LABORATORY SURROGATE SPIKES Field Inorganic Organic Measurement Laboratory Laboratory Set Sat (3) (4) (S) Inorganic Organic Blologicel Laboratory Laboratory Laboratory Sot Sot Sot (6) (7) ($) NOTES: C NO hut- SphNAw I. na = not applicablo, 2. Woter storage volume in goons - V=SPS+((TD-DTW)*CVC) Where: TO -total depth in foot; DTW-depth to water In foot; SPS-sand pack storago CVC-casing volume constant NOTE PURGE AT LEAST 3 TIMES THE STORAGE VOLUME - SEE TEXT Examptc of calculation method: mcasurod depth to water in MW-20-20 R; then total storage volume=6+((60-20)t0.16)-12.4 gallons; purge at lcust 36 gallons. 3, Field observation, enroll, pH, temperature, apeclfle con.ductanco, turbidity (in City shop). 4. None currently assigned. 5. Ben=e, toluene, othylbonzeno, and xyleno (BTEX) by gas chromatograph. 6. Chemical Oxygen Demand, Na, Cl, SO4, NO3, NH4, Ca, Mg. 7. EPA method $240 (VOCs by gas ehromatograph/mas® spectroscopy) 8. Total Coliform. 9. Both produCUon wells may not require sampling, see text. l 1 1 1 I ! I 1 1 1 1 t 1 1 1 l 1 LEGEND Pumping Conditbrts PW-1 1300 gpm PW-2 3000 gpm r MW10 (17.2) PW-3 OFF PW-8 3370 gpm PW-9 OFF z�. GROUNDWATER 18 ELEVATION CONTOUR MW11 (17.07) MW5 (17.72)INFERRED GROUNDWATER �, ;`� �♦ FLOW DIRECTION MW4 (16.44) 6=` MW1 (16.75) WELL NUMBER AND MEASURED WATER ELEVATION MW3 (17.0) PW3 (16.16) SG3 (20.15) *.. 16 a MW6 (16.11) �7 t ,4ii1 MW9(16.46) PW9 (NM) I t t ty r rxr�riw MW8 (15.36) o� ,y� "r s o £ 1. 1 ' M SG2 (22 46) fk < O , i F o z 53 u 'fit � y) � ♦ � � a 5 } 3 4q�- PW8 (7.15) % fb �PW1,2(7.95,8.35) v MW7 (22.23) s_ 'A 3�" 1 MW1 (15.67) & s SG1 (25.07) � , MW2 (22.8) ,r q; ►�t°�` ' µ.w. d .Add `4 .av`.r6 :.�i2 7:$Y� �y i.. �•t' qg s� V b e Q , * Measurement Error 0 250 500 FT Note Contours indicate approximate elevations and FIGURE 3-8 I i are best estimates of spatial variations SCALE (Approx.) tpointgtopontdueto ocallchangesein "a" GROUNDWATER ELEVATIONS hydrogeologlc or other influences (FT. ABOVE NGVD) AUGUST 26, 1986 CITY OF RENTON, WA 1 I I * LEGEND t Pumping w PW-1 OFF t .. PW-2 OFF «/ MW10 (19.34) PW-3 1500 gpm eF ' PW-8 OFF PW-9 OFF > • / , , r,��` GROUNDWATER 's' 18 ELEVATION � MW11 (19.35) MWS (20.42) "�- CONTOUR �♦ INFERRED GROUNDWATER ?� FLOW DIRECTION +44 MW4(19.21) 9 ���� APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF GROUNDWATER DIVIDE MW1 (16.75) WELL NUMBER AND 0 MW3 (19.44) MEASURED WATER ELEVATION SG3 (20.72) a �PW3 (NM) MW6 (19.58)to MW9 (20.05)i'+ 4.". PW9 +� SG2 (23.28) 2? MW8 (20.34) ;€ 17 "i, .n^ PW8 (20.98) 1 PW1, 2 (19.85, 20-19) WA MW1(1981) }s 000 / ,iy SG1 (26.21)00 2 (24.62) y } 0 250 500 FT Note Contours indicate approximate PWo•ial variations elevations and are best estimates of spatial vels ma sthrouFIGURE SCALE (Approx.) point punts site Actual levels may vary 3-6 pointbpolntdue other o local influences GROUNDWATER ELEVATIONS hydrogeologic or other influences (FT. ABOVE NGVD) NOVEMBER 6, 1986 CITY OF RENTON, WA fill 0� w I �o 0 250 500 FT I I I SCALE (Approx.) LEGEND w> t z r v a« Pumping Conditions ` x.:. y,4 a• # a 1 PW-1 1700gpm p PW-2 3000 gpm PW-3 OFF MW10 (17.88) 0 x PW-8 OFF PW-9 OFF T= GROUNDWATER ^� ELEVATION CONTOUR x MW11 (17.89) MW5 (19.03) 3 sir INFERRED GROUNDWATER g �� �♦ FLOW DIRECTION M APPROXIMATE W4 (17.79) LOCATION OF GROUNDWATER DIVIDE ti MW1 (16.75) WELL NUMBER AND MEASURED WATER ELEVATION MW3 (17.85) a 3 PW3 (17.85) MW6 (17.58) (31` MW9 (18.41) 3x t 7j PW9 (18.55). n s< 53)isMW8 (18.55) t PW1, 2 (8.99 3.92) 1 ,.. MW7 (23,31) •... ` MW1 (16.94)10/ z- °V sf<.Ia��; MW2(23.54) I wlk n : x Note Contours indicate approximale elevations and are best estimates of spatial variations throughout the site Actual leve13 may vary point to point due to local changes In hydr geologic or other influences FIGURE 3-7 GROUNDWATER ELEVATIONS (FT. ABOVE NGVD) SEPTEMBER 11, 1986 CITY OF RENTON, WA LEGEND Pumping Conditions 40. PW-1 OFF ' R PW 2 OFF a PW-3 OFF MW10 (18.29) �i tPW-8 3450 gpm s PW-9 OFF r GROUNDWATER ' sE — t o — ELEVATION ��. CONTOUR MW5 (19.13) i MW11 (18.27)'V. INFERRED GROUNDWATER s % FLOW DIRECTION 40000 '��sr APPROXIMATE tz MW4 (18.07) `Yak is LOCATION OF n� ♦ �� GROUNDWATER DIVIDE MW1 (16.75) WELL NUMBER AND MEASURED WATER ELEVATION MW3 (18.34) PW3 (18.0) SG3 (20 35) ,* j MW6 (18.11)�. 1 a MW9 (18.16) m„ 3. PW3 (18.0) O W t Xr MW8 (17.88) SG2 (22.67) a ,1 '`• r) xfx l "� "4K r a > ... a, rL�x c x a ✓5-rr y., , W1 PW8 (8.16) t PW1, 2 (18.97, 18.41) r \s �; MW7(22.91) A �0 a S MW1 (18.18) �rM SG1 (25.2) £ a' MW2 (23.32) �e...=. o zso 500 FT Note Contours indictee epproaimaee elevations and FIGURE 3- 5 l I I are best estimates of spatial variations throughout the site Actual levels may vary GROUNDWATER ELEVATIONS SCALE (Approx.) point to point due to local changes in hydrogeologic or other influences (FT. ABOVE NGVD) SEPTEMBER 16, 1986 CITY OF RENTON, WA ;x i .. ,. MW1 K (19.85) SG1 (25.96) -- jt � t � 'a �/� 5 Yr �rf F' y"=� � ���%�•r rnNer,l�i * n� i�3 6�. 250 500 FT I I I SCALE (Approx.) Note Contours indicate approxrmale elevations and are best estimates of spatial variations throughout the site Actual levels may vary FIGURE 3-4 Point topointor GROUNDWATER ELEVATIONS to local changes in hydrogeologicotherinlluences (FT. ABOVE NGVD) NOVEMBER 8, 1986 CITY OF RENTON w I .A j.s1 NP,LEGEND 1 14 %` Pumping Conditions ro �s s § PW-1 OFF PW-2 OFF ' MW10 (20-04) N ` PW-3 OFF PW-8 OFF 2 Y € PW-9 OFF a GROUNDWATER 18 — ELEVATION MW11 (19.87) ' MWS (21.23)' a CONTOUR d, INFERRED GROUNDWATER FLOW DIRECTION ra MW4 ` MW1 (16.75) WELL NUMBER AND - MEASURED WATER ELEVATION 40 MW3 (19.87) '� 11 a-i z. + PW3 (20.22) SG3 (20.9) r. MW6 (20.16) MW9 (20.56) PW9(20.75)� ' y(» SG2 (23 42) �a y MW8 (20.89) PW8(21.3)� PW1, 2 (20,24 20.57) M f )� W7(24.34) , MW1(20.13)� x s /too,* SG1 (26.10) M W 2 (24.79) t i •' ; k t zr > biz, fv cj t ` w .t'y ,� " 5 „ )'+. 250 500 FT I I I SCALE (Approx.) f�fl Note. Contours indicate approximate elevations and are heal estimates of spatial variations throughout the site Actual levels may vary point to point due to local changes in hydrogeologic or other influences FIGURE 3-2 GROUNDWATER ELEVATIONS (FT. ABOVE NGVD) JANUARY 23, 1987 CITY OF RENTON, WA LEGEND y t Pumping Conditions PW-1 1700 gpm �r ) PW-2 OFF PW-3 OFF �0j MW10(19.4)i � PW-8 OFF PW-9 OFF GROUNDWATER ELEVATION CONTOUR MW11 (19.18) MW5(20.57) �► INFERRED GROUNDWATER FLOW DIRECTION s. a M APPROXIMATE W4 (19.22) ' N LOCATION OF 41 st; a " 'r GROUNDWATER DIVIDE i ` MW1 (16.75) WELL NUMBER AND { ; - MEASURED WATER ELEVATION MW3 (19.12)� r PW3 (19.59) " SG3 (20.65)�� MW6 (19.29) t MW9 (20.06), PW9(20.08) SG2 (23.2) MW8 20.16 i +PW8(20.49) PWI, 2 (16.84, 17.48) „ *v MW7 (24.25) �► a SG1 (26.08) , ... t' MW2 (24.32) 0 250 500 FT I I I SCALE (Approx.) Note- Contours indicate approxof spatial variations elevations and are bell estimates of spatial vanahons throughout the site Actual levels may vary point to point due to local changes in hydrogeologic or other influences �q- 011 FIGURE 3-3 GROUNDWATER ELEVATIONS (FT. ABOVE NGVD) NOVEMBER 16, 1986 CITY OF RENTON, WA ",1 -• �`� _ y t LEGEND - - - a G ., ` 3 Pumping Conditions PW-1 1650gpm n�p ... .,.h y ! ( PW-2 OFF PW-3 1425 gpm § MW10 (17.06) �f 4 1 PW-8 3300 gpm PW-9 1000 gP .� i" GROUNDWATER m �° !} — 18 at ELEVATION F� CONTOUR MW5 (16.82)`` �. MW11 (16.99), INFERRED GROUNDWATER " 16 ♦ FLOW DIRECTION by MW4 15.83 MW1 (16.75) WELL NUMBER AND ( ) ` MEASURED WATER ELEVATION 14 i MW3 (17.05) +PW3 (NM) SG3 (20.19) MW6 (15.77) *'k q 06 MW9(1443) _ s W g PW9 (10.63) I - a MW8 (13.62) 10 a SG2 (225) 16 41 5 PW1,2 (13.44.NM)* r (21.8) MW 00 SG1 (25.08) ss r yr 7, MW2 (22.69) 'si,�..* 2, ¢ '';-rmss•- ro y: 71,11 0 250 500 FT Note Contour' indicaleapproximate elevations and FIGURE 3-9 are to t estimates of spatial variations GROUNDWATER ELEVATIONS throughout the site Actual levels may vary SCALE (Approx.) [n] oitt�l�idaom� �� in (FT. ABOVE NGVD) AUGUST 8, 1986 CITY OF RENTON, WA Engineers Planners Economists - Scientists November 21, 1989 SEA20080.B0 City of Renton 200 Mill Avenue Renton, Washington 98055 Attention: Ron Olsen, Utilities Engineer Subject: Pipeline Materials for the Aquifer Protection Ordinance Following our meetings of the past two weeks, we have prepared the attached Table 1 which shows Pipeline Material Alternatives for pipelines crossing the City of Renton's Aquifer Protection Area, Zone 1. The accompanying Table 2 contains a list of considerations which should be evaluated when selecting alternative pipe materials from Table 1. These materials are intended to be used in pipelines carrying storm sewage, sanitary sewage, or landfill leachate. They are not intended for more specialized pipeline service such as transmission of petroleum products. All materials listed in Table 1 are generally considered suitable for the service indicated, based on accepted practice and their commercial availability. Some materials are better suited than others; however, there is no clearcut best choice of pipeline material for a given service. For brevity, the list of suggested material specs does not include the many specifications which cover details such as gaskets, coatings, etc. It is our understanding that the City will incorporate this list by reference into the Aquifer Protection Ordinance to provide guidance concerning allowable pipeline materials within Zone 1 of the Aquifer Protection Area, for both new construction and rehabilitation or replacement of existing pipelines. As we have emphasized in our meetings, this list is likely not all-inclusive; it is only a guideline. It is impossible to condense all pipeline materials selection information into a short table or text. It is essential CH2M HILL Seattle Office 777 108th Avenue, N.E., Bellevue, Washington 206.453.5000 P.O. Box 91500, Bellevue, Washington 98009-2050 City of Renton Page 2 November 21, 1989 SEA20080.B0 that each pipeline project be fully evaluated on a case -by - case basis to arrive at the optimum engineering solution. Please call us if you have any questions. Sincerely, CH2M HILL Arthur L. Storbo, P.E. Attachment TABLE 2 CONSIDERATIONS ON SELECTION OF PIPE MATERIALS The following considerations are to be used in conjunction with Table 1 for tentative selection of pipe materials. a. Rubber gaskets may be severely damaged by petroleum products, particularly in prolonged exposures to concentrated flows containing little or no storm water or sanitary sewage. b. Gasketed joints are not considered leak -proof at zero or low pressures, and may not be leak -proof at higher pressures. C. Mechanical joints may be less likely to leak at low pressures than push -on joints. d. May need protective coatings and/or cathodic protection against external corrosion. e. Considered most reliable gasket and lining material for ductile iron leachate pipeline. f. Very difficult to repair linings on inside of joints in pipe smaller than 24-inch diameter. g. Almost always needs protective coatings and cathodic protection against external corrosion. h. Properly made joints are considered leak -proof. i. Polyethylene, although corrosion resistant, can be severely affected by prolonged exposures to petroleum products. j. Viton (or nitrile) gaskets may require long delivery time. k. Concrete pipe not recommended without "liquid -tight" lining of another material. 1. Potential to develop leaks at joints due to structural or gasket failures. M. Limited to low pressure applications. n. Pipe not available over 15-inch diameter. o. Requires special attention to bedding and backfill depth to avoid structural failure of pipe. p. Large thermal expansion coefficient. May need to limit solvent welded joints to 4-inch and smaller pipe. May require careful evaluation of pipe installation temperature and temperature of piped liquids to ensure joint integrity. q. Pipe not available over 12-inch diameter. r. Insituform lining is available in 6-inch through 60-inch diameter for almost any pressure, if sufficient pipe cross -sectional area is available s-u. Not used. V. Suitability of pipe lining and gasket material to resist chemical attack by conveyed fluids must be determined for each pipeline service considered. W. All storm and sanitary sewer manholes, catch basins, and inlets should be equipped with precast concrete bottom and sidewalls with rubber gasketed joints between sections, water -tight epoxy grout pipe entrances through walls, and bitumastic coating of all interior floor and wall surfaces. Manholes, catch basins, and inlets should have no leakage when hydrostatically tested at atmospheric pressure. X. Has good resistance to chemicals, petroleum products, and hydrogen sulfide corrosion. y. Not recommended for buried applications due to limited experience and high cost. Z. "Zero leakage" test requirement may be impossible to achieve under the best conditions for any pipe material because trapped air may distort test results, even in a drop -tight pipe. Pressure and leakage test requirements should consider whether the pipe has steep slope or will stand full of liquid. Pipelines should be tested with the intent to prevent or minimize leakage. Air testing should not be allowed; hydrostatic testing should be as stringent as any found in the industry. Pipe materials, without regard for chemical attack, corrosion, or puncture, are generally ranked as follows, in decreasing order of liquid -tight reliability: welded steel with welded joints high density polyethylene with thermal -fusion joints PVC with solvent welded joints fiberglass with welded joints Insituform liner ductile iron with viton or rubber gaskets concrete cylinder with gasketed joints welded steel with rubber gasketed joints PVC with viton or rubber gasketed joints concrete pipe with rubber gasketed joints rentpir=.wr1 TABLE 1 21 Nov 89 PIPELINE MATERIAL ALTERNATIVES City of Renton, Washington PIPE DIAMETER ; ; CONSIDERATI❑NS PIPE MATERIAL ------------------- ; <;4 4-8 10-12 14-20 24-30 36--54 SUGGESTED MATERIAL SPEC ; (See Table 2) -------- Ductile Iron, Rubber Gaskets -------------- Cement Mortar -Lined! 1,2 1,2 2 17�- 2 1,2 2 1,2 ; AWWA C1517 C104 ; a b c d v w z Polyethylene -Lined ; 1,2 1,2 1,2 1,2 1,2 ; AWWA C151 ; a b c d v w z Ductile iron, piton Gaskets ; ; ; Cement Mortar -Lined ; 1,2 1,2 1,2 1,2 1,2 ' AWWA C151, C104 ; b c d i v w z Polyethylene -Lined ; ----------------------- 1,2,3 1,2,3 1,2,3 1,2,3 ; AWWA ---------------------------- C151 ; ; b ----------------- c d e ; v w z ---------------------------- Welded Steel, Rubber Gaskets ------------ Cement Mortar -Lined ; 1,2 1,2 1,2 1,2 1,2 ; AWWA C200, C205 ; a b f g h v w Dielectric -Lined ; 1,2 1,2 1,2 1,2 1,2 ; AWWA C200, C210 ; a b + g h v w z Welded Steel, Welded Joints Cement Mortar -Lined! ; 1,2 1,2 ; AWWA C200, C205 :' f g h v w z Dielectric -Lined ----------------------------- ; ; ----------------------------------- _ ; AWWA ----------------------------- C200, C210 ; ; f ----------------- g h v w z PVC, Rubber Gasket Joints SDR-35 Sewer Pipe ; 1,2 1,2 1,2 ; ASTM D30 _ 4 ; a b m n is o v w z Blue Brute Cl 150 or 200 1,2,31 AWWA C900 1 a ~ q v w z PVC, Viton Gasket Joints SDR-35 Serer Pipe ; 1,2 1,2 1,2 ; ASTM D3034 ; b i m n o Blue Brute Cl 150 or 200 1 1,2,3 i 2 3 1 AWWA C900 ; b o g v w PVC, Solvent Welded Joints ; ; ; Sch 80 ---------------------------- ; ; 2,= ----------------------------------- 1,2,3 1,2,= ; ASTM ---------------------------- ?D1784, U17S5 ; ; h ------------------ c p g v w z High Density Polyethylene Thermal -Fusion Joints ---------------------------- ; 2,3 ----------------------------------- 1,2,3 1,2,3 1,2,3 1,2,3 1,2 ; ASTM ;---------------------------- D3350 ; ; h ----------------- i o v w z Concrete, Rubber Gasket Jts Standard Concrete Lining ; ; ASTM C76 ; a b k l m v w z !�i _h Ir:situform Lining With t 1 i 2 3 :,t,-_• i '7 t �,�,ti• 1,�., _� 2 3 1,�,-1 •-1 1,� 1 AST'" C7E, D638 ;h r v x w z t '' With HDF'E Insert ---------------------------- 1 ----------------------------------- 1" 7s-7-= 1? 7 s3 1 -, 3 7t-7=' 1 2 3 ,.�,_ 1 2 � 1 ASTM 1 ---------------------------- C7L D3350 .+�, ; h ----------------- 2 v w _ Conc Cylinder, Rubber Gasket Std Cement Mortar Lining ; 1,2 1,2 ; AWWA C301, G303 ; a b f g k v w z With Insi'_'uform Lining ; 1,2, 3 1,2,3 1,2,3 1,2,3 1,2 ; AWWA C301, C303 ; g h r v x w z With HDPE Insert ---------------------------- ; ; ----------------------------------- 1,2,= 1,2,3 1.2,3 1,2,3 1,2 ; AWWA ; --- C301, C103, ASTM U3350 ---- ; ; g h i v w z Fiberglass, Wf Welded Joints ; 2,3 o v w x y z ---------------------------- Insituform Liner ; ----------------------------------- 4,5 4,5 4 , 5 4� ,� 4 ,5 ;---------------------------- ASTM ; :' D•-8 63 ; ; ----------------- h r v w x z HDP� Insert ---------------------------- 1 1 ; c 4,� ----------------------------------- c 4,� c 4,,� 4,5 4,5 4,5 1 ASTM 1 A,../T11 ;---------------------------- 535 FJ�,.3 1 1 ; h ----------------- 1 v w z PIPELINE SERVICE 1. Storm Sewer 2. Sanitary Sewer 5. Leachate Pipeline. 4. Rehab Existing Storm Sewer 5. Rehab Existing Sanitary Sewer w 1 J AA P-1 V ` L MW10 (18.29) proos s� a `y %4- t �` MW5 (19.lio�lo13) r R ypy ), ♦ Y a L A MW11 (18.27)1 N.e z LEGEND Pumping Conditns PW-1 OFF PW-2 OFF PW-3 OFF PW-8 3450 gpm PW-9 OFF GROUNDWATER i e — ELEVATION CONTOUR �� INFERRED GROUNDWATER 1 ; t f" S"" r . t }} f► ,�.;1 FLOW DIRECTION APPROXIMATE 4 LOCATION OF ' ;'' • MW4 (18.07) 1 { ss>• ssss GROUNDWATER DIVIDE b , t'•' ` �}� .y [ t. , '"<tx t I MWl (16.75) WELL NUMBER AND sF MEASURED WATER ELEVATION r 1 PW3 (18.0) T' a r , ' SG3 (20.3S) s+ t"r MW6 (18.t1) z. �. MW9(18.18) s+'" • ,e. °i } ♦ .� PW3 (18.0) ��'� I' 3 , tr+a MW8 (17.88) r w :g SG212L6 Ile J,�' y{ a• V 5n « i „�,r� .I, MW7 YPW8 (8.16) PW1, 2 (16.97, 18.41) 01"°1�d i SG1 (25.2) MW2 (23.32) *� 00, <� MW7 (22.91) :rM 0 250 500 FT Note. COnbeal "`i,na ft of speapproxin*js elevations and FIGURE 3-5 are beet eeterxelea of speual venanons ^/,^ n ' ' ' M po,�i n dueb aa h0iAtpchenges iwms eyvary . ,pno ..�`�N�,� GROUNDWATER ELEVATION SCALE(Approx.) {J�J hyd,�oy,coromeruxnuencss (FT. ABOVE NGVD) SEPTEMBER 16, 1986 W [rt� CITY OF RENTON, WA O Pr20Po5G—D �502IAiC,S w I II LEGEND • :>w' ii.► '� }� r t, i " (. `� Pumping Conditions „ r4 � ► t ti i , , , , - P W 1 1700 gpm sT?.' t ; jt .s i ,.� c.' �.r PW-2 3000gpm }' tit.} , l" MWiO 17.88 J+. PW-3 OFF 7'Y'� `s%xY"� fwt i I e 1 .'.p`" PW-8 OFF PW-9 OFF ± GROUNDWATER . ; ELEVATION l MW11 (17.89).' i �• MW5 (19.03) `',� CONTOUR n) r•��„ INFERRED GROUNDWATER %.'� ' ; to ���� FLOW DIRECTION MW4 (17.78) *" i. ' N°! APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF y19 , 4 GROUNDWATER DIVIDE ems. '�, +�!��i"� � � „�._ � �� { r ' '„ � , S .. � �,-' `• } ., .� t. MW1 (16.75) WELL NUMBER AND s MEASURED WATER ELEVATION MW3 (17.85) ` PW3(17.85) f E # G3 (20.23) S �•�' 1- `j►. 1 �, MW6 (17.58) k }�:�� ;• x '`40 MW9 (18 4 N .� lj PW9 (18.55) • x i t R x`SG2 (22.83) M W 8 (18.55) i d y�.: 4 '�5� ><•Y f 'I " t • MW7 (23.31) ' X.e� �MW2(23.54)r.r 0 250 500 FT Note Contour aMdicala approximate e4valgns and • V p P+�S ED /11e N I TU 21 nl L-1 FIGURE 3-7 I I I are Deal eaN. of apaeal va i~s SCALE(Appro>t.) 0wi„l ''r„a he �:a� norn"" y V4e-I-`- GROUNDWATER ELEVATIONS n in h4fogeolopk or oa,er influence& o p2��oS Soa�tic,s (FT. ABOVE NGVD) SEPTEMBER 11, 1986 CITY OF RENTON, WA CITY OF RENTON MEMORANDUM DATE: March 5, 1990 TO: Mel Wilson FROM: Rick Harbert SUBJECT: I-405 METRO TRUNK SEWER MEETING In response to your memo dated March 1, 1990, I would request that the following information be provided prior to, or during, the meeting of March 9th: Sewer/Footing Locations The limits of excavation and disturbance should also be shown in horizontal and vertical views. Reference elevations should be shown using City datum, so that water surface profiles can be compared with the elevations and locations shown. Also, since Pony Ellingson will be at the meeting, he can comment on contaminant migration should such occur. 2. Video Condition Survey of Metro Line The date, time, and flow condition within the Metro interceptor should be noted and also the results of any leakage testing, if such has been accomplished. Unfortunately, during video taping, unless flow has been diverted or blocked, the bottom (flow -line) portion of the pipeline cannot be visually inspected. I would suggest that leakage testing be performed prior to construction, during and after construction. 3. Sewer/Water Quality It is anticipated that the waste water quality will vary significantly depending on contributing area, such as the Hobart and Cedar Hills landfills leachate discharge and the relative proportion of domestic waste water flow, as well as inflow and infiltration. Unfortunately, the highest contaminate concentration occurs during the summer, which is when peak flow rates are withdrawn from the City's aquifer. It would be helpful to have other consultants present comments regarding this issue. Number 4, 5, and 6 already commented on in prior comments. 7. Originally anticipated loads sustainable by sewer line This is a structural and soils consideration that depends on a number of factors such as soil shear resistance, structural integrity of the pipeline, amount of overexcavation, etc. A thorough analysis of this condition must be accomplished prior to the meeting, in order to have an effective conclusion reached. Mel Wilson March 5, 1990 Page Two 8. Contingency Plan I think it is prudent that alternative failure conditions be addressed so that this situation is evaluated on a comprehensive basis. An example might be a contingency plan for kick out of the pipeline due to horizontal unbalanced loads on the pipeline. This situation could worsen as the contractor removes soil to get at the pipeline to repair it. 9. Preventive measures to be taken It seems as though there are reasonable preventive measures that can be taken prior to construction since bacteriological or chemical contamination of the aquifer could occur rapidly and effect all downtown wells. As an example, in -situ lining in selected areas may be a justified precaution. Mel, these points are raised, not to slow the process down, but to actually speed it up so that everyone in attendance is aware of potential issues or concerns, so that they can be addressed effectively prior to the meeting and a resolution can occur during the meeting. Please contact me at your earliest convenience if you have any questions regarding these points. Thanks for the opportunity to comment. d/mwI-405/RH/bh cc: Lynn Guttmann Ron Olsen CITY OF RENTON DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING/BUILDING/ PUBLIC WORKS MEMORANDUM DATE: August 14, 1990 TO: Mel Wilson, Transportation Manager FROM: David Martin, Planning Manager V v-' 4& 1990 SUBJECT: I-405 S-Curves Outstanding Issues - Metro Sewer Line As my part of the issue paper for the Executive Committee meeting with WSDOT, these are the issues surrounding the Metro sewer line. Issues The principal issue is the amount of effort required to protect the aquifer during the S-Curves construction. The most critical portion of the project is construction of the Cedar River Bridge, because of its location within the aquifer and the proximity of the Metro sewer line. City's Position The City feels the following is necessary to assure protection of the aquifer: 1. Three times per week sampling of the monitoring and production wells and testing for inorganics, volatile organic compounds, and total coliform bacteria. 2. On -site environmental coordinator to monitor specification compliance, inspect construction equipment, and perform training for construction employees regarding environmental protection. 3. Preparation by Metro for a break in the line, including means to immediately shut down the sewer line and pump material around the break area. On - site storage of spill clean-up/containment materials. 4. Notification system which will ensure immediate shutdown of city wells in the event of a spill, Memorandum to Mel Wilson August 14, 1990 Page two and timely communication to DOE, Metro, and the Fire Department. The City also feels that WSDOT and Metro should split the cost of the extra monitoring necessary because of construction adjacent to the sewer line. WSDOT Position WSDOT feels that Metro is responsible for the cost of monitoring breaks in the sewer line. They also feel that the level of monitoring proposed by the City is excessive. They feel that routine inspection of equipment by their personnel and immediate clean-up of any spills of material from construction equipment is adequate protection of the aquifer. j:lines Agreement METRO Trunk Sewer A special problem solving team has been established to address aquifer protection issues related to construction in the vicinity of the 42" METRO trunk sewer. The specifications referred to in this memorandum of understanding require the approval of WSDOT, City of Renton and METRO. Agreement was reached as set forth below: METRO Pipe Testing will be done by METRO, both prior to "S" curve construction and after construction. Testing procedures will be agreed to by all three agencies. (The cost of this testing will be specified in a separate agreement between METRO and WSDOT). Samples will be taken along the pipe from Houser Way through the I-405 right of way. Additional sampling will also occur at existing monitoring wells in the vicinity of the sewer. Based upon analysis of the samples corrective measures will be taken to assure that the pipe is bottle tight, both before and after construction. Construction It is understood that H-pile walls will need to be driven to shore up roadways during construction. A minimum distance between METRO trunk sewer and any H-piles will be specified in the contract. Open excavation will be specified for construction of the west end abutment wall footings immediately north of the METRO trunk sewer. A clear message will be given to the contractor to not damage the trunk sewer. The precise location of the sewer should be staked in the field and it should be made clear to the contractor that these markers should not be disturbed. Any holes drilled in the vicinity of the pipe should be by auger or an approved alternate. Equipment Setting up of cranes over the pipe will be precluded. The maximum weight of equipment crossing over the pipe should be limited by specification. Other Weight Restrictions Stockpiling -of materials shall be restricted as to size and location in the vicinity of the pipeline. Specifications shall be provided related to the removal of the existing bridge structures. The structures shall not be allowed to drop or in any way produce a dynamic load in the vicinity of the METRO trunk sewer. METRO Trunk Sewer 'agreement Page 2 Contaminants Specifications will be provided related to construction methods which will control the use of fuels, solvents, heavy metals in the aquifer area. Specifications related to driving H-piles into the aquifer will also be provided. Interlocal Response Agreement An interlocal agreement for immediate response should be prepared by WSDOT, City of Renton, and METRO. Input may be required by the State Department of Ecology, Seattle King County Health Department, and the State Departments of Wildlife and Fisheries. Items to be considered for inclusion in the agreement are as follows: o Response equipment and supplies on site. o Agreements for water supply from Seattle or other districts. * o Water management/conservation plan. o Cost of clean up in re-establishing safe drinking water. o METRO plan for shut off of METRO trunk. * o Special requirements regarding WSDOT inspection. * o Education program for contractors and crews. o City daily sampling for water contamination. * o Special considerations in pre -bid conference. * o Consideration of penalty clause in contract, and possible special clean up provisions. * o Requirements related to amount of inspection. * o Strategic response plan, including advance participation and buy off from related agencies. o Additional permanent devices for constant water quality monitoring. It is agreed that the items marked by an asterisk will be a part of the Interlocal Response Agreement. The other items will be discussed and resolved by the problem solving team. METRO Trunk Sewer "greement Page 3 CITY OF RENTON Mel,/Tilson Di�" Anderson (Lynn Guttmann u METRO COX T Qohrf Spencer MEW:lr MEW236 WASHINGTON STATE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION .n n . id Martin �b Aye ,/� Ronald Anderson CITY OF RENTON MEMORANDUM DATE: February 18, 1990 TO: Lynn Guttmann FROM: Dick Anderson SUBJECT: Aquifer Protection Ordinance The proposed aquifer protection ordinance has progressed to near completion. Now we are in the process of undertaking a community information/education program on the aquifer with Carolyn Browne Associates. The two efforts should go forward together with the awareness program being used, in part, to educate on the need and provisions of the ordinance. The Aquifer Protection Awareness Program has essentially two phases of work: Phase I is information research and public contacts to develop a program design. Phase II is the preparation of materials and carrying out the education/information program. Phase I will be completed by April 30, 1990 and Phase II will continue through the greater part of 1990. I suggest that the ordinance be scheduled to coincide with presentation of the Aquifer Protection Awareness Program to the business community oU,/� 0 The ordinance needs to be finalized and I suggest the following approach to use the awareness program in the public information process for the ordinance. 1. Bring CH2M Hill in on contract to complete the ordinance in draft form as a recommendation to present to Council. CH2M Hill is under contract and has worked on the aquifer monitoring system. They have familiarity with the aquifer and our needs for the ordinance. We need a contract amendment (addendum), probably signed by the Mayor. Check on source of funding. 2. Provide for community review and input through the Aquifer Awareness Program. This should include contact with the Chamber of Commerce, downtown business group, Master Builders and other concerned or interested persons/groups. 3. Prepare council agenda bill and submit to council. 4. Pass Ordinance. Lynn Guttmann February 18, 1990 Page Two Hiring CH2M Hill and having them underway should be done during the next month so that they are available to work with Carolyn Browne on aquifer awareness. There apparently is concern in the business community that the City is not responsive to their concerns about the impact of the ordinance on business activity. Community involvement will be very important. Tentative Schedule: 1. Hire consultant (CH2M/Hill): 2. Community Program (Ordinance): 3. Aquifer Awareness Program: 3. Revisions to Ordinance: 4. Presentation to Council APAP-ORD.RJA:mf cc: Ron Olsen March 15th May 15th May 1st to 1991 June 15th July 1990 L , fiinde r�To rn /LbLrc Wor-k,S VEY CITY OF RENTON JAN 3 01990 M E M O R A N D U M CITY OF RENTON Engineering Dept. DATE: January 30, 1990 TO: Lynn Guttmann FROM: Mel Wilson SUBJECT: I-405 'IS" Curve Project Schedule David Martin has provided, by letter dated Januar,'7 24, 1990, a schedule for the above referenced project (copy attached). This letter also provides a listing of support required from the City of Renton to allow for the timely completion of this project. The following is a status report on items requested by the State. 1) Mill Avenue South - Tudor has completed the necessary design work. I will pursue the documentation necessary for the State to proceed. 2) Utilities - The City Utilities committee agreement has been revised to the States satisfaction and has been signed. It will be necessary for the City to design the portion of 24" water main between Mill Avenue and the pump house. The States timing of April 2, 1990 is extremely tight. I have discussed this with Brent McFall and Dick Anderson and we believe that our only chance of meeting this date is to have the design prepared by RH2. We are proceeding on this course. We are also proceeding to resolve the details referred to in the last paragraph under the Utilities section. 3) Cedar River Bridge Design - The information requested by the State has been prepared and delivered to the State on January 29, 1990. The items listed above constitute the immediate action items. I will proceed with the construction/traffic control agreements, permits and miscellaneous items referred to in the State letter as quickly as possible. I have reviewed the schedule provided by David Martin and discussed it with him. At this point in time the most critical items with regard to schedule are the Cedar River Bridge Design, and the Shoreline permit process. On January 29, 1990 David informed me that the Structures Division in Olympia assured David that they could meet this design schedule if they received the necessary design criteria by January 30, 1990. As stated above this information was provided to David on January 29th to be hand delivered to Olympia on the 30th. With reference to the Shoreline permit process, Jeanette McKague, Larry Springer and I met with David Martin on January 18, 1990. Based upon this meeting David will submit to the City a request to process the Shoreline Management Permit and attach the Bridge, Outfall, Utility, Parks and Shoreline committee agreements which fulfills the Cities requirements necessary to begin the Shoreline permit process. I will continue to monitor these activities. cc: Brent McFall Ken Nyberg John Webley Dick Anderson Larry Springer MEW/lr 170 � Washington State Duane Berentson VI/ Department of Transportation Secretary of rransoortat of District 1 15325 S.E. 30th Place Bellevue, Washington 98007-6538 (206) 562-4000 January 24, 1990 Mel Wilson City of Renton 200 Mill Avenue South Renton, WA 98055 Dear Mel: In response to your January 8, 1990 letter, I am sending a schedule of our design for the SR 405 S-Curves project and a comprehensive list of information or decisions we need from the City of Renton in order to proceed in a timely manner. We currently have three contracts scheduled for this project. The major milestones for each are as follows: I. SR 405 HOV Lanes and S-Curves Realignment Begin Cedar River Bridge Design Dec. 4, 1989 Shoreline Permit Application Jan. 19, 1990 Shoreline Permit Received May 25, 1990 PS&E To District May 29, 1990 PS&E To Headquarters June 26, 1990 Bridge PS&E Complete July 16, 1990 Contract Advertisement Sept. 4, 1990 II. SR 405 Waterline Utilidor 95% PS&E Submittal Mar. 12, 1990 PS&E To District May 1, 1990 PS&E to Headquarters May 29, 1990 Contract Advertisement August 6, 1990 a Im III. SR 405 Demolition Contract No. 1 PS&E To District Jan. 17, 1990 Contract Advertisement Feb. 28, 1990 The following information is needed immediately to not impact the project schedule further: I. Mill Avenue South We are redesigning this street at the request of the City. We received some information from Tudor Engineers, but we need an official notice of what the City desires. The design parameters we need include the cross -sectional geometrics (width of sidewalk, lanes and shoulders); where the new roadway will be relative to the existing road; approval of the cul-de- sac design; and direction that the Puget Power lines are to be put underground. We also need to discuss the funding responsibilities of each of our agencies. II. Utilities We need to have the agreement for the City Utilities Committee signed so that we will have a funding committment from the City for the upsizing of the water line along Main Avenue South and Houser Way. We will be able to include this design in our plans if the City is willing to commit to pay for design and construction of the difference in size between the 20-inch and 24- inch lines. We cannot design the further extension of the line to the City's pump house without jeopardizing our schedule. I suggest that the City design this part of the line and attempt to insert it in our contract prior to our submittal of PS&E to District. As noted in the in the City Utilities Committee agreement, the City needs to provide these plans to us by April 2, 1990 if the work will be part of our contract. Otherwise, the City will need to construct the extension under its own separate contract. In any case, we need a number of design details from the City so that our consultant can design our part of these lines. This information includes the location of the future PRV station and pump on the 12-inch line, and connection and alignment details on the 24-inch line. 2 III. Cedar River Bridge Design As discussed at our meeting yesterday, we need some elaboration on the design information provided to us by Tudor Engineers. They gave us the alignment and profile of realigned Houser Way. We also need a superelevation diagram, a roadway section of the proposed street, documentation of the sight distance around the bridge pier, and justification for not extending the roadway tangent in order to minimize the lengthening of the structure. We also need a letter of approval from the City regarding the substandard vertical clearance. The following items are needed to complete our PS&E, which is scheduled for turn -in on May 29, 1990. I. Construction Traffic Control We need to form the group responsible for determining traffic mitigation measures to be implemented as a result of construction activities on the freeway and city streets. This group would include members of our problem solving committee, plus others as appropriate. We need to know what mitigation is required prior to our PS&E turn -in. II. Agreements and Permits We need to begin working on a number of agreements so that they will all be finalized by the time the project goes to ad. Processing of agreements which involve the City of Renton paying the State to do work needs to begin by April 1, 1990 in order to make our utilidor ad date of August 6, 1990 and by May 1, 1990 in order to make our September 4 ad date for the highway contract. The agreements I am aware of which are in this category include the utility upsizings and the construction on Mill Avenue, both of which will be part of the utilidor contract. Other possible items have been mentioned at one time or another, but if the City has any definite requests for further additions, they need to be made immediately. We also need a number of permits from the City. The timing on these is not nearly so critical and can be completed after our plans are submitted for review in May. Some of the details need to be worked out prior to that time, however. These permits include the shoreline permit, haul road permits, construction permits for work on city property, turnback agreements, detour agreements, and noise variances. We also need M to have agreements regarding maintenance of the spill containment ponds and the city park we are building. As part of the City of Seattle waterline relocation, adjustments need to be made in the right of way ownerships to conform to the new routes. We will probably include these adjustments in the turnback agreements with the City of Renton. III. Miscellaneous In addition to these specifics, we will have a continuing need for review of plans and timely responses for designs which have an impact on the City. There are other unanticipated items which I'm sure will arise as we progress with design details. We will need to be flexible in this regard. I look forward to working together with you as we proceed towards finishing our design plans and beginning construction. Sincerely, 0 _,j g , 0%4,k� David J. Martin, P.E. Project Engineer r s 41 �- CITY OF RENTON MAYOR Earl Clymer December 21, 1989 Mr. Richard L. Wagner Chairman, Renton Planning Commission 200 Mill Ave. S. Renton, WA 98055 Dear Chairman Wagner: Thank you for your letter of December 5 in which you discuss your "grave concern regarding the lack of progress on the protection of our city's water supply." As you know much has been done to protect our dangerously exposed aquifer. Perhaps I can share with you just a few of the actions which have been taken. In May of 1988 The City Council adopted a secondary containment ordinance requiring all existing underground storage tanks in the city to be replaced with secondary containment type tanks. The deadline stated in the ordinance for removal of old tanks has now passed, and these old, potentially leaking tanks have been removed. (This includes several tanks which were owned by the City of Renton and removed at city expense.) Furthermore, while some tanks have been replaced with new secondary containment tanks many have simply been removed with no replacement; thus, the aquifer has been further protected by the elimination of many underground storage tanks. Finally, no new underground storage tank facilities are permitted in zone 1 of the aquifer protection area. A second manner in which the aquifer has been protected through efforts of the City is the designation of the Cedar River aquifer as a sole source aquifer by the Environmental Protection Agency. This designation brings into play a number of federal regulations relating to aquifer protection and plays a particularly important role in defending the aquifer against federally -funded projects, such as the realignment of I-405. As further evidence of the City's effort to protect the aquifer, the City Council has adopted a hazardous waste facility zone designation ordinance. This ordinance requires that a finding be made by the utility engineer or hearing examiner that "within zone I of the APA, no changes in land use or construction of new facilities shall be permitted unless a finding is made by the utility that the proposal will not impact the long-term, short-term or cumulative quantity or quality of the aquifer. The finding shall be based on the present or past activities conducted at the facility; regulated substances stored, handled, transported, treated, used or produced; and the potential for the activities or regulated substances to degrade groundwater quality." 200 Mill Avenue South - Renton, Washington 98055 - (206) 235-2586 Mr. Rich Wagner December 21 1989 Page 2 Finally, I have personally taken on the Washington State Department of Transportation regarding aquifer protection measures which I deemed essential during realignment of I-405 and during the life of that highway. As you know, I forcefully and publicly went out on a limb to proclaim that the aquifer must be protected at all costs. It would have been nice to have had your concerns for aquifer protection stated so vocally at that time, as I could have used your help. The aquifer protection ordinance is currently under development by our Public Works Department staff. While it is true that this ordinance is somewhat behind our original timeline for presentation to the City Council for adoption, I do not believe it is fair to imply that we have not been actively pursuing protection of the city's water supply. The aquifer protection area ordinance has many implications for the business climate and economic future of our community. Staff is therefore being very careful to take into account all conceivable implications before bringing forth an ordinance for Council consideration. We shall pursue it in a diligent manner, but not hastily. I trust that you agree with this approach. Thank you again for your letter. I do appreciate your concern and interest and hope that you will work with me on this important matter. Sincerely, a ly EZrCmer �,'t Mayor c: Ken Nyberg, Community Development Director Lynn Guttmann, Public Works Director 89201.ec/ jah CITY OF RENTON MEMORANDUM DATE: April 3, 1990 TO: Toni Nelson, Chair Utilities Committee FROM: Lynn G�t - n, Public Works Director STAFF CONTACT: Dick Anderson, Utility System Manager SUBJECT: Aquifer Protection Ordinance I am pleased to submit this informational memo on the status and our current efforts on the proposed Aquifer Protection Ordinance. Considerable effort has been made toward protecting the City's sole source water supply aquifer. Part of that effort included a proposed Aquifer Protection Ordinance, which is nearing completion. A new program was recently initiated to educate and inform the community on the nature and importance of the City's aquifer. Carolyn Browne Associates is the firm we have retained to assist us with the community information program. The two efforts, Aquifer Protection Ordinance and Aquifer Awareness Program should proceed together with the awareness program being used, in part, to educate the community on the need and provisions of the ordinance. The Aquifer Protection Awareness Program has essentially two phases of work: Phase I is information research and public contacts to develop a program design. Phase II is the preparation of materials and the implementation of the education/information program. Phase I will be completed by April 30, 1990; Phase II will continue through the greater part of 1990. We are proposing that presentation of the draft aquifer protection ordinance be scheduled to coincide with presentation of the Aquifer Protection Awareness Program to the business community. This will occur during May and June. The ordinance needs to be finalized and adopted. To do that we will have our consultant, who is familiar with the aquifer and our needs for the ordinance, complete the ordinance in draft form as a recommendation to Council. We will also provide for community review and input through the Aquifer Awareness Program. This will include contact with the - Toni Nelson April 3, 1990 Page Two Chamber of Commerce, downtown business groups, Master Builders and other concerned or interested persons and groups. Our basic schedule is as follows: 1. Phase I Aquifer Awareness Program April 30th 2. Update draft ordinance with Phase I data May 15th 3. Utility Committee review May 30th 4. Phase II & Ordinance review with Community June 30th 5. Revisions to Ordinance: July 15th 6. Utility Committee Review July 7. Presentation to Council August If you have any comments or questions on either the proposed Ordinance or the Aquifer Awareness Program, I will be pleased to discuss them with you. cc: Ron Olsen Mayor's Office Ken Nyberg AWP-STAT.RJA:lf DATE: TO: FROM: SUBJECT: CITY OF RENTON M E M O R A N D U M January 29, 1990 David Martin Mel Wilson �A4W WSDOT Drilling Permit JAN ; o tsso CITY OF RENTON Engineering DepL. Reference is made to our January 17, 1990 meeting regarding Outfall and Utility Agreements for I-405 "S" Curve project. During this meeting WSDOT representatives indicated that they will be able to obtain the use of a drill rig which meets City of Renton specifications for drilling the monitoring wells. At the meeting I stated that this was certainly Rentons preference. I also stated that if there was a delay in obtaining the appropriate equipment that Renton would cooperate in helping WSDOT stay on schedule by allowing drilling South of the Cedar River. A copy of the conditions under which WSDOT may do boring South of the Cedar River using existing monitoring wells was provided to you at the January 17th meeting. If WSDOT is unable to get the proper monitoring well drilling equipment in time to allow timely completion of this project, you may want to pursue this alternate course of action (attached). Please contact me at 277-5542 if you have any questions or find it necessary to utilize this fall. back position. cc: Dick Anderson MEW/lr 169 CITY OF RENTON M E M O R A N D U M DATE: January 8, 1990 TO: Mel Wilson ,1- FROM: Dick Anderson �J SUBJECT: WSDOT Drilling Permit You asked if WSDOT could begin drilling any of the test borings shown on a drawing you provided prior to drilling and installing the requested monitoring wells. Also, whether other monitoring wells could be used in -lieu of the proposed monitoring wells. I have drawn the proposed monitoring wells and the boring locations on copies of the ground water elevation drawings from our report titled, "Well Field Monitoring Study". These drawings show the ground water elevations (draw -down gradient) for two pumping conditions; Supply Pumps #1 & #2 operating; and 2. Supply Pump #8 operating. The pumping draw down contours show that existing monitoring well MW-1 would not effectively monitor turbidity for drilling except the possibility of borings numbered HQ-106 & HQ-107. Monitoring well MW-1 is shallow and will not provide effective monitoring because of location and depth for the other borings. Monitoring wells MW-18, MW-19 and MW-20 are not located between the water supply wells and the proposed borings, therefore would not provide any monitoring of the tracking of contaminants from the drilling operation or for turbidity. The new monitoring wells are all located essentially in -line between the water supply wells and (down gradient) and the proposed borings. I believe we can allow borings HQ-104, HQ-105, HQ-106 and HQ-107 to proceed prior to completion of the monitoring wells under the following conditions: All drilling for those test borings is completed by March 15, 1990; Mel Wilson January 8, 1990 Page Two 2. WSDOT coordinate directly with Jack Crumley on the drilling schedule so that he may monitor operation and suspend pumping from wells 1, 2 and 3 and rely on supply from wells 8 and 9 if necessary. It may be possible at that time of year to provide our water supply needs for a short period from wells 8 and 9; and 3. Daily monitoring of monitoring well MW-1. It must be understood that every precaution will be made by WSDOT and its contractor to preclude the introduction of any contaminant into the aquifer area during the test boring work. All other test borings will be made after the monitoring wells MW-28 and MW-29 have been installed and are ready for use in monitoring further drilling activity. DRILLPMT.RJA:mf CITY OF RENTON M E M O R A N D U M DATE: January 5, 1990 TO: Dick Anderson FROM: Mel Wilson SUBJECT: Washington State Department of Transportation Drilling Permit Reference is made to our conversations regarding the drilling permit requirements and the necessity to expedite this process. The City of Renton has required that the State drill monitoring wells 28 and 29 prior to drilling the proposed borings. The City has also specified the type of drill rig. The State does not have the appropriate drill rig and is currently attempting to contract for drilling with the appropriate equipment. On December 20th the State requested that we determine if any of the proposed borings could be drilled and monitored using existing monitoring wells. In reviewing the proposed boring plan (copy attached), it appears that some of these borings could be drilled using existing monitoring wells such as monitoring well 1, 20, 19 or 18. Also, is it possible that monitoring for turbidity could occur at any of the production wells 1, 2 or 3? (monitoring well 12?) I will continue to push the State to use proper drilling equipment. However, the State has delayed the borings to the point that it is difficult to assure that the bridge design can be completed in time for the October award date. In order that we avoid sharing the responsibility for such a costly delay, I am requesting that you inform me which, if any, of the borings the State may proceed with prior to drilling the monitoring wells 28 and 29. It would help a great deal if I could have this information by end of day Monday, January 8th. If you have any questions regarding this request or the timing, please contact me at extension 5542. MEWgb145 l T.23N. R.5E, SECTIOW I .\ 11 rtr rri rC, yrrrr IN hN,mt:�,M III ------------------ E ��,,;;anw PI SCE' n _ - iR ��11 B!'RE N j•24.o' E-- - — - • -- --Y— Y F�— v—_v——r— —v--r Gt o � 2 -- , ea , LEGEND�ao -- •, PR O POSEI30 !Rcu 'D 1 _ �' Al/A CTS 02DIN 6R Y NIC-i4 -M0/IrroF,ING- WEL.L.s W Tr_rt /-An i'd) Fri NI DMSknu Daniel Kellogg - Mark E. Barber - David M. Dean - Zanetta L. Fontes - Robert L. Sewell , Assistant City Attorneys TO: FROM: RE: Dear John: June 26, 1989 I J)/' j// A& kl�- John Webley, Parks and Recreation Director Lawrence J. Warren, City Attorney DOT Permit for Drilling The permit for drilling is very general. For example, there is no termination date for the permit. Also, there is no indication of the intent behind the permit. Are the drillings to be done to test water quality, or are they to take soil samples and to test soil types? Of primary concern is the fact that the drilling would be conducted in the city's aquifer. The city should ensure that the work is performed only by competent professionals. Furthermore, there should be a requirement that each contractor carry liability insurance. Finally, the state should hold the city harmless from any damages that might be caused, not only to the surface of the soil, but also to the city's aquifer. State law permits the city to require other entities to hold the city harmless from all damages, claims, causes of action including defense costs and attorney's fees, except for those caused by the sole negligence of the city. It also permits the city to require that it be compensated for any damage caused by the negligence of the state, its agents, employees, contractors and subcontractors, including actual and consequential damages to the city's aquifer. Perhaps it would be advantageous for you, I, and Lynn Guttmann to meet and establish a set of priorities that we wish to be dealt with in future permits with the state,/, Lawrence,J. Warren LJW:as. cc: Mayor A8.43:46. Post Office Box 626 - 100 S 2nd Street - Renton, Washington 98057 - (206) 255-8678 o -hecKed By 4SHEE Deol;ed By VSN2-89Plon—,Envr. 3-89 4-28-69 1 Added exlsling ullllfies. NSRR and Plcn By X H. Bauer 2-89 River Falsevork D109ram. Luminalr ErcHliec+/SOeCialfst DATE REVISION PRELIMINARY PLAN DOT FORM 221-013 SHEE; Revised II/83 Washington State Department of Transportation District 1 15325 S. E. 30th Place Bellevue, Washington 98007-6568 (206)'562-4000 Lynn A. Guttmann Director of Public Works City of Renton 200 Mill Avenue South Renton, WA 980555 Dear Lynn: Duane Berentson Secretary of Transportation June 16, 1989 SR 405 C.S. 1743 Renton S-Curve Relocation Geotech. Soil Borings To facilitate design of the I-405 Renton S-Curve it is necessary for us to drill soil borings at HQ-101,HQ-102, and HQ-103 (see attached plan). meeting today with representatives of the City, drill two water quality monitoring wells, shown and MW29-SD on the attached plan. The sequence of drilling is as follows: 1) Well MW28-SD 2) Well MW29-SD 3) Test hole HQ-103 4) Test hole HQ-102 5) Test hole HQ-101 Relocation test holes Per our we will also as MW28-SD Each well and test hole is expected to take approximately four days to drill. The water quality wells will be constructed in accordance with the City of Renton's criteria. As agreed, two water quality wells will be installed at each location. Each well will be installed in separate holes. The geotechnical test borings will be 4 to 4.5 inches in diameter with drilling methods to be either wireline or driven casing, depending on field conditions. Continuous sampling will occur in the first 25 to 30 feet of each hole and every 5 feet thereafter. Once bedrock has been encountered, the holes will be advanced a minimum of 40 feet into rock. Page 2 June 16, 1989 If piezometers are installed in the geotechnical borings, they will be constructed with 1 inch PVC pipe (Triloc) with the piezometer screen set at or near the contact with the bedrock. A bentonite seal will extend from the ground surface to a depth of approximately 25 to 30 feet. The following program will be implemented for the field exploration in this area: 1) A large plastic tarp will be placed under all drilling equipment to prevent contamination from possible fuel/oil leakage. Additionally, all drilling equipment will have oil absorbent cloths on site for backup protection; 2) All drilling equipment (eg. drill and tools) will be steam cleaned; 3) Fuel or other potentially hazardous materials will not be left on site, and no fueling will be done on site; 4) Drill cuttings will be removed from the site; 5) Test holes will either be abandoned following DOE guidelines and safeguarded (WAC 173-160-560), or they will be instrumented with piezometers with locking steel caps following DOE guidelines (WAC 173-160-510). Clean potable water from our Kent maintainence facility shall be used during the drilling operation. All drill water will be recirculated. All drilling steel shall be chlorinated/disinfected as work progresses. All drill cuttings will be picked up and placed in sealable barrels. The barrels will be emptied at an appropriate location offsite. During periods of downtime, all drill steel/tools will be pulled from the holes and covered. Open holes will be secured with temporary/lockable casing. Upon completion of each boring, a flush mounted security casing will be installed. The City will be contacted prior to the drilling of each well and test hole. The City of Renton shall have the right to stop our work at any time and for any reason. Page 3 June 15, 1989 Prior to the drilling operation, we will contact "Dig" to have the existing underground utilities located in this area. We anticipate performing the test hole drilling as soon as right of entry is obtained, and all existing utilities in the area have been located. The City of Renton, by countersigning in the space provided, acknowledges and grants permission to the State to drill monitoring wells 28-SD and 29-SD and test holes HQ-101, HQ- 102, and HQ-103. We are transmitting the original along with one (1) additional copy of this correspondence. Please sign and return the original if satisfactory. If you wish further information please contact Al Anderson or Mark Leth at 562-4454. ao J O Approved By T-I roved by SL/ml Attach. cc: Bruce Berg File (ROE-HQ2) Sincerely, David J. Martin P.E. Project Engineer WATOM CNUNKC2 (0/1'06 / Title Date Title to • — API L5' Min. Ea'/ (7yp. bw 17g Br/a rra Walt Renton Ave Uxlns 405i178 To TuAwilo LS `26 Ml/es Profile Gra/deeloi UI Profile Grade c End 15: LN Sta. 48.00' ) ca o cy Y jW Fractured Fln FIMsh (Typ.1 b yi ` > 9.7' Mln. Existing Ground Ll w✓ - - _ _ - - - - - - v_erf. dear 20'RlgYofLSLine -- - --------- I �—N Una F--NSRR Une Reference Elevation 10.0 2'-0' Mln. CT Tem 15'-01 Ann. rryA ow) 8 W.S.t . Q. SIN FALSEWORK OPENING DIAGRAM �' y °I Ww U Cedar River ¢� a 3!6 , Existing Ground Line along Right Curb Line of LN Line DATUM Noft. Good. Vert. Lktum or 1929 M LAYOUT APPROVED BY: G. T. Markich (for) J-17-69 Bridge and Structures Engineer R. A, Mottllu (ror) 4-19-89 oyr d Ad rotor N 2r1to Deatan E-ar. 3-69 Suoervlaor i Daslq�ad ay Chacnad By Da-oNad By VSN 2-89 BLVIdge P,onn1r g Engr. 3-89 4 Praeminory Pldn By At. H. Bauer 2-69 drehl+se+/SPec�alfsi C DOT DORM 221-013� Reference Elevation 10.0 10 $ td T1Z3 I� N•�` N cn W 1 1 Vert. dear I-^-N Une F►—NSRR Una SECT TnN 17_ T 9 3 N_ P C; F W AA Scale. r - 30' Bearings of a// P;ers - S T3.55'38- E a• 'Dion NYhi x Not treuded in Bridge Qumtltles M p'�fi b)Aj � V)IcS r 100 Year MA.I.(1%1 0=9610cf-& W.S. Elev. 32.0 ELEVATION WEST BRIDGE Grade elevatlons shown are flnlsh grades on L5 Una 81 of top of roadway slab aril are equal to profile grade 8I Imoto � in W � cnlW a 3I� a 36 ELEVATION EAST BRIDGE Grade e/evrtlons shown are finish grades on LN Line at top of rcxOdY slob and are eouvi to profile grade. BRIDGES AND STRUCTURES 16.0' Min. vert, dear. - (For side or Bridge) —Pigmented Sealer- xx Data from FEMA Report. City of Renton Note : Vert Seals at Elev. Z6.0 i---CARCO Line Taper 254+75.36 - 24.0' U. To Belle,'ue 3.8 M L9 C> A--'-- 1--f + - / V L (gg-EXISTING b0Icc11C,,4�5 l- PfPOPOS� J� BO,�//VGS (6R Z 89 / -WATZZT 0UAL / TY MON/ TOE//VG WEL L g oo" Wo � y I r--CARCO Une &-MAY-1989 1 ZG1d105,610EDARRIVR.LA'.. Aft, Washington State ffirm Department of Transportation Tema. Cork. x ..I .I Barrler I FALSEWORK OPENING DIAGRAM N Urie and CARCO Line C.I.P. POST TENSIONED CONCRETE BOX GIRDER LOADING: HS-20 'OR TWO 24 K AXLES a, 4- C-TRS. 811113E SHE T N0. 1 PRELIMINARY PLAN I or sr« CITY OF RENTON MEMORANDUM DATE: January 15, 1990 TO: Mel Wilson FROM: Dick Anderson SUBJECT: I-405 Agreement - City Utilities The following are my comments on the proposed City Utility Agreement. I. 16 INCH WATER MAIN: The 6" water main that will be abandoned is in the same proximate location as the new 16" relocated main and there is insufficient room to accommodate both lines. We suggested combining the two lines to make a better location available for the State to relocate the 16" main. Combining the two lines requires upsizing to the next larger line, which is 20" in standard size. Our Water Comprehensive Plan which is 90% complete and will be adopted by Council in April shows a need for a 24" main in this location as a primary feeder from the water supply wells in Liberty Park to the southerly service areas and the Rolling Hills reservoir. WSDOT is designing a 20" main rather than the 24" main requested. The City's costs to provide the design and plans for the 24" main should be reimbursed by the State when the Comp Plan is adopted, since Federal regulations require utility relocations to satisfy the comprehensive plan. Second paragraph says: "The cost of design and construction (emphasis added) of a further....." It must be made more clear that WSDOT is paying the construction cost for the 20" main and the City would pay only the incremental increase associated with the size increase to a 24" main. I believe WSDOT can and should design for the 24" main rather than the 20" main. If it is a betterment and it is determined that we must pay the betterment portion of the cost, then that cost can be paid through our 1990 CIP for I-405 overrun authorization. II. NE 3rd STREET STRUCTURE: What is the 8" sewer line to be relocated by the City? WSDOT should provide as -built plans for the 8" relocated sewer line. Mel Wilson January 15, 1990 Page 2 III. RENTON HILL UTILITIES: 3rd Paragraph: WSDOT Aptso response must be consistent with our comment or the response may not be acceptable. IV. METRO TRUNK SEWER: In addition to construction techniques and specifications we need an emergency response plan prepared addressing the steps and measures to be taken in the event of a contaminating spill, who has what responsibilities, emergency contacts to be made, level of response and final approval on the remedial or clean up effort. The emergency response plan must be made a part of the construction specifications. It must be understood that our participation in meetings and discussions on reconstruction, relocation or any modification to the Metro line, will not relieve WSDOT and/or METRO of responsibility and liability for the Metro trunk line and the I-405 construction. OTHER COMMENTS: I believe it essential for the City to have an inspector on the construction site at all times to overview and monitor construction of those facilities that will be part of the City systems; and, also the construction in critical or sensitive areas that can pose a threat to the City's aquifer or other important facilities. Our inspector can be of great assistance if there is a problem requiring our response or coordination. The WSDOT inspectors will not have the same interest or level of concern as will the City inspector and we need assurance that construction is performed in a manner acceptable to the City. The cost of this extra- ordinary inspection work should be borne by WSDOT, since it is their project that is creating a potentially serious situation and we are taking on a significant risk and additional work that is not being reimbursed. 405-UTIL.RJA:mf cc: Lynn Guttmann Ron Olsen CITY OF RENTON M E M O R A N D U M DATE: January 15, 1990 TO: Mel Wilson FROM: Dick Anderson 12 lk SUBJECT: I-405 Agreement: Outfall and Drainage I have reviewed your proposed agreement with WSDOT for the drainage and outfall system and have the following comments: POND CONSTRUCTION: There should be provision in the agreement to provide for installation of automated detection equipment at WSDOT cost at a future date if it is decided that such equipment is cost effective and provides more reliability. II. OUTFALL: III. PROTECTION FROM BARRIER PENETRATION: Liner location: Special consideration should be given to the landfill type liner location and design in the vicinity of Water Supply Wells #8 and #9. The criteria specified in the agreement may not be adequate near the wells. V. OPERATION OF THE SPILL CONTAINMENT SYSTEM: This section needs further clarification on the specific roles of the respective agencies. Ecology is not bound by an agreement they do not sign. If Ecology is to be responsible for the clean-up, and we are to rely on Ecology's efforts and responsiveness, then that agency must be a party to the agreement with a specific response plan prepared and available to all agencies. Ecology may perceive its role as only determining when the clean-up has been adequately completed, rather than undertaking and performing the actual clean-up. If there is a spill, WSDOT, because it is it's facility, will be responsible for the recovery of the cost of clean-up. Renton's costs associated with any clean-up should be reimbursed by WSDOT and included in WSDOT's recovery. It should not be the obligation of Renton to pursue the recovery of it's costs in clean-up. Mel Wilson January 15, 1990 Page 2 VI. CAPACITY OF SYSTEM: All of the storm drainage system design and construction costs will be paid by WSDOT. GENERAL COMMENTS: We are reconstructing the storm drain lines in Houser Way and Bronson to reduce the possibility of storm drainage contamination to the water supply aquifer. The proposal is to insitu line the existing drain lines. We expect to completed this project prior to the I-405 construction to help prevent further cracking and loosening of pipe joints that could occur as a result of the I-405 construction. 405-STRM.RJA:mf cc: Lynn Guttmann Ron Olsen AGREEMENT City Utilities The I-405 S-Curves City Utilities Problem Solving Team has met and agreed upon the following: I. 16 INCH WATER MAIN As part of the S-Curves project, the WSDOT needs to relocate an existing 16 inch City water line. The new line will be located in the roadway along Main Street and Houser Street. (see attached plan) The WSDOT has agreed to replace the 16 inch line along Main Street with a 20 inch line which will be located in the approximate location as the existing 6 inch. The 6 inch line will be abandoned. The WSDOT has agreed to install a 16 inch line along Houser Street. The cost of design and construction of a further upsizing to 24 inches (difference between 20 inch and 24 inch pipe) to conform with a proposed draft of the City of Renton Comprehensive Plan will be the responsibility of the City. WDOT's request for FHWA participation in funding this upsizing has been rejected. II. NE 3RD STREET STRUCTURE It may be necessary to relocate the City of Renton's 8 inch sewer line as a result of the lengthening of the 3rd Street bridge. Since the bridge is being lengthened at the request of the City to provide for future expansion of 3rd Street, the cost of relocating the 8 inch line will be borne by the City. The City will field locate the line and determine if it needs to be moved. WSDOT will provide as-builts of the existing structure and the proposed layout of the new structure. III. RENTON HILL UTILITIES Along Mill Avenue, WSDOT has agreed to install a 12 inch water line to connect lines which are being severed by the construction of the utilidor carrying the City of Seattle's three major water transmission lines. Construction of the I-405 S-Curves project will prevent the City from easily connecting two zones of its water system, one on Renton Hill and the other in the downtown area. In this regard, it is the State's responsibility to extend the 12 inch main from Mill Avenue South the entire length of the frontage road to the intersection with Renton Avenue South then down the hill to tie in to the waterline serving NARCO which will also be upgraded to 12 inch. WSDOT is dependent upon Federal Highway Administration funding for construction of this project. Should interstate funding not be available for the total length described, a reanalysis of funding sources must be undertaken. WSDOT is reviewing the 12/12/89 letter from Dick Anderson to David Martin. Issues contained in this letter will be the subject of an additional agreement. IV. METRO TRUNK SEWER WSDOT will be constructing footings in close proximity (20 foot minimum clearance) to the 42 inch Metro sewer. A joint City/State engineering effort will be undertaken to determine construction procedures necessary to assure that there will not be any Metro trunk leakage due to construction. This Engineering effort will include data gathering, a brain storm session of experts and follow-up engineering specifying construction techniques and specs. The construction specifications will include an emergency response plan addressing the steps and measures to be taken in the event of a contaminating spill, who has what responsibilities, emergency contacts to be made, level of response and final approval on the remedial or clean up effort. It is understood that responsibility and liability for any aquifer contamination from the Metro sewer due to I-405 construction rests with WSDOT and/or Metro. V. PUGET POWER TRANSMISSION LINES Although not a City of Renton facility, this committee discussed relocation of Puget Power's 115 KV line which is necessitated by the S-Curve construction. The City and WSDOT have agreed to a route for the relocation which is acceptable to Puget Power. The City agrees to allow the utility a variance from its tree -cutting and undergrounding guidelines. The State agrees to pursue on exception to its limited access area along SR-405. A second Puget Power line will conflict with construction of the lower valve structure of the utilidor. The City agrees to allow a temporary relocation of this line along Main Avenue South and Houser Way South. CITY OF RENTON WASHINGTON STATE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Mel Wilson David Martin Dick Anderson Lynn Guttmann Acknowledge: Mayor Earl Clymer 405/CTUTAGMT/MEW/bh Jim Lutz District Administrator W W W W W W xxx Vl Vf$A N oo �r Ewa aaa AAA N M N n •F t -C--40,5 .l►TC-7 /l-2-8� r! erg -rr� ,21S-Z,a e,a rar 3 G �' 6 STo /Zol ro Weir S M-s.-AuiL41 r 0 r-_ Guar sl419 c f w / 7-N SP/1~ Fv0 i7W6 , - w AO-.-r' 1 S 7x4r 0701=vz r— o /< o K R 3(o 10 N r7co" c. G'.t 7&kf— G OV.W2- a4 V K"YL AsYO -YW r p oG-w ov / ••� C� ; f�-� Er / S n�-r� SPA -A- t 1 .,& e-, a-rv- ? w 7 VAt rl-c• %r 44zeaa S /0 CWPA0 2 2 vw7t r o / 2 SM km -7. 3 c r s 1`l /o Cur01�-!t TL V Ir2 /� �(�/W x �A-r✓J !i' . W, 41_ nraT D6' N +y 2A-rN�-G, C,onrcfir/ r—d2 o v dm 116 L-. L^J- u is )=Q ..a D *-e4 D V /L,# / N /.;- a e7r / rr ra 4- 4LL4 1 rv-7c, — Pa-4,0 D83tGN Po CS ^toT V/ULr rn2 P /7.a v, t S I o .v r SJf0.7z,0-s ;2e-(a,uIA4'3 1CG�ucL►Ty � QuA 4"ry eoKc,rtAJ • u n! DI-TT4 i l4tr'O wa 7-bv ' eS er►vu-r+-a�s3 w r�L O� u �a a ry . G o P,t c wn-tQr jc o ti N a 17 er-7V%f 7-7 6 of e• nt Tmff L R V- . FA-s e- R06-'r'er , • f4-kV v..'- m K e Cd bO /% 1 TS a ^.r d e- IZK N —O l�iL 2iYTLf W i T%� N!n✓ P44 1par $ "!Y e► • -- PA aX r- is V s-ruTN T o ri . f" w R Ter o f F l o w. 5-o nvi ti w-v t t r, n1 e. fJ /t.a- i n/A d; a- /.v ro c x . 3 6 �' G i 7 r-I S v-5 • W,a 'Z Q cu /4- i P 7- l of- D esT, pa n/ o , I Lr F L u 3 M v e- f` c- e o iv 7-Av;p + i ,v ,e- n/Ts a Ur, o t= f o"O f >e N 0 7- rr 4 / ny rn- • ••/" , 4/4fv75 'Pbz--rVYlT►0nA .0-ND rnv/ttr C0r1T72-0"a 01-Z Jam . C.Q aL- , r-Y CEDAR RIVER PIPELINE DATE: NAME: PHONE: ORGANIZATION: 1 •) /� 1 .4iv DL%L.s o�v S�z - 4 4S� �u S D o 7` 3.) 1 - '55 4•) �0._,.�y �0.r�._ Sb-L 4.44R w sT::)oT 5 .) 'D c K QNoErzso.y 2 3 s- zr.'3 i PEW 7&.j 6 .) wr !i(% 5 b Zy.7 !a o Gy S 6%J T 7.)G� Gt/i�s �h Z to ) 11.) 12.) 13.) 14.) 15.) 16.) 17.) 18.) 19.) 20.) 0 CITY OF RENTON MEMORANDUM DATE: September 12, 1989 TO: Mel Wilson FROM: Dick Anderson SUBJECT: I-405 AQUIFER PROTECTION There are two remaining issues on the I-405 project relating to the City's primary water supply aquifer, which is located in the Liberty Park area. They are: The discharge location into the Cedar River for the storm water drainage from the freeway facility, and 2. Protective measures to prevent spillage of hazardous materials from entering the water supply aquifer. Importance of the Aquifer: The loss of water supply well pumps 1R, 2R, 3R and old 3, #8 and #9, represents the loss of approximately 90% of the City's water supply. The backup reservoir supply would provide approximately a 1-day water supply for the City under normal use conditions. Such a loss of supply for more than a month would require imposing several emergency provisions on our service and customer supply such as: 1. rationing to residential and business use, 2. termination of supply to major industrial users such as Boeing (in part), PACCAR, etc., 3. eliminate all unnecessary uses (sprinklering, etc.), and 4. no fire protection abilities (there would be substantial risk of major loss and a high liability factor). It would also require that we initiate immediate emergency resupply measures that could possibly include the following, if there were proper interlocal agreements and response mechanisms in place: 1. Acquire emergency supply from the City of Seattle and the surrounding Water Supply Districts (if Seattle had available water). This would require interlocal agreements for the supply of water and the construction of intertie connections for emergency water supply. 2. construction of new supply wells and connecting feeder lines may be a possibility. This requires pre -approval of water rights. The construction, testing, certifying and placing new wells on line would require several years before a new supply would be available. Mel Wilson September 12, 1989 Page Two PROTECTION AGAINST HAZARDOUS SPILLS Alternatives: Acceptance - Allow construction of the freeway with no special protective provisions (similar to the present situation). City accepts all risks relating to a spill incident with recourse only through the legal processes. This alternative is tantamount to the City abrogating its stewardship duty to the residents (tax payers) of the City whose interests we are to protect. Avoidance - Re-routing the truck traffic away from the aquifer so there would be no threat whatsoever to the aquifer of a hazardous material spillage. There are no good alternative routes. Re-routing will likely raise public opposition to any increased truck traffic and it will worsen level of service and capacity on any route. Control and enforcement are also recognized as problems in achieving assurance of proper protection for the aquifer. Protection - design and construction of facilities. On bridge retention/containment: Design the freeway bridge to fully retain any and all vehicles and spillage. This could involve very high barriers along the edge of the roadway (a tunnel section was suggested) and special drainage retention facilities. Restrainer System: Cable barricade to prevent trucks from leaving the roadway. This may be workable on an at -grade section of roadway, but has not been shown workable on a bridge structure. Aquifer protective cover: Installation of a hydro carbon impermeable fabric membrane over that portion of the aquifer spanned by the bridge structure, including a sufficient lateral width outside of the bridge drip -line to maintain the spillage of a tanker truck if it rolled off I-405. (Note: The membrane could be similar to those used for reservoirs and for covering landfills). The fabric membrane could be installed with an earth cover which would serve as an absorbant for any spillage that could not be collected in a spill containment system, thus allowing for removal, proper disposal of contaminated soil and the restoration of the protective cover material. The ground surface area could be available for various alternative uses, including open space, park area, playground, landscaping and other non-structural uses. Protection - Legal Measures: Agreement with WSDOT by which they agree to accept any and all responsibility for any spillage on I-405. Such agreement would have to include the following provisions and conditions (these are not necessarily all inclusive, but represent important elements): Mel Wilson September 12, 1989 Page Three 1. Immediate response to clean up and remove spillage. 2. Guarantee replacement of aquifer if there is penetration of the hazardous material into the aquifer. Replacement means both immediate re -supply provisions and full restoration of the aquifer or its permanent replacement with no additional capital or operational cost to the City of Renton. That WSDOT will take all reasonable remedial actions to restore this specific water supply source. 3. Hold harmless from any claim or loss that may occur to any party as a result of the removal of this supply from the City's distribution system. 4. The payment of all costs over and above the City's normal supply costs for bringing in a temporary or permanent water supply source. 5. That WSDOT will comply with all regulatory requirements on securing and supplying a water source. 6. That permanent restoration of the City's water supply will be done without the City first having to resort to legal action. 7. That prior to completion of construction WSDOT will execute all agreements necessary to assure an adequate and continuous water supply in the event the City of Renton must terminate drawing from this source. 8. The City of Renton shall have sole responsibility, subject to local and State health codes, to make the determination on whether to stop, continue, or to re -starting pumping operations from this aquifer. DRAINAGE DISCHARGE LOCATION: This issue is dependent in large part on the design of the drainage collection, separator and discharge system and on commitments to maintenance provisions and schedules. More information is needed on the overall design before we can comment or commit on the outfall location. RJA cc: Lynn Guttmann Ron Olsen Rick Harbert RH2 Engineering/Hydrogroup, Inc. Analysis Report for the City of Renton J ne. 1987 CedarRiver Valley Aquifer Test RH2 Engineering/Hydrogroup, Inc. Texaco Spill December, 1987 Computer Model Development Spring, 1988 PCE Contamination in Monitoring Wells 1988 Additional Monitoring Wells Spring, 1988 PCE Contamination Ordinance No. 4147, City of Renton April 4, 1988 Secondary Tank Containment Resolution No. 2715 April, 1988 Adoption of Well Field Monitoring Study as a Factual Document Resolution No. 2715 April 4. 19RR Aquifer Protection Ordinance Draft 15 Sole Source DesiL-nation Received June 8. 1988 (In Final Sole Source Aquifer (In registry -October 3. 1988) Petition) Well Field Monitoring Study, June, 1988 prepared by CH2M Hill Additional monitoring wells Fall, 1988 South of Cedar River Final Sole Source Aquifer Petition November, 1988 prepared by CH2M Hill Ordinance No. 4186. November 14, 1988 Zoning for Hazardous Waste and Storage Resolution No. 2748, Adoption January 9, 1989 Amended Aquifer Protection Area Results of 3 Additional Monitoring., February, 1989 Wells south of Cecta-r-Mver Installation and Pump Test by CH2M Hill. Summary of Groundwater Modeling Januarv. 1989 Efforts in Support of Renton Aquifer Management * Underlined Documents are attached. CITY OF RENTON WATER SUPPLY SYSTEM 1980 DECADE T'HUSFAR May 30, 1989 The following is a chronological history of the City's water supply, aquifer monitoring, and aquifer protection efforts during the 1980 decade through May 30, 1989. ACTION DATE Standard DSHS required quality information available Comp Plan Recommends Aquifer Protection Program Tanker overturns on I-405 Aquifer Protection Study Authorized Well Field Protection Study Prepared by CH2M Hill Amendment to Well Field Protection Study • prepared by CH2M Hill Aquifer Protection Study Adopted Resolution No. 2553 Groundwater Monitoring Movement Study - Data gathered 1986-87 Golf Course Acquired for Aquifer Protection and Emergency Well Field Olympic Pipeline spill in Maple Valley Sole Source Aquifer Protection Application Paccar Monitoring wells/contamination Wells 1-2-3 Relocated/Redeveloped Aquifer Test Data Report for the City of Renton Cedar River Vahey Aquifer Test Prior to 1980 April, 1983 August, 1983 1/25/84 August, 1984 May, 1985 (In above document) 7/23/85 8/8/85 1985 1986 11/24/86 1/87 Spring, 1987 June 24-26, 1987 June, 1987 * Underlined Documents are attached. DEC - 1 2- 8 9 T U E 1 6: S Q Pacific Groundwater Group 2377 Eastlake Ave, E., Suite 200 Seattle, Washington 98102 o-= 206.329.0141 PAX 329.6968 MEMORANDUM DATE: DECEMBER 12, 1989 TO: RON OLSEN, CITY OF RENTON FROM: CHARLES ELLINGSON, PACIFIC GROUNDWATER GROUT' RE: CRITERIA FOR MONITORING WELL CONSTRUCTION AND COMMENTS ON WSDOT GEOTECHNICAL BORING PLANS F . 0 2 We have the following comments on WSDOTs plans for geotechnical borings as reflected in the letter from WSDOT (David Martin) to the City (Lynn Guttman) dated July 26, 1989, The following pages contain suggested "City of Renton criteria" for monitoring well drilling by the WSDOT, COMMENTS ON WSDOT LETTER OF JULY 2611989 1, Separate holes for each monitoring well will require the rigs to be onsite longer but will make construction of well seals easier. 2. Only clean potable water should be used as circulation fluid in driven casing or wireline drilling, No additives or other fluids, 3. Chapter 173-160 WAC requires a nominal 4-inch difference between drilled diameter and constructed diameter of wells. Piezometers are considered wells by this regulation. We recommend that the WSDOT acquire a variance from this regulation if they proceed with plans to install 1-inch diameter piezometers in a 4-inch drilled boring. 4. Four or four -and -a -half inch diameter borings are not large enough for construction of 2-inch monitoring wells without a variance to State regulations. SUGGESTED CITY OF RENTON CRITERIA MONITORING WELL DRILLING IN ASSOCIATION WITH I-405 RELOCATION The following criteria are suggested in addition to standard monitoring well construction specifications such as those stated in previous City monitoring well drilling specifications, State regulations, and numerous other publications. Refer to attached Figure 1. 1. Drill 8-inch diameter wells by cable tool method. 2. Construct one or two wells in each boring as desired. Figure 1 assumes two wells in each boring. 3. Drill until bedrock is encountered as determined by onsite geologist and agreed to by City representative, or, drill until the City agrees that the wells are sufficiently deep if bedrock is not encountered. Screens should be placed based on consultation with City representative, after boring log is available, 4. Cement/bentonite or pure high -solids bentonite grouts may be used as well seals but they must be mixed to manufacturers standards or Chapter 173.160 standards, whichever applies. Improper mixing could result in loss of grout into the aquifer, 5. Use materials specified in Figure 1. 6. Develop the wells with a bailer or clean, filtered air until non -turbid water is extracted. 7. We recommend well -head completions using steel casing sticking -up from the ground and with traffic barriers where appropriate. These provide better protection of the well over time. PVC top ( vtnlcd) CpntttTr. pj,.� pro�tC��vG Govt� �1.�.{Cr'ris�nt� V Steel (As;tig W;j� 1o�k,na Cap Dpa"h P; po- 27' /2" rfe X,44,.-,,IC rury Steel Co Sea j Nk-(,y) 40 qO ZWo.,41 RA �er�c rbeH 8' TernporQry Stec) G4sin CY Our"— h� A Soh' /" :—f FJne Sand Cdcjovttdc jo-zo) 10' + Macl+��G Sl�ttej Sc�+. j!o PVC Scrctn (205+.4) Ccnttring G4�de jnj CAP U4 cap AttAc-krd With 5f k;,%I 5 Stctl Screws) MI To Sch1e. 11-Fi1 k re 1 I V44I co,, H(,Or) mv^'4uri n5 W'Z f Go 64-k t4 io►� t CITY OF RENTON MEMORANDUM DATE: February 12, 1990 TO: Dick Anderson, Utility Systems Manager FROM: Dan Clements, Finance Director RE: RH2/I-405 Utilities Relocation Agreement CAG-010-90 This correspondence will provide you with a written follow-up of your February 7 request for approval of the above -referenced contract. Areas of Concern There are several areas of concern regarding the proposed agreement. These include: 1.) Lower than normal insurance coverages; 2.) No estimated cost of the contract, or "not to exceed" wording; and 3.) No indication City or State consultant requirements have been met. Insurance Concern Section X, Legal Relations, contains insurance coverages substantially lower than those normally required by the City. City policy 210-03, paragraph 6.4.2 sets a $1.0 million coverage limit, subject to a request from Public Works to either increase or decrease this level. Based on the scope of the I-405 project, it would seem appropriate to increase, rather than decrease this limit. Barring any requests from Public Works, however, the liability limits remain at $1.0 million. Value of Contract In order to monitor costs associated with the I-405 project, we need an estimated total value for this contract. Once we have this figure, it can be compared to amounts budgeted for this work. Additionally, we would recommend that a "not to exceed" paragraph be included in the document. Consultant Selection Process We are unable to find records indicating that the selection of RH2 for this project was carried out in conformance with City policy 250-02, section 6.3, and RCW 39.80. Both State statutes and City policies call for a competitive method of selecting consultants and engineers. This requires either advertisement in newspapers regarding the required services, or selection from a small works roster. We are unable to locate advertisements for this project in the City Clerk's files. If there have been appropriate advertisements, please forward a copy to Finance. If there has not been, you may want to consider either: 1.) Carrying out a selection process consistent with City policies, or 2.) Have the Mayor declare this an emergency situation because of the extremely tight time- lines associated with the project. If you choose the latter action, procedures are outlined under section 6.5 of Policy 250-02. If you have any questions, or need help responding to any of these questions, please let me know. DC:pb cc: Lynn Guttmann Mel Wilson Larry Warren Marilyn Petersen 51287.00(.049) 11/15/89 d I405 UTII.ITIES RELOCATION CONSULTANT AGREEMENT FOR ENGINEERING SERVICES U'p(-M BSI CAG-010-90 THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into on this day of . 19_, by and between the CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, hereinafter called the "AGENCY" and the consulting firm of RH2 ENGINEERING, P.S., whose address is P.O. Box 1180, Kirkland, Washington 98033, the location in Washington State at which work will be available for inspection, hereinafter called the "CONSULTANT'. WHEREAS, the AGENCY does not have sufficient qualified engineering employees to prepare the necessary construction plans, specifications, and contract documents within. a reasonable time and the AGENCY deems it advisable and is desirous of engaging the professional services and assistance of a qualified consulting engineering firm to do the necessary engineering work for the project, and WHEREAS, the CONSULTANT has represented and by entering into this Agreement now represents, that he is in full compliance with the statutes of the State of Washington for registration of professional engineers and that all personnel to be assigned to the work required under this Agreement are fully qualified to perform the work to which they will be assigned in a competent and professional manner, and WHEREAS, the CONSULTANT has indicated that he desires to do the work set forth in the Agreement upon the terms and conditions set forth below. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the terms, conditions, covenants, and performances contained herein below, the parties hereto agree as follows: L OBJECTIVES AND SCOPE -OF -WORK The objective of the Agreement is to provide engineering services necessary for the relocation of utilities for the I.405 project as described in attached Exhibit A. IL TIME OF BEGINNING AND COMPLETION The CONSULTANT shall begin work under the terms of this Agreement when authorized in writing by execution of this Agreement by the AGENCY. The time required, in calendar days, for completion of all work under this Agreement excluding the Coordination task shall be 230 worldng days following execution of this Agreement. Established completion time shall not be extended because of any delays attributable to the CONSULTANT, but may be extended by the AGENCY in the event of a delay attributable to the AGENCY or because of a delay caused by an Act of God or governmental actions or other conditions beyond the control of the CONSULTANT. Delays attributable to or caused by one of the parties hereto amounting to 20 working days or more affecting the completion of the work may be considered a cause for renegotiation or termination of this Agreement by the other party. An additional 90 working days shall be included for the supplemental services task following completion of all other tasks in Exhibit A. III. PAYMENT The CONSULTANT shall be paid by the AGENCY for services rendered under this Agreement as provided hereinafter. Such payment shall be full compensation for work performed or services rendered and for all labor, materials, supplies, equipment, and incidentals necessary to complete the work as described in Exhibit A. Payment for work accomplished shall be on the basis of CONSULTANTS time expended on the project multiplied by the hourly rates stated in Exhibit B, plus charges for services performed at CONSULTANTS hourly rate as noted in Exhibit B. CONSULTANTS hourly rates are those standard hourly fees which are charged for work performed on the AGENCY'S project by CONSULTANTS employees as indicated in Exhibit B. I405 UTII.ITIES RELOCATION CONSULTANT AGREEMENT FOR ENGINEERING SERVICES U'p(-M BSI CAG-010-90 THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into on this day of . 19_, by and between the CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, hereinafter called the "AGENCY" and the consulting firm of RH2 ENGINEERING, P.S., whose address is P.O. Box 1180, Kirkland, Washington 98033, the location in Washington State at which work will be available for inspection, hereinafter called the "CONSULTANT'. WHEREAS, the AGENCY does not have sufficient qualified engineering employees to prepare the necessary construction plans, specifications, and contract documents within. a reasonable time and the AGENCY deems it advisable and is desirous of engaging the professional services and assistance of a qualified consulting engineering firm to do the necessary engineering work for the project, and WHEREAS, the CONSULTANT has represented and by entering into this Agreement now represents, that he is in full compliance with the statutes of the State of Washington for registration of professional engineers and that all personnel to be assigned to the work required under this Agreement are fully qualified to perform the work to which they will be assigned in a competent and professional manner, and WHEREAS, the CONSULTANT has indicated that he desires to do the work set forth in the Agreement upon the terms and conditions set forth below. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the terms, conditions, covenants, and performances contained herein below, the parties hereto agree as follows: L OBJECTIVES AND SCOPE -OF -WORK The objective of the Agreement is to provide engineering services necessary for the relocation of utilities for the I.405 project as described in attached Exhibit A. IL TIME OF BEGINNING AND COMPLETION The CONSULTANT shall begin work under the terms of this Agreement when authorized in writing by execution of this Agreement by the AGENCY. The time required, in calendar days, for completion of all work under this Agreement excluding the Coordination task shall be 230 worldng days following execution of this Agreement. Established completion time shall not be extended because of any delays attributable to the CONSULTANT, but may be extended by the AGENCY in the event of a delay attributable to the AGENCY or because of a delay caused by an Act of God or governmental actions or other conditions beyond the control of the CONSULTANT. Delays attributable to or caused by one of the parties hereto amounting to 20 working days or more affecting the completion of the work may be considered a cause for renegotiation or termination of this Agreement by the other party. An additional 90 working days shall be included for the supplemental services task following completion of all other tasks in Exhibit A. III. PAYMENT The CONSULTANT shall be paid by the AGENCY for services rendered under this Agreement as provided hereinafter. Such payment shall be full compensation for work performed or services rendered and for all labor, materials, supplies, equipment, and incidentals necessary to complete the work as described in Exhibit A. Payment for work accomplished shall be on the basis of CONSULTANTS time expended on the project multiplied by the hourly rates stated in Exhibit B, plus charges for services performed at CONSULTANTS hourly rate as noted in Exhibit B. CONSULTANTS hourly rates are those standard hourly fees which are charged for work performed on the AGENCY'S project by CONSULTANTS employees as indicated in Exhibit B. VM EXTRA WORK The AGENCY may desire to have the CONSULTANT perform work or render services in connection with this project in addition to or other than work provided for by the expressed intent of this Agreement. Such work will be considered as Extra Work, and will be specified in a written supplement to this Agreement which will set forth the nature and scope thereof. Work under a supplemental Agreement shall not proceed until authorized in writing by the AGENCY. TERMINATION OF AGREEMENT A. The AGENCY reserves the right to terminate this Agreement at any time upon not less than ten (10) days' written notice to the CONSULTANT. B. In the event of death of a member, partner, or officer of the CONSULTANT or any of its supervisory personnel assigned to this project, the surviving members of the CONSULTANT hereby agree to complete the work under the terms of this Agreement, if requested to do so by the AGENCY. This section shall not be a bar to renegotiations of this Agreement between surviving members of the CONSULTANT and the AGENCY, if the AGENCY so chooses. C. In the event this Agreement is terminated by the AGENCY other than for fault on the part of the CONSULTANT, a final payment shall be made to the CONSULTANT for actual work performed. In addition, the CONSULTANT shall be paid for any authorized extra work completed. No payment shall be made for any work completed after ten (10) days following receipt by the CONSULTANT of the Notice to Terminate. If the accumulated payment made to the CONSULTANT prior to Notice of Termination exceeds the total amount that would be due as set forth herein above, then no final payment in excess of the total contract amount as revised shall be due. D. In the event the services of the CONSULTANT are terminated by the AGENCY for fault on the part of the CONSULTANT, the above stated formula for payment shall not apply. In such an event, the amount to be paid shall be determined by the AGENCY with consideration given to the actual costa incurred by the CONSULTANT in performing the work to the date of termination, the amount of work originally required which was satisfactorily completed to date of termination, whether that work is in a form or of a type which is usable to the AGENCY at the time of termination, the cost to the AGENCY of employing another firm to complete the work required and the time which may be required to do so, and other factors which affect the value to the AGENCY of the work performed at the time of termination. Under no circumstances shall payment made under this subsection exceed the amount which would have been made if the formula set forth in Subsection C above had been applied. E. In the event this Agreement is terminated prior to completion of the work, the original copies of all plane, prints, drawings, and field notes prepared by the CONSULTANT prior to termination shall become the property of the AGENCY for its use. DC DISPUTES Any dispute concerning questions of facts in connection with work not disposed of by agreement between the CONSULTANT and the AGENCY shall be referred for determination to the Director of Public Works or AGENCY Engineer, whose decision in the matter shall be final and conclusive on the parties to this Agreement. X LEGAL RELATIONS The CONSULTANT shall not knowingly violate federal government, state, and local laws and ordinances applicable to the work to be done under this Agreement In the event legal action is brought by AGENCY or CONSULTANT against the other to enforce any of the obligations hereunder or arising out of any dispute concerning the terms and conditions hereby created, the losing party shall pay the prevailing party such reasonable amounts for fees, costs, and expenses as may be set by the court_ The CONSULTANT shall secure regular Public Liability and Property Damage Insurance Coverage in the amount of $100,000 for death or injury to any one person, and $300,000 for death or injury to two or more persons in any one occurrence, and $50,000 for property damage in any one occurrence with any aggregate property damage coverage of $100,000 for two or more occurrences from an insurance company authorized to do business in the State of Washington. t s f: EXHIBIT A CITY OF RENTON I405 WIDENING FROM BENSON AVENUE TO SUNSET AVENUE ENGINEERING SERVICES SCOPE -OF -WORK TASK I PRELIMINARY EVALUATION OF WIL ITMS RELOCATION A. Identify existing water, sanitary sewer and stormwater"pipelines located within this section of I405. B. Meet with City and State representatives to discuss effects of proposed freeway widening and realignment. C. Develop drawings in plan view and appropriate sections as well as profile to illustrate the effect and extent of utility relocation necessary. D. Evaluate pipe sizing for various alternatives such as combining capacity where multiple crossings are in sufficient proximity so that combining capacity is a reasonable alternative. E. Make suggestions for minimizing impacts on the City's aquifer as well as existing neighbors and community facilities while accomplishing the utilities relocation. TASK II DEVELOP FINAL DESIGN FOR UTYL=S RELOCATION AS DIRECTED BY CITY 1. Review locations of existing surface improvements and interfering utilities. 2. Visit the site with City staff and select an appropriate pipeline route. Meet with City staff and discuss location alternatives, restoration requirements and include the results of these discussions in the final design. 3. Obtain survey of critical locations including elevation and location of edge of right-of-way improvements. 4. Utilize calcuated centerline equations and elevations from DOT. 5. Develop a site plan for pipeline relocations. The site plan will be based on survey information provided by the state DOT or the City of Renton in AutoCAD 10.0 format or later release will show: right-of-way, property lines, easements, edge of pavement, structures, utilities, facilities, and landscaping. Utilities marked by the "one -call" locating service will be shown. 6. Utilize the DOT station base line for design and construction. 7. Develop a piping plan and connection details using station and offset, and distances from existing features to locate the pipeline alignment. 8. Create profile and typical cross -sections (mid -block and intersections). 9. Develop connection details at each end of the pipeline for connecting to the existing mains. Develop testing connection details and show on plan sheet 10. Show temporary construction and permanent easement permit or franchise requirements on plan sheet, and provide information necessary for the City to develop ■ legal description of these areas, if any. 11. Prepare pipeline technical specifications in standard RH2 Engineering format, for use by City or State DOT in soliciting bids. 12. Deliver original plans and technical specifications to City Staff (for incorporation into appropriate documents and printing). PHASE 2 • SERVICES DURING CONSTRUCTION 1. Make periodic visits to the site to observe the progress and quality of the work to usure that the project is being completed in general compliance with the Contract documents. The Consultant will not make exhaustive or continuous on -site inspection. During the visits, the Consultant will keep the City informed of the progress of work, and will endeavor to guard the City against defects and deficiencies in the work of the Contractor, and may recommend rejection of work as failing to conform to the Contract documents. Coordinate with the City's Inspector who will have primary inspection resp)nsibilities. 2. Review project progress pay estimate submittals by the Contractor. Prepare progress payments using standard City format. A e EXHIBrr B SCHEDULE OF HOURLY RATES Claseiflcation Rate claseiflcation to Principal E D{ $70./Hr.Eng. Tech T III S45/Hr. Principal E VIII S70/Hr.Eng. Tech T II $41/Hr. Principal E VII $66/Hr.Eng. Tech T I S30/Hr. Project Mgr. E VI S62lHr.Comp. Spe. IV S54/Hr. Project Mgr. E V S58/Hr.Comp. Spe. III S49/Hr. Comp. Spe. II $45/Hr. Proj. Eng, E IV S54/Hr. Comp. Spe. 1 $41/Hr. Proj. Eng. E I S54/Hr. Admin. Aset. $33/Hr. Staff Eng. E II S46/Hr. Staff Eng. E I =41/Hr.Word Proc. III S33/Hr. Word Proc. II S28/Hr. Eng. Tech. T V S54/Hr.Word Proc. I S21/Hr. Eng. Tech. T IV S49/Hr. Office Aide $IVHr. The rates indicated above do not include Consultant's professional liability insurance charges. An additional 8% charge will be made for all hourly rate billings to client. In-house Copies In-house Copies In-house Copies In-house Blueprints In-house Computer In-house CAD System In-house CAD Vellums Mileage FAX IN-HOUSE SERVICES 8-112 z 11 8-1/2 z 14 11 z 17 24z36 7 $ .10/Ea. $ .25/Ea_ $ .50/Ea. S 1.20 Ea. S 6.00/Hr. $25.00/Hr. $15.00/Ea. $ .30/Mile $ 3.00/Sheet CERTIFICATE OP INSURANCE ISSVE DATE IMM:DU:v ' 2/9/90 PPOOUCER THIS CERTIFICATE IS ISSUED AS A MATTER OF INFORMATION ONLY AND CONFERS NO RIGHTS UPON THE CERTIFICATE HOLDER THIS CERTIFICATE DOES NOY AMEND Cor roon & Black, Inc. EXTEND OR ALTER THE COVERAGE AFFORDED BY THE POLICIES BELOW PO Box C-34201 _.._ .. Seattle, WA 98124 COMPANIES AFFORDING COVERAGE (206) 386-1400 CODE SUB -CODE INSURED RH2 Engineering 1410 Market St. Kirkland, WA 98033 COMPANY A LETTER COMPANY B LITTER I COMPANY C I UTTER COMPANY D LETTER _ .........—.......... 1 COMPANY E i LETTER Safeco Insurance Company of America ... .. .. ... ..r :.W+...I+.IJ„M.:•I.'lK ...1�,FY.':. .u,.,,!11{I,. »..wr:,iN,liil{IIS,.. _.-:,I:r`. i11, .. THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT THE POLICIES OF INSURANCE LISTED BELOW HAVE BEEN ISSUED TO THE INSURED NAMED ABOVE FOR THE POLICY PERIOD INDICATED, NOTWITHSTANDING ANY REQUIREMENT, TERM OR CONDITION OF ANY CONTRACT OR OTHER DOCUMENT WITH RESPECT TO WHICH THIS CERTIFICATE MAY BE ISSUED OR MAY PERTAIN, THE INSURANCE AFFORDED BY THE POLICIES DESCRIBED HEREIN IS SUBJECT TO ALL THE TERMS, _ • EXCLUSIONS AND CONDITIONS OF SUCH. POLICIES. LIMITS SHOW MAY HAVE,BEEN REDUQED..BY PAID CLAIMS. CO i TYPE OF INSURANCE .LTR: POLICY NUMBER POLICY EFFECTIVE POLICY EXPIRATION ALL LIMITS IN THOUSANDS DATE (MM/DD/YY) DATE (MAVDDIYY) GENERAL LIABILITY 1 GENERAL AGGREGAT .._. S . L, DOD_.._ A X I COMMERCIAL GENERAL LIABILITY PRODUCT$.CQMP/OPS.AixGAEMTE E, OOO F.._. CLAIMS MADE X OCCUR.' i S P 2075195 8/ 1 6/ 8 9 8/ 1 6/ 90 PER$ONALA ADVEATISINO .IN,IUP-Y ..-i _1., OOO ...._ ^—,.,,: OWNER'S 6 CONTRACTOR'$ PROT. . ; '-EACH OCCURRENCE. _.-.........•. , S 1 , 0-00 _.. 1 FIRE DAMAGE (Any ono fire) 7 ___ I, 4E41CAL EXPENSE.( jYone poltprl]__i. ,.. _,._.. 1 ... AUTOMOBILE LIABILITY COMBINED jj�,;'•,:.;; ANY AUTO i - j SINGLE S { LIMIT ..... ALL OWNED AUTOS I I BODILY SCHEDULED AUTOS ! INJURY S HIRED ALTOS BODILY ! '.. NON -OWNED AUTOS I INJURY S ,• GARAGE LIABILITY t ^ t I • '; PROPER IY E !I :. 1 ».....__.... _ ........_.. _.... DAMAGE i EXCESS LIABILITY EACH AGGREGATE OCCURRENCE' OTHER THAN. UMBRELLA, FORM ..... _ . WORKER'S COMPENSATION STATUTORY AND I �..{ (EACM ACCIDENTI. . EMPLOYERS' LIABILITY I-(0I8EA$f-P0LICYLLMIT) .. --(. .......—...... .......—....._....... _... . ,_..... i.. (DhlEASE FACH EMPLOYEE OTHER i I DESCRIPTION OF OPERATION!/LOCATIONS/VEMICLES/PUHPF ODVWRR/S►ECIAL MEMO 1 405 Utility Relocation E HOLa R ..,, ..... .. ,..,».,,�CAhIL'ELl;A�7lOQ1'..:.;c►;:;..:�a�,mrrotk[;klnu►bl+%7a�lc�,;,;t; •I� � •Ir*)�..�IRSC�",�'�.�t`1 43:C.>:a�.sl'I�l1t:1)1,d1�(Gw„W i SHOULD ANY OF THE ABOVE DESCRIBED POLICIES BE CANCELLED BEFORE THE City of Renton EXPIRATION DATE THEREOF, THE ISSUING COMPANY WILL ENDEAVOR TO � 200 Mill Ave S ;. MAIL �0 DAYS WRITTEN NOTICE TO THE CERTIFICATE HOLDER NAMED TO THE Renton, WA 98055 LEFT, OUT FAILURE TO MAIL SUCH NOTICE SHALL IMPOSE NO OBLIGATION OR LIABILITY OF ANY KIND UPON PANY. ITS AGENTS OR REPRESENTATIVES. Attn: Micky/Public Works AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE a S. Roberton�`�,�,,,. CORROON &BLACK, INC. To: City of Renton 200 Mill Avenue South Renton, WA 98055 Attn: Micky/Public Works Re: RH2 Engineering 1410 Market St. Kirkland, WA 98033 Gentlemen: We are pleased to enclose documenIs Ind icated below: xx Certificate of Insurance Professional Liability and General Liability _ Memorandum of Insurance Original Policy (As Captioned) Copy of Policy (As Captioned) Loss Payable and/or Mortgage Clause Contract of Sale Clause Cover Note and/or Binder Other The enclosed is issued in connection with: 1405 Utility Relocation We trust you will find the enclosures to be entirely satisfactory. Very truly yours, By tev e o erton� cc: RH2 Engineering Terri Hooper I'.O. Box C-34201 Zip 98124 Telex: 160565 FAX: (206) 443-6631 insurance • bonds • Benefits • Risk Management Once the "most qualified firm" has been determined, the city or town may negotiate a contract for the services at a price which the city or town the municipality determines is fairand reasonable. In re valuechinof detheteservnces to be rendered as nt "shall take into the and professional nature thereof."48 If a well as the scope, complexity, negotiations satisfactory contract cannot be negotiated, the to above cproc durey, terminated with the firm and another firm, following seIected.49 The process continues until an agreement is reached or the search is terminated. The process outlined above for the procurement of architectural or engineering dispensed with upon a finding by the city or town that "an services may b emergency requires the immediate execution of the work involved."b MEANING OF PUBLIC WORK As has already been mentioned, RCW 35.23.352, 35.22.620 and 35A.40.210 require competitive bidding for public works or improvements when the total cost of such work is in excess of a certain Idollar 39 04 0 0 def ncslthc temning of "public meapublic work" as work" as used in these statutes. RCW follows: The term public workshall include all waork, construction, alteration, d at repair or improvement , law 1 the cost of the state or of any municipalit yor which is by property therein, but nothing herein shall apply lien or charge on any to the construction, alteration, repair or improvement of any municipal street railway system. (Underscore supplied)51 It is noteworthy that this definition of public work includes construction and ce. For example, replacing t repair but excludes ordinary maintenan but not bridge or roof would amount to a repair perhaps a a publ cconstruction, work 2On the maintenance, and therefore would be considered to be a aroof would involve other hand, servicing a sewer system orcleaning work and consequently would maintenance and therefore would not be a p not be within the purview of the public works bid statutes. as sThe er terms, "public work" has generally been held to include 48 RCW 39.80.050(1). 49 RCW 39.80.050(2). 60 RCW 39.80.060. 51 This definition is adopted for first class cities andfor code othcr classe5tie cities with a population of 20,000 or more by RCW 35.22.620(1) and for and towns by RCW 35.23.352(1). 52 AGO, December 19, 1923, (Vol. 17. p. 175). 12 mr=TRO Municipality of Metropolitan Seattle Exchange Building • 821 Second Ave. • Seattle, WA 98104-1598 October 15, 1990 Mr. Robert Josephson Washington State Department of Transportation 15325 S. E. 30th Place Bellevue, Washington 98007 I-405 Realignment: City of Renton Dear Mr. Josephson: Ifg5l 1 ,,'0T 16 1990 CJT- OF RENTON Eng•Inee6ng Dept. Following is the Metro staff proposal for protecting Metro's Cedar River Interceptor during the subject highway construction. 1. Metro would inspect and grout the 42" sewer prior to any construction in the area. 2. Metro would hire a consultant to design a monitoring system for detecting leaks during the construction period. WSDOT would share the cost of the consultant and the monitoring program. 3. WSDOT would require its contractor to place a concrete slab over the interceptor sewer for add protection during highway construction. 4. In addition to or in lieu of item 3, WSDOT would require its contractor to maintain on site, or have on call, an emergency bypass system. 5. Metro will make arrangements to have repair supplies and equipment readily available in the unlikely event any repairs to the interceptor sewer are necessary. Please contact me at 684-1266 with any questions or comments. Thanks for your cooperation. V yours, Ro ert N. Hirsch 6 Local Agency Affairs Administrator cc: Ron Kuchenreuther, Metro ✓Lys Hornsby, City of Renton 50 40 ►d MN. 30 Et z o o' 4Z" METRO SE\A/c� 1 1JGVnLC APPROX I MATI ON ('EDNE OF INFLUENrE ) Y � T 4�' Proyra m -- Cos 15 ..� �mDlino► �ff�r--� e�rsoh ��d 4i me = aD hrlwk X ��D X I cvk = �37 doo /mo .. LaboYa�OYu �4r�,(u ses M6W 1 Exfefnal Labora,iorY does omalyses IDD/ca. BTEx co/eu. V Des - I `I1 mo. COD i Ala I GI 1 SDy , NO3 , /VH&j , co Io/ca. Tofal Col i �rrll - 36 /mo for next- Jac/ 5eUice on MEX , V005 ----- --- - -- - _ - --- - add - 56°Io far- fhme- fes+s _ = 43, BCo -- M e+had d : -- Purchase a5 ror�cr,fn rah and d o - -- -- -� 50 wo - - - --- - .. - - 3, 3� 0 1300 Irno d 1 W60 - _ - 50r WD Ya jime -fn ope►ztfe Tofal (-011�6rm CDD) NU CI I Soy / No_INHy / (a, IRS V OC C nclt -day LIM 01 �ONMD) -I- 6 o ./mo . t [AT E X I Z �14) lbo y/ 8COM o 11 $ 6 vbgru) J TotzLf Colic -arm ��Irna/wk� Flo -71 yyo�mo rAd CITY OF RENTON "LL PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT Earl Clymer, Mayor Design/Utility Engineering December 21, 1989 Washington State Department of Transportation District #1 15325 S.E. 38th Place Bellevue, WA 98007-6568 Attention: David J. Martin, P.E. Project Engineer RE: Cedar River Pipeline Relocation Project Dear David: As you know, the City of Renton withheld official comment on the 70% submittal of the Cedar River pipeline relocation project presentation of November 22, however; after further analyzing the state (WSDOT) plan, significant comments (particularly relocation, sizing and drawing standards), have arisen. The question of sizing to a 24" water main on Houser Way and Main Ave. S., to conform with the proposed comprehensive plan and the issue of federal funding of that relocation will not be addressed in this letter. It shall be assumed that the comments which follow applicable to sizing, are based on the present 1983 comprehensive plan. In the event the proposed comprehensive plan is adopted, the city reserves the right to submit further review comments with regard to sizing on state submitted plans. Particular areas of proposed relocated pipe, both water and sewer are of concern to the city. It would be to your benefit to review the enclosed plans while reading the following comments: LOCATION: INTERSECTION S. 4TH ST. / MAIN AVE. S. a) Extend 20" water south to existing hydrant and reinstall hydrant at same location. b) Make provisions for tie-in 8" main on North side of S. 4th St. at the corner of Main Ave. S. c) Make provisions for tie-in main on North side of S. 4th St. at Main Ave. S. d) Tie-in detail shall be provided per City standard (copy attached) e) It would appear that 20" main will have crossed under 16" main so it may be extended easily in the future. 200 Mill Avenue South - Renton, Washington 98055 - (206) 235-2631 Facsimile (206) 235-2513 ` Washington State Department of Transportation December 21, 1989 Page Two 2. LOCATION: MAIN AVE. S. / HOUSER WAY S. a) Present design show tie-in to short piece of 6" main, with no blocking detail. The pressure on the 6" via the 20" would crush both mains. b) Recommend abandonment of existing 6" main. Ac) Continue 20" main up Houser Way S. with (3) 22 1/2 degree bends. d) Add 24"x8" tee, and 8" gate valve tie-in approximately 60 feet up Houser Way S. Make provisions for existing 8" main connection back to existing 8" valve. at Main Ave S. and S. 3rd. St. e) Retain 20" or greater main in Houser Way S. as substitution for existing 16" and 6" mains to be abandoned at Mill Ave. S. f) Appears crossing STA. 8+12 only allows for 2'-6" coverage where 48" (except where may be required) is minimum. (see attachment) g) Recommended 20" main (or greater) requires slope alteration and air release valve near crossing of existing 51 1/2" Seattle main at approximately STA. 5+40. h) Make provisions for 16" main tie-in with 20" main. Extend 20" main beyond STA. 8+46, cut and cap to allow for future connection to City well fields. 3. LOCATION: BUILDING 1025 / MILL AVE.S. As a way of crossing the 66" Seattle water main the 8" sanitary sewer main in Mill Ave. S., will have to be relocated. The following changes to the sewer system may provide a means of accomplishing this effort. a) Abandon existing 8" sewer main which parallels building 1025 at Mill Ave. S. b) Relocate 8" sewer main to run north/south at building 1025 and parallel to Mill Ave S., and the required side sewers to the manhole. c) Extend new 8" main and cross under railroad. d) Rotate 8" sewer main at Houser Way S. and run parallel east/west on Houser Way S. to Mill Ave S. For better maintenance accessibility. e) Tie-in 8" sewer main to existing 8" sewer main with manhole at Mill Ave S. f) Re-route new 8" sewer main at SAT. N. 13+73,-15 RT, by crossing under existing railroad track. g) Rotate 8" sewer main and extend east/west, and parallel to Houser Way S. east of Mill Ave. S. h) Tie-in 8" sewer main to existing sewer main at Mill Ave. S., north of intersection. Washington State Department of Transportation December 21, 1989 Page Three 4. LOCATION: FRONTAGE ROAD / ABOVE INTERSTATE 405 a) New 6" main to replace existing 4" main is sub -standard per 1983 City comprehensive plan. New 12" main required. (copy map attached) b) Extend 12" main entire length of Frontage Road from Mill Ave. S. to main that extends in to Narco. c) Extend 12" water main from intersection of Renton Ave. S. and Frontage Road and extend 12" main parallel to sanitary sewer main over hill to Narco entrance road and tie-in to relocated Narco 12" up graded water main. (make provision for installation of pressure reducing valve and pump station connections). d) Re-route new 8" sewer main at STA. N. 13+73, -1.5 RT, by crossing under existing railroad track. e) Rotate 8" sewer main and extend east/west, and parallel to Houser Way S. f) Intersect 8" Sewer main to existing sewer main at Mill Ave. S. g) Re-route of new 8" sewer main will allow minimum depth requirements at crossing for new 20" (or greater) water main over existing 66" Seattle main at STA. 8+30 through removal of existing 8" sewer main. The City requires standard drawing practices be maintained for all plans received through the Utility Engineering Department. A standard detail pamphlet has been assembled and shall be used as a guideline by which all drawings submitted to this office shall be accepted. Standard sheets shall be 22" x 34". Where valves, tie-in connections, reducers, blockage, and extensions are called out, a separate detail shall be shown. The final drawings received by the city for record must be on mylar and shall not contain any adhesive backed materials such as "sticky -back" additions or alterations. If you have any questions regarding any of these comments, please feel free to contact the Water Utilities Systems Division. Very truly yours, Richard J. Anderson Utility Systems Manager Enclosures DOT/RA:RM M Agenda Welcome & Agenda Review - Bob "Charge For The Day" - Mel Self Introductions Project Plans - David Data - Peter City Concerns - Mel Brainstorming - Concerns Solutions Lunch Narrowing Down Wrapping Up. PARTICIPANTS FOR MARCH 9, 1990 CHARETTE CITY OF RENTON WSDOT I-405/METRO 4211 SEWER COORDINATION Groundwater Quality: Charles (Pony) Ellingson, Pacific Groundwater 329-0141 Sewer Design/Construction: Marty Dirks, KCM 443-5300 Mike O'Neal, Brown & Caldwell 281-4000 Geotechnical: Al Killian, WSDOT 753-7111 Structures: George Markich, WSDOT 753-6096 Facilitator: Bob Stilger, Northwest Regional Research (509) 483-0345 Metro: Tom Jeffries, Ed Cox WSDOT: David Martin, Norm Storme, Bob Aye City of Renton: Ron Olsen, Rick Harbert, Mel Wilson, Peter De Boldt. concerns * Sheetpiles next to pipe * Weight of equipment on class 4 pipe - or other weight (stockpiles etc.) * Any de -watering that might cause settling of pipe. * Boring or Drilling or anything else hitting pipe. * Pipe Condition at end of construction. * No redesign of bridge. * Construction techniques and contaminants. * Existing condition of sewer lines. Leakage rate now and during construction * Disturbances during construction. * Response Plan in case of contamination; redesign? * Pre-existing leakage vs. new. NO OVERKILL Soil Conditions Existing Pipe o Condition o Leakage Construction o Techniques o H-Piles o Boring o Equipment weight o Other weight o Contaminants o Removal of existing Response and Remedies o Existing vs. new leakage o Plan o Liability DON'T DISRUPT RIVERBED SOLUTIONS Pipe o Metro Pre & Post Testing 1-2 wks Packer (Joints) o Additional Testing of Entire section of line/Manholes (drill & water sample) o Drill & Sample along pipe. "Bottle Tight" o Comparison to existing o Sampling state wells as well. Soil Okay Construction o H-Piles Existing sewer here - "do not damage it" Specify allowable distance from sewer line Open excavation on West end. o Techniques & Areas Specify a load maximum Precise location of line Use augers next to pipe Contractor not disrupting markers. Equipment Weiaht o Spec to limit maximum weight o Preclude crane over pipe. Possible transit over pipe. 0 Restrict other equipment over pipe. Other Weight o Limit stockpile size/location (restricted work area). Contaminants - Float (fuels), dissolve (sewer), sink (solvents) o H-piles into aquifer? Timed to coincide with minimum water demand periods (non -summer) o Other issues already addressed Removal of existing structures o No dropping specified in contract. Maintaining water supply (drinking water) Treatment/removal of contaminant. (Short term/Long term) Resupply of water during treatment Who repairs pipe; who has jurisdiction; who pays What does METRO do with flow? What do we do immediately? Protection of the resource. Development of interlocal agreement for immediate response (METRO, WSDOT, City, Ecology, Health Dept., Seattle/King County State Game & Fisheries) Response equipment & supplies on -site Agreements with Seattle for water supply/other districts. Reaction management plan (conservation plan). Penalty clauses in contract. What's the probable cost of clean-up/resupply? METRO plan for shut-off Good inspector on -site (TA from METRO) Education program for contractor/crews City doing daily samples for contamination Clear pre -bid conference. r Contractor Higher level Pre -Bid Conference Penalty Clause in contract Possibly special clean-up provisions Foremen/Crew Education (repeat) Constant Inspection (State in Lieu). Client Strategic response plan Advance participation & buy off from related agencies METRO shut-off Resupply Constant Inspection Daily monitoring & testing New permanent devices for constant monitoring DATE: TO: FROM: SUBJECT: RE: CITY OF RENTON M E M O R A N D U M~ 1 1� ivvr March 1, 1990 Rick Harbert Mel Wilson `� Brainstorming Session Engineering OF RENTON Dept. Construction of I-405 in the vicinity of Metro trunk sewer. We will be holding a brainstorming session on the above referenced subject on March 9th from 9 am to 3 pm, followed by a short wrap up session of key city and state representatives. I am attaching a copy of the proposed agenda, a list of participants, and a list of information which will be included in a package sent out to all participants prior to the meeting. The purpose of the brainstorm session is to assure that we consider all possible measures and select the best measures for protection of Renton's water supply during construction of bridge footings in the vicinity of the 42" Metro trunk sewer. It is the intent that agreement be reached with WSDOT at the March 9th meeting, on both physical and non- physical measures to be taken. If there is any additional support documentation you want added to the information package, or any experts you want added to the brainstorming session, please inform me by 9 AM, Tuesday March 6th. I am also scheduling a pre -meeting of the City team to assure that we are prepared for the March 9th meeting. Thank you for your participation in this critical aquifer protection event. cc: Lynn Guttmann Ron Olsen Bob Stilger Peter De Boldt David Martin MEW:lr attachments MEW211 im PROPOSED AGENDA FOR MARCH 9, 1990 CHARETTE CITY OF RENTON WSDOT I-405/METRO 42" SEWER COORDINATION 9:00 AM - 3:00 PM SILVER CLOUD INN 1. WSDOT presents information on Footing and Design & Construction (Max. 10 min.). 2. City of Renton presents background data on sewer & soils (Max 10 min.). - Peter De Boldt. 3. City of Renton summarizes concerns related to construction of bridge piers near sewer line (Max 10 min.). - Mel Wilson. 4. Brainstorming session on concerns/solutions. 5. Break (lunch) 6. Recommendation on physical and non-physical measures to be taken for aquifer protection. 7. Wrap up session with key personnel to insure that acceptable plan of action is developed. MEW:lr MEW216 INFORMATION TO BE PROVIDED TO PARTICIPANTS 1. Sewer/Footing locations (Plan & Section) 2. Video condition survey of Metro line. 3. Sewer water quality. 4. Sewer flow based on time of year. (This may not be available) 5. Metro has no indication that line currently leaks, therefore a rate of leakage is not available. 6. Soils data. 7. Originally anticipated loads sustainable by sewer line. MEW: 1r MEW215 ti r PARTICIPANTS FOR MARCH 9, 1990 CHARETTE CITY OF RENTON WSDOT I-405/METRO 4211 SEWER COORDINATION Groundwater Quality: Charles (Pony) Ellickson, Pacific Groundwater 329-0141 Sewer Design/Construction: Marty Dirks, KCM 443-5300 Mike O'Neal, Brown & Caldwell 281-4000 Geotechnical: Al Killian, WSDOT 753-7111 Structures: George Markich, WSDOT 753-6096 Facilitator: Bob Stilger, Northwest Regional Research (509) 483-0345 Metro: Eddie Chu WSDOT: David Martin, Norm Storme, Bob Aye City of Renton: Ron Olsen, Rick Harbert, Mel Wilson, Peter De Boldt. MEW: 1r MEW217 ` Pacific Groundwater Group 2377 Eastlake Ave. E., Suite 200 Seattle, Washington 98102 206.329.0141 FAX 329.6968 MEMORANDUM August 15, 1989 JE8907 City of Renton - WSDOT I-405 Negotiations TO: Rick Harbert, RH2 Engineering FROM: Charles Ellingson, Peter Schwartzman Pacific Groundwater Group Gfi�IFn ��g 1989 Ro+:tp To: RE: HYDROLOGIC CONSIDERATIONS ASSOCIATED WITH CONSTRUCTION Objectives: The purpose of this memo is to outline construction practices which may potentially impact the sole source aquifer and the surface drainage system in the vicinity of Renton. Aquifer protection objectives include the maintenance of water supply availability and groundwater quality. Surface water protection objectives include prevention of chemical contamination of streams and rivers, as well as increased sediment load due to erosion associated with project activities. Pertinent project activities are broken down into four phases: exploration, foundation design selection, installation, and operation and maintenance. Potential risks associated with project activities include: o creation of a conduit for contaminant migration to the aquifer from both the land surface and the riverbed; 0 introduction of dissolved chemicals to the aquifer; I o increased suspended sediment in surface water and groundwater; o blockage of groundwater flow towards the Renton wellfield by the bridge foundation; and o detrimental modification of stream -aquifer interaction. The outline presented below addresses each of these risks in the context of the first three phases of project activities. It is our understanding that risks associated with operation and maintenance will be addressed by others. The outline addresses common activities employed during construction, but does not claim to address all possible activities or risks. Mitigation techniques intended to reduce risks are explored, and conclusions are presented as to the acceptability of the construction activities addressed. Please review this memo and the attached table, and contact us regarding final information submitted to the city. attachment: Table of Construction Activities, Risks, Mitigations, and Conclusions TABLE OF CONSTRUCTION ACITVMES, RISKS, MMGATIONS, AND CONCLUSIONS PRASE 1: EXPLORATION DRILLING Method Risk Mitigation Conclusions mud rotary conduit surface seal, not acceptable drilling immediate abandonment increased sus- mud selection pended sediment` chemical conta- mud selection mination by mud` rupturing utility utility locator cable tool conduit surface seal, acceptable drilling immediate with abandonment mitigation rupturing utility utility locator auger conduit surface seal, acceptable drilling immediate with abandonment mitigation rupturing utility utility locator air rotary conduit surface seal, acceptable drilling immediate with abandonment mitigation increased sus- tricone drilling pended sediment` rupturing utility utility locator seismic increased sus- none p exploration pended sediments chemical conta- no explosives mination ` Of primary concern when drilling within aquifer. WELL ABANDONMENT (ABOVE AQUIFER)" TYM Risk Mitigation Conclusions native conduit compact not acceptable backfill cement conduit use high density/ acceptable grout no shrink cement with mitigation future land appropriate use landscaping bentonite none acceptable grout " NOTE: Geologist must be onsite to determine aquifer limits. (continued) WELL ABANDONMENT (WITHIN AQUIFER)" TVe Risk Mitigation native blockage use only coarse backfill materials pea gravel chemical con- wash or ensure tamination is clean pit run chemical con- wash or ensure tamination is clean blockage of use only coarse aquifer grade materials '• NOTE: Geologist must be onsite to determine aquifer limits. PHASE I FOUNDATION DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS Type Risk Mitigation spread blockage minimize cross - footing (if within sectional area foundation aquifer) and depth conduit adequate surface (in place) seal adequate aquitard seal low conductivity backfill materials collection of wash and test contaminated imported fill runoff in abut- ment drains use no PVC glue on drain pipes test water quality of drain water conduit during see risks and miti- excavation gations presented under "CONSTRUCTION ACTIVMES" (below) chemical see risks and miti- contamination gations presented by concrete' under "CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES" (below) ` - Of primary concern when working within aquifer. Conclusions acceptable acceptable with mitigation acceptable with mitigation Conclusions acceptable with mitigation (continued) DISCHARGE FROM DEWATERING Acti,,ri Risk Mitigation discharge bank erosion drainage into protection established introduction of measures drainages suspended sedi- ments to surface settling ponds water or filtration chemical no hazardous contamination chemicals used to construct discharge pipes consider conta- minated discharge under emergency response plan Conclusions acceptable with mitigation PHASE 3: CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES MANAGEMENT OF EQUIPMENT, MATERIALS, AND CHEMICALS Activi Risk Mitigation storage and chemical contami- no hazardous chemi- transfer of nation of aquifer call stored over hazardous by leak or spill aquifer (zone 1) materials no transfers or refueling performed over aquifer (zone 1) lined berm for all tanks develop specifica- tions for emergency response to leak or spill .cashing chemical contain- no washing equipment equipment ination over aquifer concrete recharge reduction do not discharge truck by sealing land concrete washout washout surface over aquifer use of form oil & concrete sealer EARTHWORK Activi open excavation temporary storage of excavated materials permanent placement of excavated materials landscape modifi- cation for equipment access chemical contam- ination Risk conduit introduction of suspended sediment to surface water introduction of suspended sediment to surface water erosion of natural slopes introduction of suspended sedi- ment to surface water none Mitigation minimize time open: only one excavation open at any time berm excavation cover excavation adopt recommendations presented in "Waste Disposal & Erosion/ Sediment Control Methods' by The Associated General Contractors of Washington; and comply with all regulations as above as above Conclusions acceptable in zone 2 Conclusions acceptable with mitigation (continued) OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL Inter -office Correspondence oace: January 9, 1989 To: L. J. Jancusak, =-Ol From: Kathryn Hefferline, Assistant Attorney General, Applicability of City of Reaton's P_o_csed Ac-o__er au�ietr - Protection Ord:;mance to FiSDO'+ Activities P=cl--9ct_Cn Cir_-nance "r.,- Cse= D'-�•'�z=- -nVareas ; - ' -==--a— _and use w - =aj..Z a _t_'__er rrotect_on areas; ( ) esta __sa r ins_ ection, and monitoring stamda_ds for new a:.d existing r-c^.a-_d subs;.a nce facilit_es, wart- by de=_n_t_cn includes sate highways; (4) establish unicrm standards for release repot-inc, emergency response, substance management plann-mc, closure, and abandonments, and enforcement; and (5) establish procedures. Al! these proposed regulations would have an adverse impact upon WSDOT's cons on projects wi_in the Renton city limits i = this ordinance is adopt=d and 2.s f:.und to It - "v ace 1v to WSDOT activities. The C1ty of Renton ses:.s to extend -he previsions of the ordinance bevond the city limits by relying on Chapter 35.88 of the Revised Code of Washinctcn (RCW). However-, in the only tour:. decision inter �r_tinc T-'__=e _'. 88 , Brawn v. Cie Elmo, 143 Wash. 588 (1927), the Washington Supreme Court held that the delegation cf the stata's police power to various municipalit-t under Article X1, § 11 "is stric-ly lim_t_d 1:c the er z_sa of that power ttin t_ ifs c= suc — muric�pal:-__s." in so dci:rg; the court found the C=tv c-- Cie Ilum's ordinance, whicz provided for the punishment of persons who commit-ed certain prescribed acts outside the-cc.perate limits of the city _to 'be unconstitutional. Renton's a�.amrt to do exac-_v what the City of C1e E1um attempted to do would mcs- likely also be found to be unconstitt ional. More specifically, Renton's ordinance pu---perts to es-ablish two different types of aquifer protection zones. 0 6-3. Zone 1 would be the land area situated between a well owned bV the -t.1 of Rentcn and the 36--day ground water travel tite cc=ur. § 6. B. 1. Zone 2 V ttld extend _frca the 3 65-day- crouna water travel tine contour to the boundar.1 of the zone of- pot=_ntial capture for the well or well field. § 6.B.2. Different regulations would apply to facilities located in- each, zone. For instance, no new construction would be pe =,tt_d within Zone 1 of an aquifer protection area unless the Renton Water Works urri� OF THr. A"171'UHNEY (Jb VE&kL L. J. Janousek January 9, 1989 Page 2 Utility makes a finding that the construction would not -impact the long tern, short ta=, Cr C•.r-:.ulative quantity Or C-Sa__C'� OL the acui_er. § 7.A.1 Per=i:s for ccnst_scticn Zone 1 of an aquifer protection area would have to be reviewed far complianca with the ordinance. The ordinance desicnates tae specific type of pipe that will be used for any stc= sewers w ' th�n 500 feet Of a Ci=v Of Rent_ well. S 7..... Tti'a C--_"c^aCn taco -=es saec_fic conditions be met befcra any rer­.,Lit w=gin Zone 1 is issued including semiannual ground water mcnitcrinc via special monitoring wells, special containment devices whit ., wi _1 prevent haza_ do s substances fr0= -_e CrcL'nd including releases t ct =av mix wi th stores =Inc'= = =ese =- •ice devices built to accommodate a 100-year storm), and iaplementation cf monitoring standards for the facility and establis:..:.ent o. Wai_,1te.nance mcnit.._ ng r _ .._s . § i . _ . _-5 . _.te or, also prescribes the use of certain ferti__=ers and -e-sticides- with'_n an aquifer protection area, the amount of fertilizer which may be applied, and recui_=_s the user tc apply for an aquifer protection area permit Ln order use fertilizer or pesticides. § 4.A and B. _ The acui_er prctection area permit which is r au --zed fOr any con_t..:cticn wi`hin an aquifer Protection area is su!:Ject tc i=s own application requirements including an established =sew Thase requirements include a list of all regulated ssbstances a:.d their quantities which are t_rans=rted at the facility being pe ntad, a list of chemicals to be monitored through crcund water monitoring samples; a detailed description of activities conducted at the fac=lily that involve re-ulat_d s_uhsta_ ces, a descript. _OZ CZMZ&- 'Lent dSV_C=s WhiC comply with. the requirements of the ordinance; a pra,00sed reaulabec substances management plan for '"O!ie facility, a description of the procedures for inspection and maintenance of containment devices; a description of how :ecuTated substances _will be disposed;and a site map. § 10.=.1-3. In addition to these reru_iremezts the -ordinance also requires restrictive covenants to be placed on the property title and proce_uras for daily in-house inspection of. containment devices and- areas weer e regulated subst_nces are fret spo� :.ed and the mai ncanance oz records and dogs detailing -the inspections. § 11.P. & 3.- The ordinance also aranc�tes t:Te_-procedu=es, en=orcement, and penalties (up .-'o $1,000/day plus clean up casts). for violations of the ordinance. §§ 15, 15, and 20. From t::.is description or the ordinance,, it can be seen that if the -ordinance is adopted it could, if it were to be found to apply to state activities wit::in the city limits of Renton, be very burdensome to WSBCT. OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GE.NEFLAJ_ L. J. Janousek January 9, 1989 Page 3 There are three main reasons that Rentcn's propcs_d crc_ranca should not apply to WSDOT activities: (l) In General, mu:�icioal a rules do not pply to state activ:uv; (2) Rentor's pr=posa^. ordinance should be preemmted because it is in di=_ct conflict With other state sty tutes; and (3) The legislature has expressed its ceneral intent - to occupy the field of regulation ther_by preempuing Renton's proposed ordinance. = or each of these reasons, I have enumerated my reasoning as to why Renton's erd=nonce should not apply to WSDOT activities below. 1. .a General, xumicical Rules no Not Anziv me stare Acp_v:times - 11 of the wasaimctcn States Const_cut_cr. p-cv_des. Anv county, city, town or township may make and enf—c ce w=thin its limits all such local police, sanitary and other ra^slatiors as are not in conflict wits general I", aws. in add_:icn to this corsuitutional prevision, the City o` Renton is also rel vLig on Title 35.88 fcr its power to adc=_ prcpcs_d ord—nance. RCW 35-88.020 states: ?very city and town --may by or:inance--pr�scr'_:e what acts shall constitute offenses against the purity of itrV a t a r I sup^v and the punishmentz er pena'_t_es Cher ==c_ and a^_-orc: Althcuch this stat•:ta gives LtEe City of R_ntcn tae pcwar t_ adopt the prepesed ordinance, it does not expressiv state that such ora=ancas shall be applicable to the state. RcId 35. E3.110 Gives city councils or boards the power to divide a muni c_pal i __� into res __�ive zones by -stating: =or anv or all of such purposes of council or board, on recommendation cf its commission, m-ay c_vide the municipality or any portion thereof into d_stri=s of such s:_e, shape and area, or may est a lish suzh cf_iciz'_ maps, _ or development plans fc-r_ the whole or anv per;.ion df the municipality _.a.s may be deemed best suited to ca_-^y out she purposes of this chapter and within such dist:'_cts it may regulate and restrict -the erection, construction, - reconstruction, alteration, repair or use of buildings, st=lct_, es or land. RC'R 36.70.750 of the Planning Enabling Act gives counties the Power to zone by stating: - OFFICE OF THE ATiOPNEY GENERAL L. J. Janousek January 9, 1989 Page 4 Any board, by ordinance, may establish classifications, within each of which, soe_i_i c controls are ident___ed and which wi11: (1) - Regulate the use of buildings, structures, and land as between agric .lz- re, industry, business, residence, and other pur: cses; (2) regulate location, height, bulk, nu=ber cf Stores and size of buildings and structures; the size cf yards, � cc: and other c_ en spacas; the density of : ocu' aticn; the cercentace c= a _..t wn=ch may he cc�-^iec cy buildings and st= actures ; a d t-ae area r e^.:i=ed to provide e f = _s =et facilities for the Marring of mctor vehicles. in cc =par+son, however., tie far more pervasive city and county zoning codes have been held not to apply "Co state projects. Snehcr..ish Countv v. State, 97 Wn.2d-6461 648 P.2d 430 (1982), State V. Seattle, 94 Wn.2d 162, 615 P.2ri 461 (1980) . Therefore, it can be argsed that RCW 25.88.020, an inconsequential statute in comparison to the zoning codes, also does not apply to state prcjec=s suca as highway ccnst_sc=_en. our legislature knows- how and has, upon occasion, expressly made state-owned lands subj'e to ta=icula= local regulations. Section 28 of the Shoreline Management Act of 19--'_ (RCv 90.53.2030) expressly, states that: The provisions of this Chapter [including local regulations adopad thersunder 1 shall be applic--a'to all agencies -of state government, counties., -and- public- and mkni.eipal ccrporat_ons and to all sh.a.Ta-lizes-_e-f the sate owned or administered by LikerN_se, the state legislature also -made local building codes adopted pursuant to the- State Building Code- Act express-1v -applicable to state building projects. RCW 19.27.060(2) states: "the s=at_ building code -shall be applicable to all buildings and - structures including those owned by the state or by any coverr�ental _subdivision- or unit of local ceve=nme_-:t. " However, the legislature cons=i cuously_ rafrained =rcm pravid'_ng sinilar =,ZVisions in the Act for -land use recu?at_ens or zor_irg_-codes. in the present situ ion, the statute Renton is relying --on does not expressly state that any such -adopted ordinances shall apply to the state or its agencies. RCW 47.52.027 gives the Szcretary co-f Transportation the power to adopt "design standards, rules, and regulations relating to construction, maintenance and control of access of the national OFFICE OF THE ATI'OR.'VEY GE NER'tL. L. J. Janousek January 9, 1989 Page 5 syst_m cf intarstate and de_ense hig :ways w__hin th is state". WSDCT, through the Secreta=v of T=_nspc=ta__on has adopted numerous standards for the design, = szructicn, and maintenance of the state highway syst=m. RCW 47.52.027 goes on to state that "the standards, rules, and regulations so adopted by the sac eta_-- shall const_tuta the public policy of L n y th's state and shall have the force and effect of law." Dt _s my = nicn that the legislature has given exc'_us_ve control over the design and construction of state hicr.ways t;, WSDCT and t :at the Renton ordinance does not ap^lv to st=.a h;-h* rC ' 3__s wi m L'1 the Ren=Cn. c_ -V 1'�1'' 1 is . 'ase my conclusion primarily upon the general rule that municipal or::inances do not apply to state ccnstz-,:c-ion w_-hin city limits. Generally, "the principle is that the state, when creating municipal gove_rments, does not cede to them any control of t:,e stata's proper-y situated within them, nor over any proper _.r wrich -tie state has autthorized anct"her body or power to ccr._rol." Kentucky Institute, Educaticr, of Blind v Louisville', l23 Ky. 7671 97 S.W. 402, 404 (1906) . Washington cour--s have held _=am some state_ projects cannot be governed by municipal zoning and land use codes. Snohomish County v. State, supra; State V. Seattle, sups a; Scuth Hill Sewer D' s �'-� Ct V . pi - -=e ccunrv, 22 Wn-: App. 738-, 591 P.2d 877 (1979) ; city of Bellevue v. - - Bat 1 aurae ccninun'ty C_^i l cr.a et al., King Cc my No. in Attorney General Cpin-ion No. 72, 1976, we stated fiat: - _I7 has, hoseever., -been-thy csition flf tiis o=`i_e - fer many years that in the absence of a statute to the c:,n=, such codes are not applicable to- the state itself or to the lawful uses made by the state of _ts own lands. :n add it_on , _n Attorney General Latter 0: ini on No. 56, - 9 7 7 , we stated: _ A city_, town or county may not amend the state building code a5 it ap-lies within-s jur_sdiC_ion so as to re':uire state _ agencies to comply with -local zon? nca or other lard use controls -as a —condition precedenz to receiving a local build_. g permit. The same principles apply to state construction of highways withiZ the limits of a municipality. in Sce highways, like._ buildings, are constructed on state property for state purposes under the authorization of state law, the same basic principles concerning the non -applicability of local law should be OFFICE OF THE ATiOFUNEY GE:vFERAL L. J. Jancusek January 9, 1989 Page 6 c:,ntrcllinc. The state does not cede tc municipalities' control over its proper`v. See, Kentuc?:v ins-i tsta. fducation of 314.nd V. T,cu syille, Supra. Thus, when one of the C1 -y's streets has been declared by an act of the legislature to be a secondary highway, the improvement of that street is no longer a municipal affair within the meaning of the constitution. Southern California Roads Ccm=anv v. McGL'_-e_, 2 Cal. 2d 115, 39 P.2d 412 As stated above, RCW 47.52.027 states that the rules and standards adc=ted bv_ the Secreta=,r of Tra.nsrcrtation "shall have the for:.e and effect of law." A state agency allocated by law the raspor._ibili tv of perfo zinc a cover.nmental function is not sub�sc- to the general police powers of a municipal corperation. Board of Regents v. Temme, 88 Ariz. 299, 356 P.2d 399 (1960). Subject to constitutional limitations, the state has absolut; control over streets and highways within its borders, and such ower of supervision and control may -be exercised di_rect'_y by the lec_slaz re, or it may be delegated to a subcr-dinate ccverrmertal agency. Smith v. State Highway Commission, l83 Zan. 443, 346 P.. 259 (1959) i Sou=Z Caroiina StetsyiChway Denartment y Parker Way-»- and Sewer Subdistrict, 247 S.C. 137, 146 S.Z.2d._-160 In the instance case, the_queston is not whether the Rentcn ordnance would- ccntrol in the absence of state =eculation of '•'he area it covers, but whether such an ordinance may govern state high way d'esica, cons =action, and maintenance en -state prdpe-t, whin the 1egq7_1at has- civea WST''exclusive �antrol.= aver t. design and construction of the -2:ai gnways. I believe that under the cirrsmsuances the proposed Renton crdin nace_should have no e=few upon WSOCT. However, we might also wish t-c�- argue that the proposed ordinance is in direct conflict with state law and that the legislature has effective-ly preempted the field cf regulation. (2) Ren:on's P=oaysed Ordinance Should Be Preempted Because T_= _ is in Direct Confl-Lct Rith Other State Statates. Since RC',q 47.52.02.7 gives WSOQT standards and rules the farce and effect cf law, it therefore is necessary to determine whether the - Renton ordinance is in conflict -with WSDOT regulations or anv - other state statute and, therefore, is in direct contradiction with Article 11, § 11 of the Washington Constit• t,' The Washington cases indicate that the existence of a conflict within the meaning of Const. art. 11, 5 11, can be predicated OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL. L. J. Janousek January 9, 1989 Page 7 upon either (1) a direct' contradiction in the two enactments, or (2) a preemption of the field of re-aulaticn by the state. Cav of Union Gan v. Carev, 0'4 Wn.2d 43, 39% 0 P.2d 674 (1964) Seat -'-a - v. Lana, 61 Wn.2d 737, 380 P.2d 472 (1963); State_ v. Lundquist, 60 Wn.2d 397, 374 P.2d 246 (1962); Bellingham v. Schammera, 57 Wn.2d 106, 356 P.2d-292 (1960). Not only does the Renton ordinance appear to contradict WSDCT hichway construction design and maintenance standards such as recurring _designs to meet 100.-year storm capacities instead c- the ;vSDOT 25-year standard, but the or3'_,.ance also aape_rs tc c_._trad-4ct other scat= sue ---es. Ttese stat ,:es-nclude ch. 36.36 RCW which expressly gives the countisla_ iy t:r-y the power -to- create aquifer protection areas to protect and maintain subte--ranean water. Re-riton-'s proposed ordi ance usu rs the power the county has been granted to establish acui-Oer protection areas by purporting to create these areas itself. . 7 t-4s is in direct contradiction to RCW 36.36.020 which es ta' 1 i sties the process by which a county can designate aeuifer protection areas. Ch.- 90.44 RCW gives- the Dem&:..went of Eccloc_v the power to regulate public around waters and regulate t desi c..ation of ground water management areas. SDeci _i ca1'__v, RCW 90.4 -400 states: - :n._recognition of existing water rights and the .need -o _ - manage groundwater aquifers for future use, the depar'-. ert of ego l cav shall, by rule, establish standards, criteria, _. and a process for the designation of specific around water a:-eas. or sub -areas and -provide fcr either t e depa=-1--ment of ecology, local governments, or ground water users of the area to initiate development a ground--wat__ management prog—m for each zrea or sub -area, consist___^_t w.*th state and' local government objectives, polices, and =- authorities. Renton's proposed ordinance again -appears to overlook- this state _statute which -_gives the Department of Ecalogy- the power to designate the process by which ground water areas are -d-ete=-4ned. Again R-eneon's .proposed._ ordinance appears tor ignore thy- - ccmprehensive process ch. 90.4.4 RCW sets up to delineate gro-sand water management gr acedures — Ch _ 9-0. 4 8- RCT- establishes a - cmmprehensive state water pollution control act, which includes _ amendments made by Initiative No. 97, whits comprehensively addresses hazardous waste clean up. RCW 90.48.030 specifically giv-es jurisdiction of the control and prevention of water pollution to the Department of Ecology by stating: OFFII CE OF 7HE PL7rCRNEY GE_NER.'t t L. J. Janousek January 9, 1989 Page 8 The depa_1_=er_t shall have the jurisdiction to control and prevent the pollution of streams, lakes, rivers, ponds, inland Waters, salt waters, water courses, and other surf -ace and underground -waters of the state of Washington. RCW 90.48.035 eXtends the* Department cf Ecolocy's rower tc include r'.:larak ng by s:.ating: The department shall have the authority to, and shall promulgate, amend, or rescind such rules and regulations as it shall deem necessa=y to carry out the provisions Cr t:_is cta t-r,_ including but not li iited_to rules and regulations relating to s tandards of c,:ality for waters of the state and for substances discharged therein in order to maintain the -- highest possible stardar4_s of all waters of the sate in accordance with the public policy as declared in RCW 90.48.010. Renton's proposed ordinance is in direct ccnlradict'_on to the powers which the legislat-u:.� soeci_iczll_v give only -to the= Depa_ ment of Ecolocy under these sta utet. Renton does net appe`.r to have the authority to adopt an ordinance d=alines with aratar pollution control, that power has been- reserved in- t:e Deparenl of Ecology under these statutes. - (3) T".:e Lea=slatu_= Has Excnessed I-ts..General =ntent to occuuv the -Field of reaulat_on The=eb-v P=eemot_:iG Rentca!s-P:aecsed ordinance. t-he iiel& of regulation. and, therefore, is-i_rL_di:ect ccn=1:c= with the General laws of the state within the. meaning cf nr_. 11, § ll.- Earlier Washington cases held th-at legislative intent to exclude or preempt municipal action -in a particular area must --appear on the face of the statute. Seattle v. Lone, su=—a - and other cases cited above. However, Lenci v.-Seatt'ie, 63 Wn.2d 6.64, 388 P.29 926 -(1964) , -indicates that -legislative or state in tent to -preempt a_ Given field and the=-eby_ e==-ectively-- invalidate_. a local ordinance ih that field, -may be shcvn not only by the language cf.the sta _te itself, but! If the legislature is silent- as to its intent to occupy a _ given field, resort must be had to the -purposes of the leg=slative enactment and to the facts and circumstances uoon which the enactment was intended to overate. OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL L. J. Janousak January 9, 1989 Page 9 63 Wn.2d at 669, 670. This lancuace is in accord with currant scholarly_ opinion and the weight of decisions in other staz_s. Decart--e*IL of Licenses and T-.^.sDe=_" o^s v. weber, 394 Pa. 466, 147 A.2d 326 (1959) ; 2 Sutherland Const_ruc-ion, § 3901 (3d ed. 1972 suDp.) Where the legislat' a has adopted statutes governing a par =cular matter, its intent with retard to oc=spving the field to the exclusion of all local regulation is not to be measured alone by the language used, but by the whcl_ pur?csa and scope of the legislative scheme. in Re Zcr.. =_ Cam. 2d 630, 381 P.2d 635, 30 Cal. Rptr. 811 (1963) ; in Re Mcss, Cal. __ 117, 373 P.2d 425, 23 C_l. R_ tr. 361 (1962) ; in Re !a- - 58 Cal. 2d 99, 372 P.2d 897, 22 Cal. R:tr. 857 (1962). Tn a recent Washington appellate ccu-�- decision, Seattle v. chin, 50 Wn. ADD. 218, 748 P.2d 643 (1903); cart. denied 110 Wn.2d - 1025 (1938) , the court considered several factors when exa=in inc - whether the legislature has preempt_d an area by implication. Id., citing State v.'?ortch, 92 Wn.2d 342, 348, 596 P.2d 104� (1979). The f—st factor is the principle that: T_'-e c"==-er the local c-cacern ? n a par.._cular arse c_ lecis l ation, the less likely a single unifor= statewide standard is needed and the less likely a local ordinance will be preemp-ted by state leci-s_ation in the area. _a. C-*--ng Pasco v. Ross, 39 Wn. App. 480, 482, 694 P.2d 37 - (1985) . We could argue the slate's int rest in provi ding uni_:.rn - r:.ad,;ays fcr the. pub?ic outae_ghs the local concern that st_t_ highw-ap c:.ns===76.,ian_=av h weir. weer=s�_nl _�If_ea= county - --.: v . were =gores=vezy':�q=crdinazrces- and -c cns-,. __ r_cu'ring s'ecific changes.. and. modificati or_s �o ichways wi`:.iZ she__ Jur�SC1C:r.On, 1`woL'ld be i=possible Co Cr=a6.e a L'Il_ C7r� hight;av system and -all continuity in state highway corsc__c-icr. -- practices would be lost. -The second factor 'Co consider is w1rethe= the legislature has - created so comprehensive a lecislati-re frameaonk in a particular area that there is no room left for c.:.:V.z_rr_nt jurisdiction. Id. - citina Po ..ch',- sumra, at 34-3. We -can- easily argue that the legislature .in cstiing the power tz WSDOT to. adopt standards regarding hichway desien, paint=nanca, and court=.zction _e== ve=r little r-oom for local ordinances which- impact highway construction. Th=pughout Title 47, tee legislature emphasiied _ that WSDOT and the Transmcrtation Commission was to have ccnt- of over the development and maintenance of a comprehensive and balanced state-wide transportation system. To allow etie_wisa would allow To b-ipalities--lacking WSDOT's expertise - tor -control - OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENEFAL L. J. Janousek January 9, 1989 Page 10 the design and ccrst-action of highways. This obviously was nct the legislature's intent. Relying upon the court's language in Lenci and Shin and the holdings of courts in other jurisdictions, I believe that we are justified in concluding that state preemption of a field of legislation can be found by implication. In this case the comprehensiveness of the standards promulgated by WSDCT, the natural primacy of state_ interests in the area of highway construction, the grant by the legislature of jurisdiction over water pollution control tc the Department of Ecology, and the impc— :.anca of unif ormity of r=_ ati cn in this field, all point to the conclusion that 5tat3 Dreerction Of this area 0f law was the intent of the legislature and of the highway conmissicn. _ Oven the e`Sis%- -nca ci a S:.a63 i7It_ntiOn t0 OC.'.'.l?JV the f_-_' d, C" City of Renton's proposed ordinance probably is invalid because of (l) general preemac cn of the field by the state in addition etc- bei na inval_d because of (2) spec fic conflicts with state enactments, and (3). the general rule that - municipal ord'_nances do not ammly to state cons t: action within city limits. _ __. s a:. mary, I feel we have a strong ar gument that the Ren =c n ordinance should not apply to WSDCT activities for the ahove—mentioned reasons.- in addition, there are other issues which I have not discussed here which ammear to summon t:.,e sa_^*e. conclusion.