Salt Lake City International Airport Terminal Redevelopment ...

FINAL 

Salt Lake City International Airport 

Terminal Redevelopment Program 

ENVIRONMENTAL 

ASSESSMENT 

Prepared for: 

Salt Lake City 

Department of Airports 

Prepared by: 

August 22, 2012 

TBG012712153950RDD

Final 



Environmental Assessment 

Prepared for 

Salt Lake City Department of Airports 

776 North Terminal Drive 

Salt Lake City, Utah 84116 

August 2012 

215 South State Street 

Suite 1000 

Salt Lake City, Utah 84111

Executive Summary 

This Environmental Assessment (EA) has been prepared pursuant to the National 

Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), in accordance with the requirements of Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA) Orders 5050.4B and 1050.1E. This EA analyzes and discloses the 

impacts associated with the proposed Terminal Redevelopment Program (TRP or Proposed 

Action) at Salt Lake City International Airport (SLC or the Airport). 

Purpose and Need 

Much of the existing terminal complex at SLC was designed and built more than 50 years 

ago and, although it has been expanded and renovated during this period, the original 

structures and layout remain largely the same. These facilities were not designed to meet 

current standards of energy efficiency or seismic safety, and the age of these structures leads 

to increased maintenance requirements and costs to the Airport and its users. In addition, as 

the airline and airport industry have experienced dramatic changes during the last 50 years, 

the existing terminal complex has become functionally obsolete, as shown in Exhibit ES-1. 

The Proposed Action would meet the following specific needs: 

 

 

 

Problems with Existing Aging Infrastructure. The existing terminal complex is 50 years 

old, requires extensive ongoing maintenance, is not energy efficient, does not provide 

current airline industry standard levels of service (LOS), and does not meet current 

seismic design standards. 

Respond to Changes in the Air Transportation System. Since the terminal facilities at 

SLC were planned and built, the aviation industry has experienced significant changes 

in the way airline passenger traffic is handled. The following major changes have 

occurred in the industry over the past 50 years: 

 

 

 

 

 

The introduction of hub and spoke route systems, which made the ability of 

passengers to transfer quickly from an arriving aircraft to a departing aircraft a key 

requirement 

Increasingly stringent security requirements, requiring more space for passenger 

screening 

Changes in baggage handling and delivery demands 

Increasing need for well-placed concessions to generate revenue, to reduce pressure 

on public funding sources 

The advent of ticketless travel, which has decreased the area required for ticketing 

and check-in 

Enhance Operational Efficiency. The existing terminal configuration requires 

redundant facilities for passenger check-in and baggage screening, baggage claim, 

enplaning and deplaning curbsides, and associated mechanical systems. The current 

terminal configuration also results in inefficient aircraft movement in the terminal area. 

RDD/102790005 (NLH4349.DOCX) 

TBG012712153950RDD 

ES-1

Existing terminal complex is 50 years 

old, requires extensive ongoing 

maintenance, is not energy efficient, and 

does not provide current industry 

standard levels of service. 

Concourse layout 

contributes to airfield 

congestion, increased 

aircraft emissions, and 

increased fuel use. 

CONCOURSE 

INTERNATIONAL 

ARRIVALS BLDG 

TERMINAL 2 

TERMINAL 1 

CONCOURSE 

Terminal configuration requires redundant facilities for passenger 

check-in, passenger and baggage screening, baggage claim, enplaning 

and deplaning curbsides, and associated mechanical systems. 

Exhibit ES-1 Inefficiencies of the 

Existing Terminal Complex 



SLC\399292\Inefficiencies_TerminalComplex.ai MAR-12 ckm

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 

Proposed Action 

The Proposed Action shown in Exhibit ES-2 would consolidate separate passenger 

processing facilities into a single facility serving all concourses and gates and includes the 

following components: 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Phased replacement of the Airport’s terminals and concourses 

Reconstruction of taxiways and ramps in the terminal complex as required to 

accommodate aircraft circulation in the reconfigured terminal area 

Construction of a replacement parking garage 

Replacement rental car facilities in the new parking garage, including new rent-a-car 

(RAC) counters, ready-return spaces, and a quick-turn-around (QTA) facility 

A new remote service site for offices and rental car storage areas, located south of the 

existing economy parking lot 

New terminal roadways and improvements within the terminal complex 

New central utility plant (CUP) located west of the replacement parking garage 

In addition to consolidating terminal facilities, the Proposed Action would better accommodate 

the current and forecast mix of aircraft. The Airport now has about 86 narrow-body 

equivalent gates, 1 56 of which are served with loading bridges (SLC, 2011). The Proposed 

Action would provide between 72 and 74 gates (or about 76 narrow-body equivalent gates), 

depending on the average size of the aircraft using the Airport. All of these gates would be 

served with loading bridges. 

The terminal, concourses, and connectors in the Proposed Action would provide a net 

increase of 644,328 square feet, or 62 percent, compared to the existing facilities. This 

additional space would enable the Airport to provide industry standard LOSs and provide 

additional space for concessions, to enhance revenue generation and passenger convenience. 

A new parking garage would be centered south of the new terminal building, with two 

pedestrian bridges connecting the second level of the garage to the new terminal. The new 

garage would provide 3,636 short-term and long-term parking spaces, compared to the 

1,834 spaces provided in the existing parking garage. Rental car facilities would be located 

on the first level of the parking garage. A new customer service building containing rental 

car customer service counters and office space would be located on the ground floor of a 

separate building immediately adjacent to the north side of the parking garage. The second 

floor of this building would contain the termini of the pedestrian bridges, and provide space 

for the development of airline check-in counters and a station for the future light rail 

extension to the new terminal building. A rental car QTA facility would be located south of 

the new parking garage to accommodate fueling and other servicing facilities. 

1 “Narrow-body equivalent gate” expresses the passenger handling capacity of an aircraft gate at a terminal in terms of the 

number of narrow-body aircraft that would accommodate the same number of passengers. For example, a gate sized for a 

wide-body aircraft, such as a Boeing 777, would represent more than one NBE gate. In contrast, a gate designed for 

regional jet or commuter aircraft would represent less than one NBE gate. 

RDD/102790005 (NLH4349.DOCX) 

TBG012712153950RDD 

ES-3

D 

C 

B 

SOUTH CONCOURSE WEST 

SOUTH CONCOURSE EAST 

TERMINAL 

RAC 

PARKING 

CUP 

QTA 

REMOTE SERVICE SITE 

New Construction 

Existing Renovated 

Note: RAC = rental car facilities 

0 250 500 1,000 Feet 

\\JAFAR\PROJ\SLC_405943\MAPFILES\AFFECTEDENVIRONMENT\PROPOSEDACTION_ROADS.MXD SSAVAGE1 06/20/2012 10:29:09 AM 

¹ 

Exhibit ES-2 Proposed Action 


Terminal Redevelopment Program


Additional facilities for the rental car operations would be located south of the Airport’s 

economy parking lot. This area would become the rental car remote service site and would 

provide space for vehicle maintenance bays, offices, and miscellaneous equipment storage. 

The area around the service buildings would be paved to provide an area for vehicle storage 

and fleet changeover. 

The Airport entrance roadway system would remain unchanged until reaching the exit 

leading to the new parking garage, which would be followed by successive exits for the new 

terminal. Entering motorists would continue to encounter the same sequence of decision 

points as today. The Proposed Action would replace the current single-level terminal 

curbside roadway with a two-level roadway, with the arrival roadway on the lower, or 

baggage claim, level and the departure roadway on the upper, or ticketing, level. Beyond 

the curbside roads, most of the existing access and circulation roadways would remain 

unchanged. Outbound roadway sections could be widened to improve operations and 

accommodate forecast demands. In addition, terminal roads would be temporarily relocated 

to accommodate terminal construction and road construction. 

A new CUP is included to serve the redeveloped terminal complex. The CUP would be 

located west of the proposed parking garage and southwest of the proposed terminal. The 

CUP layout would accommodate equipment throughout the construction associated with 

the TRP. Construction of the facilities within the CUP would be phased into the future, 

when warranted. The size and storage capacity of the various components of the CUP 

would depend on the final systems selected for the terminal complex. 

The Proposed Action would reserve a suitable location adjacent to the QTA and parking 

garage facility for the future relocated light rail station. The Utah Transportation Authority 

is responsible for finalizing the design and is the responsible agency for funding the 

construction. The future light rail station relocation project is included in this EA because 

the final location of the light rail station is reflected in the Airport Layout Plan (ALP) for the 

TRP, making it a federal action subject to NEPA. 

The Salt Lake City Department of Airports (SLCDA) proposes to begin construction of the 

Proposed Action in 2013 (design starting in 2012) and complete construction in about 2024. 

The sponsor is requesting the following actions from the FAA as the lead federal agency: 

 

 

 

 

FAA acceptance of the Final EA 

FAA issuance of a Finding of No Significant Impact 

FAA unconditional approval of the ALP for the TRP 

Possible issuance of Airport Improvement Program grants for construction 

Alternatives 

The alternatives considered to meet the previously described passenger terminal needs 

include actions that could be taken by the SLCDA, with FAA approval, such as selecting a 

different location or configuration for the passenger terminal, or building a supplemental or 

replacement airport to reduce or eliminate the need to improve facilities at SLC. Other 

alternatives that are outside the authority of the SLCDA or the FAA are also considered. 

These other options include the use of demand management techniques to reduce or 

RDD/102790005 (NLH4349.DOCX) 

TBG012712153950RDD 

ES-5


eliminate the need for new passenger handling facilities, the use of other airports, or the use 

of other modes of transportation that may reduce the need for improvements at the Airport. 

Terminal Development Alternatives 

As the transfer point between surface and air transportation, passenger terminals must be 

easily accessible from the surface transportation systems and the airfield circulation system. 

At a major airport, such as SLC, the area required for passenger handling facilities, automobile 

access and parking, and airfield circulation is extensive. The existing terminal 

complex at SLC is well located in all of these respects. Although other sites on or adjacent to 

the Airport might be considered for a replacement terminal complex, no other site offers 

similar benefits. Exhibit ES-3 shows the constraints of six potential terminal locations 

(labeled A through F) at SLC. These constraints and limitations include: 

 

 

 

 

The size of the area needed to accommodate the necessary facilities and the necessary 

separation from existing runways 

The need to avoid area required for airfield circulation 

Proximity to access roadways 

Surrounding development, infrastructure, and environmental factors 

Area A, the existing terminal area, is the best located with respect to airfield circulation and 

the regional surface transportation system. Continued use of this area would minimize 

impacts to the natural and manmade environments compared to developing a new site by 

avoiding the need to develop undeveloped areas, or to acquire and relocate off-Airport 

development. For these reasons, alternatives that would relocate the terminal complex from 

Area A would not be prudent; terminal planning has, therefore, focused on the existing 

project area shown in Exhibit ES-1. Exhibit ES-4 shows terminal concepts developed for SLC 

in master planning studies dating back to 1975. 

Potential Terminal Configurations 

During the last 35 years, the SLCDA has examined dozens of concepts for providing 

terminal facilities. As noted above, these concepts have focused on the existing terminal area 

as the most logical location for a passenger terminal complex (see Exhibit ES-4). These 

concepts have generally approached terminal development in one of three ways: 

 

 

 

Multiple terminals 

Single terminal 

Hybrid 

Single-terminal concepts (1997 Concept H and 2010 Proposed Action) would minimize the 

need for duplicate facilities and would provide maximum flexibility in responding to 

changes in air transportation service patterns. Single-terminal concepts would also 

minimize congestion and delay in the terminal area by eliminating dead-end taxilanes and 

chokepoints between concourses. The multiple-terminal and hybrid concepts do not meet 

the purpose and need for the Proposed Action and are not retained for detailed 

consideration. 

ES-6 

RDD/102790005 (NLH4349.DOCX) 

TBG012712153950RDD

B 

215 

D 

A 

C 

E 

C 

80 

F 

Airport Boundary 

Airport Building 

Water Body 

Airport Pavement 

Air Carrier Runway 

GA Runway 

Air Carrier Runway Circulation 

Off-Airport Development 

Interstate Highway 

Major Airport Access Route 

Exhibit ES-3 Site Constraints 



SLC\399292\SLCAirport\SiteConstraints.ai NOV-10 ckm


Other Salt Lake City International Airport Alternatives 

The SLCDA has investigated other means of meeting at least some of the needs identified 

previously under Purpose and Need without redeveloping the terminals. In addition, FAA 

Order 1050.1E, Paragraph 506.e., states that “Alternatives not within the jurisdiction of the 

lead agency, but within the jurisdiction of the Federal government, should be considered.” 

Two potential alternatives fall into this category: 

 

 

Renovation and Rehabilitation. In addition to considering the terminal development 

concepts described earlier, the SLCDA has investigated the cost of maintaining the 

existing terminal complex. In 2009, the SLCDA commissioned an Asset Preservation 

Study (Jacobs Engineering, 2009) that estimated the cost of renovating the existing 

terminal facilities at more than $61 million. This study only looked at the items needed 

to maintain the structures and did not address the cost of bringing the facilities into 

compliance with current seismic design standards or industry standard LOS. 

Addressing these seismic design and LOS deficiencies would go well beyond the 

concept of renovation and rehabilitation. Therefore, this alternative does not meet the 

purpose and need for the Proposed Action and is not retained for detailed evaluation. 

Implementing Demand Management Measures. Historically, measures such as slot 

quotas or congestion pricing have been proposed to reduce congestion at airports with 

excessive levels of airfield congestion and delay. In concept, activity or demand 

management might address some of the needs identified under Purpose and Need by 

spreading peak activity levels over a longer period, thus reducing congestion and 

enhancing passenger LOS. This alternative would not eliminate the problems of aging 

infrastructure, respond to changes in the air transportation system, or enhance 

operational efficiency. In addition, measures that would restrict airlines’ flexibility in 

providing air service could be viewed as imposing an undue burden on interstate 

commerce and being contrary to the tenets of airline deregulation. Although such 

measures have been supported in rare cases of high-density airports with excessive 

levels of airfield delay, there is no precedent for such measures being imposed to reduce 

terminal and landside congestion in the United States. This alternative is not retained for 

detailed evaluation. 

Non-Salt Lake City International Airport Alternatives 

Other alternatives that would not entail development at SLC might enhance the efficiency of 

existing terminal facilities by reducing the level of activity these facilities must 

accommodate. In concept, reducing the intensity of peak period demand might reduce 

congestion and enable the terminals to provide higher passenger LOSs. Alternatively, 

diverting demand to other airports or modes of transportation might also reduce congestion 

and provide higher LOSs with a less intensive development program. 

In practice, alternatives that manage or divert demand typically address broad congestion 

and LOS issues rather than site-specific problems. For example, the lack of airport capacity 

in general might be addressed if current or future demand at a given airport were reduced 

through diversion to some other mode of transportation or alternative airport. In contrast, 

correcting inefficient terminal layouts and outdated infrastructure would require a sitespecific 

solution even if total demand were reduced. 

ES-8 

RDD/102790005 (NLH4349.DOCX) 

TBG012712153950RDD

Existing 

1975 Terminal Area Plan 

1981 Alternative 1 1981 Alternative 5 1986 Alternative 10 

1986 Alternative "B-3" 

1988 Recommended 

1997 Concept "B" 

1997 Concept "H" 

2010 Proposed Action 

SOURCES: Salt Lake City International Airport Master Plan Study, prepared for the SLCDA, 1975; Salt Lake City International Airport Master Plan 

Update, Passenger Terminal Area Alternatives Evaluation, prepared for the SLCDA, 1981; Special Terminal Area Study, Final Report, Salt Lake City 

International Airport Master Plan Update, prepared for the SLCDA, 1986; Salt Lake City International Airport Master Plan Update, prepared for the 

SLCDA, 1988; Salt Lake City International Airport Master Plan Update and Part 150 Study Update, prepared for the SLCDA, 1997; Terminal 

Development Program, Task 2, Program Validation and Preliminary Planning, prepared for the SLCDA, 2010. 

0 

¹ 

SEA \\JAFAR\PROJ\SLC_405943\MAPFILES\HISTORICALALTERNATIVES.MXD SSAVAGE 10/20/2011 3:46:00 PM 

750 1,500 3,000 Feet 

Existing Airport Building Selection 

Existing Pavement 

Stream 

Water Body 

Exhibit ES-4 Historical Alternatives 




Although the SLCDA and the FAA have little ability to limit, divert, or manage demand, the 

FAA, as the lead federal agency, must consider alternatives beyond those in its (or the 

sponsor’s) direct control. Conceptually, alternatives that would reduce the demand for 

passenger facilities at SLC could meet some of the needs identified under Purpose and 

Need. The following alternatives in this category were considered: 

 

 

 

Replacing the Airport (New Airport). Although this concept could meet the needs 

identified under Purpose and Need, the cost of such an alternative would be extremely 

high compared to the Proposed Action. Furthermore, the resulting Airport would likely 

be less convenient to population centers and would likely have a much greater impact 

on the natural and/or manmade environment because it would either develop 

previously undeveloped lands or displace existing urban development. The Wasatch 

Mountains to the east and the Oquirrh Mountains to the west of the Salt Lake City 

Metropolitan Area would also limit the possible locations of a new airport serving the 

region. This concept would not be prudent because of its environmental, social, and 

economic consequences, and it is not retained for detailed evaluation. 

Using Another Airport. SLC, located about 5 miles west of downtown Salt Lake City on 

Interstate 80, is conveniently located to serve the air transportation needs of the Salt 

Lake City Metropolitan Area. The FAA National Plan of Integrated Airport Systems 

(NPIAS) lists two airports, South Valley Regional and Bolinder Field/Tooele Valley, 

within 25 miles of SLC. The NPIAS identifies three additional airports within 50 miles of 

SLC. None of these airports has the airfield or surface access capacity to accommodate 

air carrier operations without essentially being rebuilt. Using another airport as either a 

replacement or a supplement for SLC would, therefore, require nearly the same level of 

investment as building a replacement Airport, and would have similar potential for 

environmental impacts. This concept would not be prudent because of its 

environmental, social, and economic consequences, and is not retained for detailed 

evaluation. 

Using Other Modes of Transportation or Communications. Alternative modes of 

transportation offer feasible alternatives for air travelers, particularly for trips of 1 day or 

less (about 500 road miles). At longer distances, alternative modes of transportation 

become less desirable because of the amount of time lost by travelers. Diverting demand 

to other modes of transportation or communications, such as video conferencing, might 

address some of the needs identified under Purpose and Need by reducing congestion 

in the terminals, thereby enhancing passenger LOS. Although neither the FAA nor the 

SLCDA has the authority to mandate the use of alternative modes of transportation, 

automobiles already attract some passengers that might otherwise use air 

transportation. Two of the Airport’s top 20 destinations (Denver and Las Vegas) are 

within 500 miles of SLC and collectively account for 9 percent of the Airport’s passenger 

traffic (LeighFisher, 2010). The effects of diversion to automobile travel are already 

reflected in existing and forecast aviation passenger demand. To the extent that 

conventional rail traffic and telecommunications, including video conferencing, compete 

with air transportation, those effects are also reflected in existing levels of air passenger 

demand. Improvements in rail transportation, such as the introduction of high-speed 

rail service, and/or increased use of video conferencing could affect the growth in air 

travel in the future, but would not alleviate existing deficiencies. This concept would not 

RDD/102790005 (NLH4349.DOCX) 

TBG012712153950RDD 

ES-11


meet purpose and need for the Proposed Action and is not retained for detailed 

evaluation. 

Alternatives Eliminated from Detailed Consideration 

Alternatives that would not meet the purpose and need for the Proposed Action are not 

reasonable alternatives and are not carried forward for detailed consideration. Similarly, 

alternatives that would entail substantially greater environmental, social, or economic costs 

than the Proposed Action are not considered to be prudent and are not carried forward. 

Table ES-1 summarizes the reasons these alternatives are not carried forward. 

TABLE ES-1 


Alternative 

Reason for Elimination 

Multiple Terminals 

Hybrid Terminal 

Renovation and Rehabilitation 

Replacing the Airport (New Airport) 

Using Another Airport 

Implementing Demand Management 

Measures 

Using Other Modes of Transportation or 

Communications 

Would not meet the purpose and need for the Proposed Action and 

would have environmental consequences similar to those of the 

Proposed Action. 

Would not meet the purpose and need for the Proposed Action and 

would have environmental consequences similar to those of the 


Would not meet the purpose and need for the Proposed Action. 

Some degree of renovation and rehabilitation would be undertaken 

as part of the No Action Alternative. 

Would entail substantially greater environmental, social, and/or 

economic costs than the Proposed Action. 





Evaluation of Reasonable Alternatives 

Two alternatives are retained for detailed evaluation: the Proposed Action and the No 

Action Alternative. To define the issues and provide a clear basis for choice between these 

two alternatives, Table ES-2 compares the alternatives with respect to the ability to meet the 

identified purpose and need, technical and economic factors, passenger terminal LOS, 

environmental impacts, and regulatory requirements. 

ES-12 

RDD/102790005 (NLH4349.DOCX) 

TBG012712153950RDD


TABLE ES-2 

Comparison of Alternatives Retained for Detailed Evaluation 

Alternatives 

Evaluation Criteria 

Ability to Meet Purpose and Need 

Replace Aging Infrastructure 

Respond to Changes in the Air 

Transportation System 

Enhance Operational Efficiency 

Technical and Economic Factors 

No Action 

Would not replace existing 

infrastructure. Renovation and 

rehabilitation efforts described in 

Section 3.1.2.1 would be required 

to maintain the existing facilities, 

but would not eliminate existing 

inefficiencies. 

Would not reconfigure terminals to 

support current and future air 

service patterns. 

Would continue redundancy in 

passenger handling facilities and 

inefficient aircraft circulation in the 

terminal area. 


Would replace existing 

infrastructure with modern, 

energy efficient facilities. 

Would provide flexible facilities 

to meet functional needs of the 

current air transportation system 

and avoid functional 

obsolescence in the future. 

Would reduce redundancy in 


enhance the efficiency of aircraft 

circulation in the terminal area. 

Average Aircraft Delay (minutes per 

operation) 

Annual Cost of Aircraft Delay and 

Taxi In and Out Time 

Roadway LOS (peak period, on 

arrival and departure roadways) 

4.55 (2025). 4.04 (2025). 

$153 million (2025). $145 million (2025). 

E/F – very unacceptable (2025). A/B – good (2025). 

Passenger Terminal LOS 

Public Circulation Areas – 

Industry Standard = 20.5 ft 2 /PHP a 

Departure Lounge Areas – 


15.7 ft 2 /PHP (28 MAP, about 

2025). 


2025). 


2025). 


2025). 

Baggage Claim Areas – 

6.4 ft 2 /PHP (28 MAP, about 2025). 9.3 ft 2 /PHP (28 MAP, about 

Industry Standard = 17.2 ft 2 /PHP a 2025). 

1,420 ft 2 /PHP (28 MAP, about 

Security Screening Checkpoints – 

1,750 ft 2 /checkpoint b 

Industry Standard = 

2025). 


2025). 

Public Restrooms – 


Industry Standard = 3.5 ft 2 /PHP c 2025). 


Retail and Food/Beverage 

10,000 ft 2 /MEP c 

Concessions – Industry Standard = 2025). 


2025). 

RDD/102790005 (NLH4349.DOCX) 

TBG012712153950RDD 

ES-13


TABLE ES-2 


Alternatives 


Environmental Impacts 

Air Quality – Operations 

No Action 

Would have higher annual 

emissions from aircraft and surface 

vehicle operations than the 



Would have lower annual aircraft 

and surface vehicle emissions 

than the No Action Alternative. 

Air Quality – Construction Not applicable. Construction emissions would 

be less than de minimis. 

Water Quality 

Energy Supply, Natural Resources, 

and Sustainable Design – 

Building Efficiency 



Aircraft Fuel Use 

Regulatory Requirements 

Stormwater Discharge Permit 

Revision 

Continued compliance with water 

discharge permit requirements 

would maintain water quality 

standards. 

Would continue use of old, 

inefficient terminal buildings. 

Not applicable. 

Continued compliance with 

UPDES Permit No. UT0024988. 


water discharge permit 

requirements would maintain 

water quality standards. 

Would increase building 

envelope, but would also 

increase energy efficiency. 

Would reduce fuel consumption 

compared to the No Action 

Alternative. 

Update UPDES Permit 

No. UT0024988. 

a Source: International Air Transport Association, 2004 (LOS C [acceptable] assumed) 

b Source: Transportation Security Administration, 2010 

c Source: de Neufville and Odoni, 2003 

Notes: 

ft 2 = square feet 

MAP = million annual passengers (enplaned and deplaned) 

PHP = peak hour passenger 

UPDES = Utah Pollutant Discharge Elimination System 

The No Action Alternative would not meet the purpose and need because it would not 

replace aging infrastructure, enhance the operational efficiency of the Airport, or respond to 

changes in the air transportation system. The No Action Alternative would be inferior to the 

Proposed Action Alternative with respect to all technical and economic factors, and 

passenger LOS. Although construction of the Proposed Action would generate short-term 

air quality impacts, these would not be significant and would be offset in the long term by 

reduced emissions from aircraft and surface vehicle operations. The Proposed Action would 

have minimal effect on other natural environmental resources because the project is located 

in a previously developed area served by adequate stormwater conveyance and treatment 

facilities. The Proposed Action Alternative would have no effect on the human environment 

through changes in noise exposure, surface traffic, or land use. 

ES-14 

RDD/102790005 (NLH4349.DOCX) 

TBG012712153950RDD


Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 

The setting of the Proposed Action is intensively developed and isolated from surrounding 

natural environmental features and urban development, as illustrated by the project area 

shown in Exhibit ES-5. In addition, the Proposed Action Alternative would not differ from 

the No Action Alternative with respect to the volume or distribution of aircraft operations 

or surface traffic. The proposed terminal redevelopment would slightly increase the amount 

of impervious surface, but the resulting increase in stormwater runoff would be 

accommodated by the existing and planned drainage system and would continue to meet 

permit requirements. For these reasons, the Proposed Action would have minimal effects on 

the natural and human environments. Summaries of the impacts on individual resources 

follow. 

Air Quality 

The proposed redevelopment of the terminal complex would reduce congestion and delay 

for aircraft on the taxiways and ramps surrounding the terminal complex and for surface 

vehicles on the terminal roadway system. As a result, air emissions from aircraft and 

vehicles would be reduced compared to the No Action Alternative. 

In addition, the existing terminal complex does not take advantage of energy-efficient 

technologies and designs developed over the last 50 years. New terminal facilities would 

incorporate more energy-efficient design and materials and would be built to U.S. Green 

Building Code Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) Silver standards. 

The new facilities are expected to reduce energy consumption and associated air emissions 

compared to the No Action Alternative. 

Redevelopment of the terminal complex would entail the demolition of existing structures, 

as well as the construction of new structures, airfield pavement, and roads. Although this 

construction activity would generate air emissions, those emissions would be well below the 

de minimis levels that would require a conformity demonstration under the General 

Conformity Rule. 

Water Quality 

Redevelopment of the terminal complex would largely be restricted to areas that are 

currently paved or otherwise developed impervious surfaces, and would not materially 

increase the amount or alter the nature of surface water runoff. The new terminal complex 

would require paving about 60 acres of currently undeveloped area, which represents an 

increase of about 4.7 percent in the Airport’s existing impervious surface. The current mix of 

development and activities in this area, and the level of such activities, would remain the 

same as under the No Action Alternative. Consequently, the quality of the water flowing 

from these surfaces would remain essentially unchanged. 

The Airport’s network of drainage infrastructure has been designed to accommodate the 

increased stormwater runoff while continuing to meet the water quantity and quality limits 

incorporated in its UPDES permit and Salt Lake County Flood Control permit. Continued 

compliance with these permits would preclude significant degradation of receiving waters. 

RDD/102790005 (NLH4349.DOCX) 

TBG012712153950RDD 

ES-15

W 

2670 N 

2200 

32 00 W 

2100 N 

16 R 

16 L 

C ORRA L LN 

1700 N 

17 

MORTON DR 

HAROLD GATTY DR 

AMELIA EARHART DR 

WRIGHT 

BROTHERS DR 

34 L 

TERMINAL DR 

§¨¦ 215 

§¨¦ 80 35 

100 N 

14 

34 R 

32 

C ST 

700 N 

NORTH TEMPLE ST 

1 95 0 W 

150 S 

5200 W 

2650 

W 


Project Area 

0 750 1,500 3,000 Feet 

\\JAFAR\PROJ\SLC_405943\MAPFILES\AFFECTEDENVIRONMENT\PROJECTAREAMAP.MXD SSAVAGE1 04/16/2012 10:34:57 AM 

¹ 

Exhibit ES-5 Project Area 




Floodplains 

The project area is located outside regulated floodplains. The proposed terminal 

redevelopment would add 60 acres of impervious surface, which would increase the 

amount of impervious surface at the Airport by 4.7 percent. This increase is within the water 

discharge quantity permitted for the Airport and could be accommodated by the existing 

storm drainage facilities; therefore, no impact to floodplain capacity is expected. 

Wetlands 

Although wetlands are present at and adjacent to the Airport, the proposed terminal 

redevelopment would not directly or indirectly affect wetlands. The proposed 

redevelopment would include three areas, totaling 60 acres, that are not already paved or 

otherwise developed. The 2005 delineation of the Airport’s wetlands (SLCDA, 2005) 

included a survey of the project area, generally the area between Runways 16R/34L and 

16L/34R, because the area had been disturbed during previous Airport expansion, resulting 

in modified wetlands hydrology and soils. In approving this document, the U.S. Army 

Corps of Engineers did not suggest revisiting this area. As noted previously, the Proposed 

Action would not materially alter the quality or volume of water flowing from the Airport 

into the surrounding waterways. Therefore, the Proposed Action would not indirectly affect 

wetlands adjacent to the Airport. 

Biotic Resources 

The FAA Desk Reference (FAA, 2007a) defines “biotic resources” as the types of flora 

(plants) and fauna (for example, fish, birds, reptiles, amphibians, marine mammals, and 

coral reefs) in a particular area. The term also includes rivers, lakes, wetlands, forests, 

upland communities, and other habitat types supporting the flora and the aquatic and avian 

fauna. The project area is largely paved or otherwise developed, and contains little or no 

natural vegetation and limited landscaped vegetation. Although the new terminal complex 

would require paving about 60 acres of currently undeveloped area, this area has been 

graded and is surrounded by active aircraft movement areas and/or roadways. 

Federally Listed Endangered or Threatened Species 

The factors limiting the potential impacts to biotic resources from the alternatives under 

consideration also limit their potential effects on federally listed endangered or threatened 

species. As stated above, the project area is largely paved or otherwise developed, and 

contains little or no natural vegetation and limited landscaped vegetation. In addition, the 

project area does not contain federally designated critical habitat for any listed species. 

Hazardous Materials 

A records review conducted through Environmental Data Research, Inc., identified six 

incidents involving hazardous waste in the project area. All but one record have been closed 

by regulatory agencies. The one open incident involves the 1993 closure of a rental car 

company’s leaking underground storage tank near the proposed rental car QTA facility. 

Contaminated soil was removed, but residual groundwater contamination could remain at 

the site, so the record continues to be administered by the Utah Department of 

Environmental Quality (UDEQ), Division of Environmental Response and Remediation. 

Contractors excavating soils near this one site could encounter low amounts of soil 

RDD/102790005 (NLH4349.DOCX) 

TBG012712153950RDD 

ES-17


contamination, as well as contaminated groundwater. Best management practices would be 

established to minimize hazardous materials risks to contractors and members of the public. 

Construction crews would likely bring fuel, cleaning solvents, paints, and raw materials 

onsite to build the proposed improvements. Proper handling, storage, and disposal of these 

materials, as required in bid specifications, would prevent adverse effects on the 

environment. 

Solid Waste 

Solid waste generation and disposal within the replacement terminal would remain 

essentially the same for either alternative. Solid waste would continue to be disposed of at 

the Salt Lake Valley Landfill by Waste Management of Utah. This landfill is a permitted 

Class I facility that is able to accept municipal waste, commercial solid waste, small-quantity 

household hazardous waste, industrial waste, asbestos waste, and infectious waste. 

According to data from UDEQ, Division of Solid and Hazardous Waste, the landfill has a 

remaining capacity of 450 acres or 29 million tons (UDEQ, 2010b). On the basis of current 

and historical disposal rates and the available capacity, the Salt Lake Valley Landfill is 

anticipated to have a remaining life of 25 years. 

Energy Supply, Natural Resources and Sustainable Design 

The TRP would increase the square footage of terminal and concourse space by about 

62 percent, compared to the No Action Alternative. However, the project would replace old, 

inefficient facilities with new facilities employing current technologies to save energy and 

reduce the use of natural resources, such as water. To be consistent with Salt Lake City 

policy, these new facilities would be built to LEED Silver standards. In its preliminary 

planning, the project team identified opportunities to enhance sustainability in the following 

areas: (1) aviation benchmarking, (2) designing for climate, (3) water conservation, 

(4) energy conservation, (5) electrical consumption, and (6) materials and waste. As the 

program enters the design phase, the project team will incorporate these opportunities. 

Historic Properties 

The potential impacts of the alternatives under consideration on historic resources are 

limited, because the potentially historic Airport buildings were extensively remodeled in the 

past and almost nothing remains from the original structures. A confirmation letter from the 

Utah State Historic Preservation Office (2012) concurred that no historic resources would be 

affected within the project area. 

Noise 

The FAA Desk Reference states that, “Airport development actions that change airport 

runway configurations, aircraft operations and/or movements, aircraft types using the 

airport, or aircraft flight characteristics may affect existing and future noise levels.” As 

noted earlier, the Proposed Action and No Action Alternatives would experience the same 

level of aircraft activity through the forecast period. Consultation with FAA Airport Traffic 

Control Tower staff indicates that, as at most airports, the SLC runways are assigned on the 

basis of the direction from which aircraft arrive or to which they are departing, not 

according to their assigned terminal gates. The Proposed Action would not change Airport 

runway configurations, aircraft operations and/or movements, aircraft types using the 

ES-18 

RDD/102790005 (NLH4349.DOCX) 

TBG012712153950RDD


Airport, or aircraft flight characteristics that might affect existing and future noise levels 

and, therefore, would not cause noise impacts. 

Compatible Land Use 

The FAA Desk Reference states that, “If the noise analysis described in Chapter 17 of this 

Desk Reference concludes that there is no significant noise impact, a similar conclusion 

usually may be made about compatible land uses.” As noted earlier, the alternatives under 

consideration would not differ with respect to noise impacts; this supports the conclusion 

that the Proposed Action would not cause compatible land use impacts. 

Light Emissions and Visual Impacts 

Neither the Proposed Action nor the No Action Alternative would create an annoyance to 

local communities near construction activities or operations. The proposed project would be 

located in the Airport’s terminal complex, which is completely within Airport property and 

surrounded by existing Airport development that includes a wide variety of aeronauticalrelated 

light sources. Operation of the Proposed Action would be similar to existing 

operations with respect to roadway lighting, parking garage lighting, and terminal facility 

lighting. 

U.S. Department of Transportation Section 4(f) Resources 

Neither the Proposed Action nor the No Action Alternative would directly or indirectly 

affect land subject to U.S. Department of Transportation Section 4(f). The proposed project is 

completely within Airport property, which does not contain the resources listed under 

Section 4(f). The closest Section 4(f) resource to the project area is Wingpointe Golf Course, 

which is located south of the project area at the entrance to the Airport from Interstate 80. 

Wingpointe Golf Course is owned by the Airport. No further analysis or mitigation is 

planned. 

Social Impacts 

Neither the Proposed Action nor the No Action Alternative would pose health or safety 

risks to children, affect homes or off-Airport businesses, divide or disrupt communities, or 

change local surface transportation patterns. The proposed project would remain on Airport 

property, mostly on previously developed land. The proposed TRP would occupy 

essentially the same area as the existing terminal complex. 

The Proposed Action could cause short-term impacts to Airport retail and concessions by 

necessitating temporary relocations and shifting of retail/concession locations during 

construction activities. In the longer term, the increased terminal and concourse space 

would provide an opportunity for more retail and concession space that could generate 

additional economic activity. No further analysis or mitigation is planned. 

Environmental Justice 

Neither the Proposed Action nor the No Action Alternative would affect minority or lowincome 

populations. The project would be located completely within Airport property and 

would not disrupt local communities or any population in the Salt Lake City area. As noted 

previously, the Proposed Action would not alter the number, types, or flight paths of 

RDD/102790005 (NLH4349.DOCX) 

TBG012712153950RDD 

ES-19


aircraft flying in and out of the Airport and would not change noise levels, compared to the 

No Action Alternative. No further analysis or mitigation is planned. 

Induced Socioeconomic Impacts 

The No Action Alternative and the Proposed Action would accommodate the same level of 

passenger, aircraft, and vehicular activity, indicating that the Airport’s long-term economic 

impact on the community would be similar in either case. The proposed TRP would 

increase the area available for retail and concessions by about 10 percent. Assuming the 

same level of employment and revenue per square foot, the additional economic impact 

would be beneficial, but would have no material effect on the regional economy. The 

Proposed Action would not, therefore, generate growth in excess of that supported by the 

No Action Alternative. In addition, because both alternatives would continue to use the 

same entrance points, the Proposed Action would not cause shifts in population movement. 

The Proposed Action would replace old, inefficient structures with new facilities 

incorporating modern energy and water conservation concepts. These new facilities could 

reduce the demand for public services relative to the No Action Alternative. 

The Proposed Action could cause short-term, construction related disruption to Airport 

retail and concessions because retailers and concessionaries would be relocated and shifted, 

depending on the location of construction activities. In the longer term, as noted previously, 

the increased terminal and concourse space would provide opportunities for more retail and 

concession space that could generate additional economic activity. No further analysis or 

mitigation is planned. 

Cumulative Effects 

The previous discussions of environmental consequences show that the impacts of the 

proposed TRP would be limited to the Airport. Exhibit ES-5 shows that the project area is 

separated from the surrounding area by major Airport and highway infrastructure. Because 

the project area is geographically isolated, the investigation of past, present, and reasonably 

foreseeable future actions focuses on actions within the Airport boundaries. A review of the 

available NEPA documentation for the past and present projects at SLC shows that only a 

few projects would have the potential to contribute to cumulative effects when considered 

in combination with the Proposed Action. In general, the potential contributions to 

cumulative impacts consisted of surface water, stormwater, and air quality effects from 

construction activity. The impacts of these actions would not exceed thresholds of 

significance for any resource when considered in combination with the Proposed Action. 

Similarly, a review of project descriptions for planned Airport projects indicates little 

potential for future projects to exceed thresholds of significance for any resource when 

considered in combination with the Proposed Action. 

ES-20 

RDD/102790005 (NLH4349.DOCX) 

TBG012712153950RDD

Contents 

Page 

Chapter 

Executive Summary ...................................................................................................................... ES-1 

Acronyms and Abbreviations ......................................................................................................... ix 

1 Purpose and Need .............................................................................................................. 1-1 

1.1 Purpose and Need Statement ............................................................................... 1-1 

1.2 Problems with Existing Aging Infrastructure .................................................... 1-2 

1.2.1 Maintenance and Rehabilitation ............................................................. 1-4 

1.2.2 Energy Efficiency ....................................................................................... 1-4 

1.2.3 Current Seismic Design Standards ......................................................... 1-4 

1.2.4 Existing Levels of Service ......................................................................... 1-6 

1.3 Respond to Changes in the Air Transportation System .................................... 1-6 

1.3.1 Changing Patterns of Air Service ............................................................ 1-7 

1.3.2 Changing Facility Requirements ............................................................. 1-9 

1.4 Enhance Operational Efficiency ........................................................................... 1-9 

1.4.1 Aircraft Circulation ................................................................................... 1-9 

1.4.2 Vehicular Circulation .............................................................................. 1-10 

1.5 Aviation Demand Forecasts ................................................................................ 1-11 

1.5.1 Historical Aviation Activity ................................................................... 1-11 

1.5.2 Federal Aviation Administration Terminal Area Forecast ................ 1-11 

1.5.3 Recommended Forecast .......................................................................... 1-14 

2 Proposed Action .................................................................................................................. 2-1 

2.1 Terminal Redevelopment Program ..................................................................... 2-1 

2.1.1 Aircraft Gates ............................................................................................. 2-3 

2.1.2 Passenger Terminal Space ........................................................................ 2-3 

2.1.3 Parking and Rental Car Facilities ............................................................ 2-4 

2.1.4 Roadways and Associated Infrastructure .............................................. 2-5 

2.1.5 Central Utility Plant .................................................................................. 2-6 

2.1.6 Relocated Light Rail Station ..................................................................... 2-6 

2.2 Development Phasing ............................................................................................ 2-7 

2.3 Consistency with the Airport Layout Plan ......................................................... 2-7 

3 Alternatives.......................................................................................................................... 3-1 

3.1 Range of Potential Alternatives ............................................................................ 3-1 

3.1.1 Terminal Development Alternatives ...................................................... 3-1 

3.1.2 Other Salt Lake City International Airport Alternatives ..................... 3-9 

3.1.3 Non-Salt Lake City International Airport Alternatives ..................... 3-10 

3.2 Alternatives Eliminated from Detailed Consideration ................................... 3-12 

3.3 Evaluation of Reasonable Alternatives ............................................................. 3-13 

3.3.1 Alternatives Considered in Detail ......................................................... 3-13 

3.3.2 Comparison of Reasonable Alternatives .............................................. 3-18 

RDD/102790005 (NLH4349.DOCX) 

TBG012712153950RDD 

III

Contents, Continued 

Page 

4 Affected Environment ....................................................................................................... 4-1 

4.1 Project Location ...................................................................................................... 4-1 

4.2 Human Environment............................................................................................. 4-4 

4.2.1 Existing Noise and Compatible Land Use ............................................ 4-4 

4.2.2 Historic Cultural Resources and U.S. Department of 

Transportation Act Section 4(f) ............................................................... 4-5 

4.2.3 Social and Socioeconomic Characteristics ............................................. 4-5 

4.3 Natural Environment ............................................................................................ 4-6 

4.3.1 Climate and Air Quality .......................................................................... 4-6 

4.3.2 Water Resources ...................................................................................... 4-10 

4.3.3 Biotic Resources ....................................................................................... 4-12 

4.3.4 Hazardous Materials and Solid Waste ................................................. 4-14 

4.3.5 Existing Hazardous Sites and Contaminated Properties .................. 4-15 

4.4 Past, Present, and Reasonably Foreseeable Future Actions ........................... 4-17 

4.4.1 Past Projects ............................................................................................. 4-17 

4.4.2 Current Projects ....................................................................................... 4-18 

4.4.3 Reasonably Foreseeable Future Projects .............................................. 4-18 

5 Environmental Consequences ......................................................................................... 5-1 

5.1 Air Quality .............................................................................................................. 5-2 

5.1.1 Regulatory Setting .................................................................................... 5-2 

5.1.2 Thresholds of Significance ....................................................................... 5-4 

5.1.3 Methodologies ........................................................................................... 5-5 

5.1.4 Environmental Impacts ............................................................................ 5-8 

5.1.5 Potential Mitigation ................................................................................ 5-13 

5.2 Water Quality ....................................................................................................... 5-13 

5.2.1 Regulatory Setting .................................................................................. 5-14 

5.2.2 Thresholds of Significance ..................................................................... 5-14 

5.2.3 Methodologies ......................................................................................... 5-14 

5.2.4 Environmental Impacts .......................................................................... 5-15 


5.3 Floodplains ........................................................................................................... 5-18 






5.4 Wetlands ................................................................................................................ 5-19 





IV 

RDD/102790005 (NLH4349.DOCX) 

TBG012712153950RDD


Page 


5.5 Biotic Resources .................................................................................................... 5-24 

5.5.1 Regulatory Setting ................................................................................... 5-24 





5.6 Federally Listed Endangered or Threatened Species ...................................... 5-27 






5.7 Hazardous Materials ............................................................................................ 5-30 






5.8 Solid Waste ............................................................................................................ 5-34 




5.8.4 Environmental Impacts of the Alternatives ......................................... 5-35 


5.9 Energy Supply, Natural Resources, and Sustainable Design ......................... 5-36 






5.10 Historic Properties ................................................................................................ 5-39 






5.11 Noise ....................................................................................................................... 5-42 

5.12 Compatible Land Use .......................................................................................... 5-43 

5.13 Light Emissions and Visual Effects .................................................................... 5-43 

5.14 U.S. Department of Transportation Section 4(f) Resources ............................ 5-43 

RDD/102790005 (NLH4349.DOCX) 

TBG012712153950RDD 

V


Page 

5.15 Social Impacts ....................................................................................................... 5-44 

5.16 Environmental Justice ......................................................................................... 5-44 

5.17 Induced Socioeconomic Impacts ........................................................................ 5-45 

5.18 Cumulative Effects ............................................................................................... 5-45 




5.18.4 Past, Present, and Reasonably Foreseeable Future Actions .............. 5-47 

5.18.5 Evaluation of Cumulative Effects ......................................................... 5-49 

6 Agency and Public Involvement ..................................................................................... 6-1 

6.1 Scoping .................................................................................................................... 6-1 

6.1.1 Agency Scoping Meeting ......................................................................... 6-1 

6.1.2 Public Information Meeting .................................................................... 6-2 

6.1.3 Results of Scoping ..................................................................................... 6-2 

6.2 Post-scoping Coordination ................................................................................... 6-3 

6.3 Public Hearing ........................................................................................................ 6-3 

7 List of Preparers.................................................................................................................. 7-1 

8 References ........................................................................................................................... 8-1 

Appendices 

A 

B 

C 

D 

E 

F 

G 

Technical Memorandum: Aviation Demand Forecasts 

Terminal Area Configuration and Construction Activities 

Environmental Data Resources, Inc., Database Search Report 

Air Quality 

Technical Memorandum: Salt Lake City International Airport – Drainage Impacts 

Historic, Architectural, Archaeological, and Cultural Resources 

Agency and Public Involvement 

VI 

RDD/102790005 (NLH4349.DOCX) 

TBG012712153950RDD


Page 

Tables 

1-1 Public Parking and Rental Car Deficiencies .................................................................... 1-7 

1-2 Terminal Deficiencies ........................................................................................................ 1-10 

1-3 Aircraft Delay and Taxi Time .......................................................................................... 1-10 

2-1 Comparison of Existing and Proposed Terminal Facilities ........................................... 2-3 

2-2 Comparison of Existing and Proposed Parking and Rental Car Facilities .................. 2-5 

2-3 Proposed Action Construction Steps ................................................................................ 2-8 

3-1 Alternatives Eliminated from Detailed Consideration ................................................ 3-13 

3-2 Comparison of Alternatives Retained for Detailed Evaluation .................................. 3-18 

4-1 National Ambient Air Quality Standards ........................................................................ 4-8 

4-2 Discharge Points ................................................................................................................ 4-12 

4-3 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Endangered, Threatened, and Candidate 

Species for Salt Lake County, Utah ................................................................................. 4-13 

4-4 Summary of Hazardous Materials Currently Used in Airport Operations .............. 4-15 

4-5 Summary of Past Environmental Categorical Exclusions at Salt Lake City 

International Airport ......................................................................................................... 4-17 

5-1 Stationary Source Emissions, 2011 .................................................................................... 5-6 

5-2 Stationary Sources and Related Activities ....................................................................... 5-7 

5-3 No Action Alternative Ongoing Construction Project Emissions ................................ 5-9 

5-4 No Action Alternative Mobile-source Emissions, Existing (2009), 2020, and 2025 .... 5-9 

5-5 Peak Year Construction Emissions, 2016 ....................................................................... 5-10 

5-6 Proposed Action Mobile-source Emissions, Existing (2009), 2020, and 2025 ............ 5-10 

5-7 Discharge Limitations and Monitoring Requirements ................................................ 5-15 

5-8 Endangered, Threatened, and Candidate Species for Salt Lake County, Utah ........ 5-28 

5-9 Environmental Data Resources, Inc., Records within the Proposed Action 

Footprint ............................................................................................................................. 5-32 

5-10 Summary of Past, Present, and Reasonably Foreseeable Future Actions .................. 5-49 

7-1 List of Preparers ................................................................................................................... 7-1 

RDD/102790005 (NLH4349.DOCX) 

TBG012712153950RDD 

VII


Page 

Exhibits 

1-1 Inefficiencies of the Existing Terminal Complex ............................................................ 1-3 

1-2 Annual Asset Preservation Costs ..................................................................................... 1-5 

1-3 Changes in Air Service Patterns ........................................................................................ 1-8 

1-4 Existing and Future Terminal Roadway Level of Service ........................................... 1-12 

1-5 Historical and Forecast Aviation Activity ..................................................................... 1-13 

2-1 Proposed Action .................................................................................................................. 2-2 

2-2 Airport Layout Plan – Terminal Area .............................................................................. 2-9 

3-1 Site Constraints .................................................................................................................... 3-3 

3-2 Historical Alternatives ....................................................................................................... 3-7 

4-1 Project Map .......................................................................................................................... 4-2 

4-2 Location Map ....................................................................................................................... 4-3 

4-3 Air Monitoring Stations in the Vicinity of the Airport .................................................. 4-9 

4-4 Project Water Bodies ......................................................................................................... 4-11 

4-5 Hazardous Record Locations .......................................................................................... 4-16 

5-1 New Impervious Surface ................................................................................................. 5-17 

5-2 Wetlands Delineation Input ............................................................................................ 5-21 

5-3 Project Area ........................................................................................................................ 5-48 

VIII 

RDD/102790005 (NLH4349.DOCX) 

TBG012712153950RDD

Acronyms and Abbreviations 

Airport 

ALP 

AST 

BIOTICS 

CAA 

CatEx 

CEQ 

CFR 

cfs 

CIP 

CO 

CUP 

dB 

DERR 

DNL 

DOT 

EDMS 

EDR 


Airport Layout Plan 

aboveground storage tank 

Biodiversity Tracking and Conservation System 

Clean Air Act 

Environmental Categorical Exclusion 

Council on Environmental Quality 

Code of Federal Regulations 

cubic feet per second 

Capital Improvement Plan 

carbon monoxide 

central utility plant 

decibel 

Utah Department of Environmental Quality, Division of 

Environmental Response and Remediation 

day-night average sound level 

U.S. Department of Transportation 

Emissions Dispersion Modeling System 

Environmental Data Resources, Inc. 

ESA Endangered Species Act of 1973 

FAA 

Federal Aviation Administration 

FAA Desk Reference Environmental Desk Reference for Airport Actions 

FEMA 

FONSI 

GA 

Governor’s Report 

HOK 

Federal Emergency Management Agency 

Finding of No Significant Impact 

General Aviation 

Economic Report to the Governor 

Hellmuth, Obata + Kassabaum, Inc. 

RDD/102790005 (NLH4349.DOCX) 

TBG012712153950RDD 

IX

ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS 

I-15 Interstate 15 



IATA 

ISR 

LEED 

LOS 

LTO 

LUST 

MAP 

MEP 

NAAQS 

NAS 

NBE 

NEPA 

NO 2 

NOx 

NPIAS 

NPCC 

O 3 

PCA 

PM 2.5 

PM 10 

QTA 

RAC 

SHPO 

SIP 

SLC 

SLCDA 

SO 2 

International Air Transport Association 

Indirect Source Review 

Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design 

level of service 

landing and take-off 

leaking underground storage tank 

million annual passengers 

million annual enplanements 

National Ambient Air Quality Standards 

National Airspace System 

narrow-body equivalent 

National Environmental Policy Act 

nitrogen dioxide 

oxides of nitrogen 

National Plan of Integrated Airport Systems 

North Point Consolidated Canal 

ozone 

pre-conditioned air 

particulate matter 2.5 microns in diameter and smaller 

particulate matter 10 microns in diameter and smaller 

quick-turn-around 

rent-a-car 

State Historic Preservation Office 

State Implementation Plan 



sulfur dioxide 

X 

RDD/102790005 (NLH4349.DOCX) 

TBG012712153950RDD

ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS 

TAF 

TGO 

TMDL 

ton/year 

TRP 

TSA 

UDEQ 

UPDES 

USACE 

USEPA 

USFWS 

USGBC 

USC 

UST 

UTA 

VOC 

WUS 

Terminal Area Forecast 

touch-and-go 

total maximum daily load 

ton(s) per year 


Transportation Security Administration 

Utah Department of Environmental Quality 

Utah Pollutant Discharge Elimination System 

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 

U.S. Green Building Code 

U.S. Code 

underground storage tank 

Utah Transit Authority 

volatile organic compound 

waters of the U.S. 

RDD/102790005 (NLH4349.DOCX) 

TBG012712153950RDD 

XI

CHAPTER 1 


Paragraph 706.b. of Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Order 5050.4B provides 

guidance on the content of the purpose and need section of Environmental Assessments 

(EA). Paragraph 706.b. recommends that the purpose and need be defined on the basis of 

the airport sponsor’s goals and objectives, and the FAA statutory objectives. Additionally, 

Paragraph 706.b. recommends that the purpose and need statement summarize the benefits 

of the project and describe the proposed time frame for carrying out the action. 

The purpose of the Terminal Redevelopment Program (TRP or Proposed Action) is to meet 

the current need to modernize the aging terminal complex at Salt Lake City International 

Airport (SLC or the Airport) and to respond to ongoing changes in the national air 

transportation system. This chapter describes the specific needs that will be met by the 

Proposed Action and provides supporting information on these needs, as follows: 

 

 

 

 

 

Section 1.1 – Purpose and Need Statement: Describes the purpose and need for the 

Proposed Action in the context of the FAA’s statutory mandate to provide for the safe, 

efficient, and secure operation of the National Airspace System (NAS). This section also 

describes the proposed federal actions and time frame for implementation. This 

statement is supported by the subsequent sections. 

Section 1.2 – Problems with Existing Aging Infrastructure: Describes the costs of 

maintaining the existing terminal complex, especially costs associated with ongoing 

maintenance requirements and energy consumption. In addition, the existing terminal 

buildings do not conform to current seismic design standards. 

Section 1.3 – Respond to Changes in the Air Transportation System: Explains that, 

because changes in the national air transportation system have altered the way terminals 

are used, the existing terminal complex no longer provides levels of service (LOS) 

consistent with industry standards. 

Section 1.4 – Enhance Operational Efficiency: Explains how the existing configuration 

decreases passenger convenience, necessitates redundant passenger and baggage 

handling facilities, and results in inefficient aircraft movement in the terminal area. 

Section 1.5 – Aviation Demand Forecasts: Summarizes the forecasts of aviation demand 

used to assess future requirements. This section also demonstrates that these forecasts 

comply with FAA guidelines for consistency with the FAA Terminal Area Forecast 

(TAF) for SLC. 

1.1 Purpose and Need Statement 

Much of the existing terminal complex at SLC was designed and built more than 50 years 

ago and, although it has been expanded and renovated during this period, the original 

structures and layout remain largely the same. These facilities were not designed to meet 

current standards of energy efficiency or seismic safety, and the age of these structures leads 

RDD/102790005 (NLH4349.DOCX) 1-1 

TBG012712153950RDD

CHAPTER 1 PURPOSE AND NEED 

to increased maintenance requirements and costs to the Airport and its users. In addition, as 

the airline and airport industry have experienced dramatic changes during the last 50 years, 

the existing terminal complex shown in Exhibit 1-1 has become functionally obsolete. 

Specifically, the Proposed Action would meet the following needs: 

 

 

 

Problems with Existing Aging Infrastructure. The existing terminal complex is 50 years 

old, requires extensive ongoing maintenance, is not energy efficient, does not provide 

current airline industry standard LOSs, and does not meet current seismic design 

standards. Section 1.2 provides additional information regarding the need to replace 

aging infrastructure. 

Respond to Changes in the Air Transportation System. Since the terminal facilities at 

SLC were planned and built, the aviation industry has experienced significant changes 

in the way airline passenger traffic is handled. The introduction of the hub and spoke 

system following airline deregulation in 1979 made the ability of passengers to transfer 

quickly from an arriving aircraft to a departing aircraft a key requirement. More 

recently, airports have had to increase the space allocated to meet increasingly stringent 

security requirements and changes in baggage handling and delivery demands. 

Growing pressure on public funding sources has increased the need to provide 

adequate, well-positioned space for retail concessions, both to generate revenue and to 

enhance passenger convenience. The advent of ticketless travel has decreased the area 

required for ticketing and check-in. The likelihood that air service will continue to 

evolve emphasizes the need to design flexible facilities to avoid functional obsolescence. 

Section 1.3 provides additional information regarding changes in the air transportation 

system since the terminals were planned and built. 

Enhance Operational Efficiency. The existing terminal configuration requires 

redundant facilities for passenger check-in and baggage screening, baggage claim, 

enplaning and deplaning curbsides, and associated mechanical systems. Section 1.4 

provides additional information regarding the need to enhance operational efficiency. 

The Salt Lake City Department of Airports (SLCDA), the Airport sponsor, proposes to begin 

construction of the Proposed Action in 2013 (design starting in 2012) and complete 

construction in about 2024. The sponsor is requesting the following actions from the FAA as 

the lead federal agency: 

 

 

 

 

FAA acceptance of the Final EA 

FAA issuance of a Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) 

FAA unconditional approval of the Airport Layout Plan (ALP) for the TRP 

Possible issuance of Airport Improvement Program grants for construction 

1.2 Problems with Existing Aging Infrastructure 

The advanced age of the existing facilities increases the effort and expense of operating and 

maintaining the terminal complex and, because these facilities are not as energy efficient as 

contemporary construction, increases energy consumption compared to modern terminal 

facilities. In addition, the existing facilities do not meet current seismic design standards. 

Finally, several components of the existing complex do not provide an adequate passenger 

1-2 RDD/102790005 (NLH4349.DOCX) 

TBG012712153950RDD



maintenance, is not energy efficient, and 

does not provide current industry 


Concourse layout 

contributes to airfield 

congestion, increased 

aircraft emissions, and 

increased fuel use. 

CONCOURSE 

INTERNATIONAL 

ARRIVALS BLDG 

TERMINAL 2 

TERMINAL 1 

CONCOURSE 

Terminal configuration requires redundant facilities for passenger 

check-in, passenger and baggage screening, baggage claim, enplaning 

and deplaning curbsides, and associated mechanical systems. 

Exhibit 1-1 Inefficiencies of the 

Existing Terminal Complex 



SLC\399292\Inefficiencies_TerminalComplex.ai MAR-12 ckm


LOS at present and will become more deficient over time. This section summarizes the 

effects of aging infrastructure on maintenance, energy consumption, and design 

requirements. 

1.2.1 Maintenance and Rehabilitation 

The recent Asset Preservation Study of the Airport (Jacobs Engineering, 2009) identified the 

seven types of maintenance and repair requirements not typically addressed in the course of 

normal operation and maintenance of the terminal building. The SLCDA would need to 

spend $61,584,148 to address the following identified needs (see Exhibit 1-2): 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Component Renewal. Projected replacement of a building system or system component 

as it reaches the end of its useful life. 

Cyclic Maintenance. Requirement that recurs based on normal wear patterns, such as 

painting, caulking, and carpet replacement. 

Deferred Maintenance. Items that currently are physically or operationally defective 

and have not been scheduled for corrective action or maintenance has been postponed 

because of lack of resources. 

Investigative. A special category for the segregation of items that need more precise 

definition before the specific deficiency can be determined and the corrective action 

identified. 

Life Cycle Maintenance and Repair. Components of an equipment asset that would 

require repair or replacement during the estimated design life of the asset. 

Preventive Maintenance. Scheduled inspections to determine the condition of building 

equipment and components; includes making minor adjustments and identifying 

potential problems. 

Safety. Items that need to be corrected immediately to prevent injury or accident. 

1.2.2 Energy Efficiency 

The existing terminal complex does not take advantage of energy-efficient technologies and 

designs developed during the last 50 years. New development offers opportunities to 

reduce energy consumption that could not be cost-effectively retrofitted into the existing 

terminal complex. Recognizing the growing concern for sustainable development and 

energy efficiency, Salt Lake City has adopted the policy that all public buildings owned 

and controlled by Salt Lake City Corporation be built or renovated using the U.S. Green 

Building Code (USGBC) Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) 

standards at the Certified level. This goal was updated to LEED Silver level certification in 

January 2006. 

1.2.3 Current Seismic Design Standards 

The asset preservation requirements described in Section 1.2.1 do not include improvements 

needed to meet current seismic design standards. The Airport is located in the intermountain 

fault zone and lies near the Salt Lake City Segment of the Wasatch fault. Geologic 

seismic hazard mapping indicates that this site could experience severe lateral ground 

1-4 RDD/102790005 (NLH4349.DOCX) 

TBG012712153950RDD

$16,000,000 

$14,000,000 

$12,000,000 

$10,000,000 

$8,000,000 

$6,000,000 

$4,000,000 

$2,000,000 

$0 

Years 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 

Source: Asset Preservation Study, Jacobs Engineering for the Salt Lake City Department of Airports, February 2009. 

LEGEND: 

CR = Component Renewal 

CY = Cyclic Maintenance 

DM = Deferred Maintenance 

IX = Investigative 

LR = Life Cycle Maintenance and Repair 

PM = Preventive Maintenance 

SF = Safety 

Totals 

Exhibit 1-2 Annual Asset Preservation Costs 



SLC\399292\AnnualAssetPreservation_v1.ai MAR-12 ckm


shaking during a major seismic event. In recent years, with heightened awareness of the 

seismic risk that exists in the Salt Lake valley, building officials have adopted more stringent 

building codes that require buildings to be designed and constructed to resist the shaking 

and lateral forces that are generated during an earthquake. Many of the buildings at SLC 

were built before the current building codes were adopted and could sustain significant 

damage during a large earthquake. The need for structural repairs to the existing terminal 

building after a major seismic event could be substantial, and the repairs could take months, 

if not years, to complete. 

Major renovations required to address the seismic deficiencies at the Airport would trigger 

the need to comply with seismic design standards incorporated in the current building code. 

Although meeting these seismic design standards would be consistent with the FAA’s 

mandate to ensure a safe NAS, this additional requirement would substantially increase the 

cost and disruption of renovations to the existing structures. 

1.2.4 Existing Levels of Service 

A 2003 terminal area capacity analysis (HNTB, 2003) determined that the following 

components of the existing terminal complex were at or approaching an undesirable LOS 2 : 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Security checkpoints passenger screening and queuing 

Meeter/greeter 3 waiting areas 

Departure lounges in Terminal Two 

Concourse circulation in Terminal Two 

Ticket counter circulation in Terminals One and Two (affected by Transportation 

Security Administration [TSA] baggage screening operation) 

Concessions in Terminal Two 

Rental car lobby counter, queuing and circulation 

At the time of the analysis (2002), the Airport accommodated 18.66 million annual 

passengers (MAP). Since then, passenger volumes have increased to 20.41 MAP. These 

deficiencies will become more severe in the future. A recent study of roadway, parking, and 

rental car facilities concluded that close-in public parking and rental car facilities were at or 

approaching capacity, as shown in Table 1-1. Over the next 10 years, the SLCDA will need 

to provide more than 1,600 additional garage parking spaces, nearly twice the number 

currently provided, and an additional 9 acres for rental car facilities, an increase of 

28 percent. 

1.3 Respond to Changes in the Air Transportation System 

In the 50 years since the current terminal complex was initially designed and built, changes 

in security requirements, airline operations, and airport funding have altered the functional 

requirements of airport passenger terminals in several important ways. The growth in 

passenger traffic described in Section 1.2.4 has intensified the problems caused by these 

functional changes. These functional changes cannot be accommodated within the existing 

2 Defined as LOS D – a poor LOS characterized by severe congestion, unstable flow, and undesirable delay. 

3 People meeting arriving passengers at the airport. 

1-6 RDD/102790005 (NLH4349.DOCX) 

TBG012712153950RDD


terminal structures. This section describes specific problems with the terminal, airside, and 

landside components of the passenger handling facilities at the Airport. 

TABLE 1-1 

Public Parking and Rental Car Deficiencies 

Facility 

Public Parking (spaces) 

Currently 

Available 

Demand 

2008 2013 2018 

Parking Garage 1,766 3,030 3,120 3,480 

Economy Surface Lots 10,040 7,070 7,280 8,120 

Rental Car Facilities (acres) 

Ready Return 6.9 9.5 9.7 10.9 

QTA Facility 6.6 10.0 10.2 11.5 

Service Center 18.3 16.1 16.5 18.5 

Total Rental Car Facilities 31.8 35.6 36.5 40.8 

Source: Jacobs Consultancy, 2010 

Notes: 

Red numbers indicate demand greater than current supply. 

QTA = quick-turn-around 

The existing terminal complex shown in Exhibit 1-1 was planned to facilitate passenger 

flows to and from individual, or “unit,” terminals. The resulting configuration of unit 

terminals and concourses limits the ability of the Airport to accommodate changing patterns 

in air service because the gates are divided among five different concourses tied to individual 

passenger processing facilities. This configuration also limits the options for allocating 

space in response to changing demand because functional areas are widely separated. 

1.3.1 Changing Patterns of Air Service 

Currently, about 44 percent of the passengers at SLC connect from one flight to another. 

Since 1980, this percentage has varied from as little as 33 percent to more than 60 percent 

(between 1987 and 1992) (HNTB, 2003, Table 1.2). Changes in the proportion of connecting 

and originating passenger place different demands on the terminal and landside facilities. 

The changing relationship between aircraft gates and passenger demand further illustrates 

the need for terminal facilities that can be adapted to changing conditions. 

Exhibit 1-3 shows that, since 1990, the types of aircraft providing passenger service at SLC 

and the number of passengers per aircraft have varied greatly, placing different types of 

demand on passenger handling facilities. As the proportion of regional or commuter carriers 

increases, the average number of passengers per aircraft decreases. Between 2001 and 2004, 

the number of passengers per aircraft decreased from 71 to 55, although total passenger 

throughput increased. This type of change alters the number and mix of gates required to 

accommodate aircraft and affects the demand for passenger handling facilities, including 

curbside, ticketing, security screening, concessions, departure hold lounges, and baggage 

claim. The existing terminal configuration limits flexibility in responding to changing 

RDD/102790005 (NLH4349.DOCX) 1-7 

TBG012712153950RDD

450,000 

400,000 

70 

350,000 

300,000 

65 

Annual Operations 

250,000 

200,000 

150,000 

60 

Passengers / Operation 

100,000 

55 

50,000 

0 

50 

1990 

1991 

1992 

1993 

1994 

1995 

1996 

1997 

1998 

1999 

2000 

2001 

2002 

2003 

2004 

2005 

2006 

2007 

2008 

2009 

Source: Appendix A, Technical Memorandum, Aviation Demand Forecasts, Salt Lake City International Airport 

Environmental Assessment, Tables 10 and 15, LeighFisher, August 2010. 

LEGEND: 

Air Carrier 

Commuter 

Total Commercial 

Passengers per Operation 

Exhibit 1-3 Changes in Air Service Patterns 



SLC\399292\AirServicePattern_v1.ai MAR-12 

ckm


industry practices. Consolidating passenger handling facilities would facilitate the development 

of flexible gate modules that could be reconfigured to accommodate different mixtures 

of aircraft sizes. 

1.3.2 Changing Facility Requirements 

In 1960, when Terminal One was built, passenger screening requirements did not exist. 

Passengers and the people meeting them or dropping them off (meeters/greeters) had 

access to all public areas, including departure lounges and concessions. After the 

introduction of security screening, only ticketed passengers were allowed past the screening 

checkpoint. This division of the terminal into “secure” and “non-secure” zones greatly complicated 

space planning in passenger terminals, creating the need to provide duplicate 

facilities in some cases. 

In 1995, the terminals provided less than 4,000 square feet of public security screening area, 

less than 0.5 percent of the total terminal area (HNTB, 1997, Tables 2.3 and 2.4). Over the 

years, the space required for screening increased, especially after the terrorist attacks of 

September 11, 2001. The recent terminal space program prepared for the TRP allocates more 

than 26,000 square feet for passenger and employee screening (HOK, 2010, Section 4), about 

13,000 square feet more than the terminal area provided in 1995. In contrast to increasing 

requirements for screening, the need for ticketing lobby space has been decreasing in recent 

years with the advent of electronic ticketing and the introduction of self-service ticketing 

kiosks. In 1995, about 18,000 square feet, or 1.8 percent of the total terminal area, were 

allocated to passenger ticketing or check-in. Current estimates of ticketing and check-in 

space required per peak hour enplaned passenger are nearly 30 percent lower than the 

terminals currently provide. 

These changes in the way that airports and airlines accommodate passengers, coupled with 

passenger activity growth over the last several decades, mean that the existing facilities no 

longer provide adequate passenger LOSs. The International Air Transport Association 

(IATA) publishes passenger LOS guidelines for airport terminal facilities that are accepted 

throughout the aviation industry. Table 1-2 compares current IATA guidelines with the 

existing terminal facilities at SLC and identifies existing and projected deficiencies. 

1.4 Enhance Operational Efficiency 

The existing terminal configuration distributes gates in five widely separated concourses in 

two domestic terminals and the International Arrivals Building (see Exhibit 1-1). This 

configuration reduces the Airport’s efficiency in accomplishing several important functions. 

1.4.1 Aircraft Circulation 

The current Airport layout places aircraft gates on a series of dead-end or cul-de-sac 

taxilanes. Aircraft arriving at or departing from the outer gates at the entrance to these 

taxilanes block aircraft using the inner gates, causing congestion and delay. Table 1-3 shows 

the average minutes of delay per operation and the average taxi time for air carrier aircraft 

at the Airport. At present (2009), air carrier aircraft at the Airport average 3.28 minutes of 

delay; this is expected to increase to 4.55 minutes per aircraft by 2025. Over the last 10 years, 

delays at the 35 busiest airports in the nation have averaged between 3 and 4 minutes, 

although individual airports have experienced substantially higher levels. To put the cost of 

RDD/102790005 (NLH4349.DOCX) 1-9 

TBG012712153950RDD


this delay in perspective, per operation, a minute of delay costs an average of about $24 for 

the aircraft currently operating at the Airport. As the number of aircraft operations grow, 

the total cost of delay will increase. By 2025, each minute of excess delay per operation 

would cost aircraft operators a total of over $11 million per year. 

TABLE 1-2 

Terminal Deficiencies 

Functional Areas 

Industry Standard 

Available Area a 

Existing (2009) Future (2024) 

Public Circulation Areas (1) 20.5 b 22.0 15.7 

Departure Lounge Areas (1) 10.8 b 15.0 10.8 

Baggage Claim Areas (1) 17.2 c 8.9 6.4 

Security Screening Checkpoints (2) 1,750 d 1,420 1,420 

Public Restrooms (3) 3.5 b 2.9 2.1 

Retail and Food/Beverage Concessions (3) 10,000 e 6,910 4,950 

a Area per person (unless otherwise noted) 

b Square feet per peak hour passenger 

c Square feet per peak hour deplaned passenger 

d Square feet per checkpoint 

e Square feet per million enplaned passengers 

Sources: 

(1) IATA, 2004 (LOS C assumed) 

(2) TSA, 2010 

(3) de Neufville and Odoni, 2003 

Note: 

Red numbers indicate less than industry standard LOS. 

TABLE 1-3 

Aircraft Delay and Taxi Time 

Activity 

Level 

Average Delay 

(minutes per operation) 

Average Taxi Time 

(minutes) 

Departures Arrivals Average Taxi Out Taxi In Overall 

2009 3.4 3.16 3.28 11.68 5.54 8.6 

2020 3.73 4.08 3.91 11.96 5.57 8.77 

2025 4.52 4.8 4.55 12.49 5.56 9.02 

Source: LeighFisher, 2012 

1.4.2 Vehicular Circulation 

The existing Airport entry and exit roadways provide adequate capacity to accommodate 

the estimated demand through the forecast period. Entry and exit roadways are expected to 

operate at LOS C, an acceptable LOS, or better through 2025. In contrast, the Terminal Two 

Arrivals curbside, Terminal Two Departures curbside, and rental car exit and road operate 

at LOS D during both morning and afternoon peak periods. These conditions are expected 

to worsen to LOS E, an unsatisfactory operating condition, by 2025. Additionally, the 

through lanes on the Arrivals roadways at Terminal Two are expected to experience LOS F 

1-10 RDD/102790005 (NLH4349.DOCX) 

TBG012712153950RDD


conditions during both morning and afternoon peak periods, likely causing traffic queues 

extending into the Terminal One curbsides. Exhibit 1-4 shows the LOS analysis for the 

existing curbsides with traffic volumes for 2009, 2015, 2020, and 2025. 

1.5 Aviation Demand Forecasts 

FAA Order 5050.4B, Paragraph 706.b.(3), states the following: 

The Purpose and Need statement should be based on current aviation forecast 

data presented in an appendix to the EA. In developing an action’s Purpose and 

Need statement, the airport sponsor’s airport planners should coordinate with 

FAA and the responsible FAA. This coordination is necessary because the 

sponsor’s forecasts must be reasonably consistent with FAA’s Terminal Area 

Forecast (TAF). FAA uses the following guidelines to determine the acceptability 

of a sponsor’s forecasts. 

(a) A 5-year forecast should be within 10% of the TAF. 

(b) A 10-year forecast should be within 15% of the TAF. 

Exhibit 1-5 shows historical and forecast aviation activity at SLC. The following sections 

describe historical aviation activity and the current forecast of enplaned (departing) 

passengers and aircraft operations, and compare these forecasts to the TAF. Appendix A, 

Technical Memorandum: Aviation Demand Forecasts, provides more detailed information. 

1.5.1 Historical Aviation Activity 

SLC is one of 29 large hub airports serving the NAS (FAA, 2010a). It is the only commercial 

airport serving the air travel needs of the Salt Lake City metropolitan area and is the 

primary air carrier airport for the State of Utah, accounting for 99 percent of commercial air 

passengers in the state. The Airport is also a connecting hub for Delta Air Lines, which 

accounted for over 74 percent of the Airport’s enplaned passengers in 2009. In 2009, 

44 percent of the passengers traveling through SLC connected to other flights (LeighFisher, 

2010). Over the last 20 years, enplaned passengers and aircraft operations have experienced 

periods of growth and decline resulting from general economic conditions as well as airline 

service decisions. Between 1990 and 2009, passenger volumes at SLC increased more than 

70 percent, averaging 2.9 percent annually. Aircraft activity grew 23 percent during the 

same period, averaging 1.1 percent annually. Between 1996 and 2004, the number of 

enplaned passengers decreased, reflecting reductions in service by mainline and low-cost 

carriers and increased airfares. Since 2004, passenger traffic has generally followed enplaned 

passenger trends in the nation, but has also been affected by changes in airline service 

patterns at SLC. 

1.5.2 Federal Aviation Administration Terminal Area Forecast 

Each year, the FAA Office of Policy and Plans prepares and publishes the TAF, a forecast of 

aviation activity predicted to occur at the nation’s airports. The TAF is prepared to meet the 

budget and planning needs of the FAA and to provide information that can be used by state 

and local authorities, the aviation industry, and the general public. As shown in Exhibit 1-5, 

the 2009 TAF projects a return to growth beginning in 2010 and averaging 2.3 percent 

annually for enplanements and 1.8 percent annually for aircraft operations. These rates are 

similar to those experienced over the last 19 years. 

RDD/102790005 (NLH4349.DOCX) 1-11 

TBG012712153950RDD

2009 2015 

2020 2025 

Source: LF Traffic Analysis Technical Memorandum 

LOS A/B 

LOS C 

LOS D 

LOS E 

LOS F 

Exhibit 1-4 Existing and Future Terminal 

Roadway Level of Service 



SLC \399292\TerminalRoadway_LOEs.ai 

JAN-12 ckm

18 

16 

14 

En nplaned Pass sengers (milli ons) 

12 

10 

8 

6 

AllowableVariation 

fromTAF 

4 

- 

2 

Historical Forecast 

1990 2000 2009 2014 2019 2024 2030 

Historical SLC 2010 Forecast FAA 2010 TAF 

600 

500 

ions (thousa nds) 

Total Air rcraft Operat 

400 

300 

200 

AllowableVariation 

fromTAF 

100 

- 

Historical 

Forecast 

1990 2000 2009 2014 2019 2024 2030 

Historical SLC 2010 Forecast FAA 2010 TAF 

Source: Technical Memorandum, Aviation Demand Forecasts for Salt Lake City International Airport, LeighFisher, August 2010. 

Exhibit 1-5 Historical and Forecast Aviation Activity 



SLC \399292\Historical-ForecastAviation_v1.ai DEC-11 ckm


1.5.3 Recommended Forecast 

Although the dynamic nature of air transportation makes predicting aircraft and passenger 

activity complex, airport plans must be based on estimates of the future needs for each of 

the airport’s major functional areas (for example, airfield, terminal, landside, access 

roadways, cargo). FAA Advisory Circular 150/5070-6B, Airport Master Plans (FAA, 2005a), 

states that, “Forecasts of future levels of aviation activity are the basis for effective planning 

decisions in airport planning. These estimates are used to determine the need for new or 

expanded facilities.” 

FAA Order 5050.4B, Paragraph 504.b., stipulates that forecasts used in the National 

Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) process should be within 10 percent of the TAF at the 

5-year forecast period and within 15 percent at the 10-year forecast period. The base year for 

the forecasts used in this EA is 2009; the last full year of data before the start of the EA 

process. The 5- and 10-year comparisons fall at 2014 and 2019, respectively. Exhibit 1-5 

shows that these aviation demand forecasts closely parallel the FAA 2009 TAF for SLC. The 

enplaned passenger forecast is within 4.9 percent of the FAA 2009 TAF for 2014 and within 

3.0 percent for 2019. The enplaned passenger growth rate (an average increase of 2.2 percent 

per year between 2009 and 2030) is slightly lower than the rate forecast by the FAA in the 

2009 TAF. Similarly, the forecast of aircraft operations is within 0.3 percent of the FAA 2009 

TAF in 2014 and 2.0 percent in 2019. The forecast growth rate in total aircraft operations (an 

average increase of 1.4 percent per year between 2009 and 2030) is slightly lower than the 

rate forecast by the FAA in the 2009 TAF for the Airport. 

The FAA approved these forecasts for use in this EA in October 2010 (Luey, 2010, personal 

communication). Since that time, the FAA has updated the TAF. A review of the 

preliminary 2011 TAF provided by FAA (Luey, 2011, personal communication) shows that 

passenger and aircraft operations growth forecasts are generally consistent with those in 

earlier editions of the TAF. The preliminary forecasts are slightly lower than the previous 

TAF but remain well within the 10 percent and 15 percent ranges described above. 

1-14 RDD/102790005 (NLH4349.DOCX) 

TBG012712153950RDD

CHAPTER 2 


This chapter describes the TRP (also called the Proposed Action), which best meets the 

purpose and need described in Chapter 1 in accordance with NEPA. The SLCDA will also 

seek FAA’s unconditional approval of the ALP for the TRP. This chapter describes the 

Proposed Action as follows: 

 

 

Section 2.1 – Terminal Redevelopment Program: Describes the major components of 

the TRP consisting of aircraft gates, passenger terminal space, parking and rental car 

facilities, roadways and associated infrastructure, and the central utility plant (CUP). 

Section 2.2 – Development Phasing: Outlines the steps required to redevelop the 

terminal complex while maintaining passenger, aircraft, and surface vehicle traffic. 

 

Section 2.3 – Consistency with the Airport Layout Plan: Shows the ALP reflecting 

implementation of the Proposed Action. 

2.1 Terminal Redevelopment Program 

The Proposed Action (Exhibit 2-1) would consolidate separate passenger processing 

facilities into a single facility serving all concourses and gates and includes the following 

components: 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


Reconstruction of taxiways and ramps in the terminal complex as required to 

accommodate aircraft circulation in the reconfigured terminal area 


Replacement rental car facilities in the new parking garage, including new rent-a-car 

(RAC) counters, ready-return spaces, and a QTA facility 

A new remote service site for rental car offices and rental car storage areas, located south 

of the existing economy parking lot 


New CUP located west of the replacement parking garage 

RDD/102790005 (NLH4349.DOCX) 2-1 

TBG012712153950RDD

D 

C 

B 



TERMINAL 

RAC 

PARKING 

CUP 

QTA 

REMOTE SERVICE SITE 



Note: RAC = rental car facilities 

0 250 500 1,000 Feet 

\\JAFAR\PROJ\SLC_405943\MAPFILES\AFFECTEDENVIRONMENT\PROPOSEDACTION_ROADS.MXD SSAVAGE1 06/20/2012 10:29:09 AM 

¹ 

Exhibit 2-1 Proposed Action 



CHAPTER 2 PROPOSED ACTION 

2.1.1 Aircraft Gates 

In 2009, the base year for this EA, the Airport had about 80 narrow-body equivalent (NBE) 

gates 4 (the Airport now has 86 gates [SLC, 2011], 56 of which are served with loading 

bridges). The number of aircraft gates that would be provided at the end of construction 

would vary between 72 and 74 (about 76 NBE gates, all served with loading bridges), 

depending on the average size of the aircraft using the Airport. 

2.1.2 Passenger Terminal Space 

The proposed replacement terminal would consist of a 684,174-square-foot facility 

(Hellmuth, Obata + Kassabaum, Inc. [HOK], 2011) located south and west of the existing 

terminal complex and directly west of the existing parking garage (see Exhibit 2-1). The 

proposed terminal would consist of a central building consolidating security checkpoints, 

airline ticketing counters and offices, baggage claim and make-up areas, and other 

passenger processing facilities. As shown in Exhibit 2-1, this central processing facility 

would serve a series of new and existing concourses and replace the two existing unit 

terminals, in which multiple passenger processing facilities serve connected concourses. 

The Proposed Action includes a 397,985-square-foot South Concourse West and a 

300,471-square-foot South Concourse East. Projecting from South Concourse East would be 

connectors to renovated portions of existing Concourses B, C, and D. The connectors and the 

remaining portions of Concourses B, C, and D total 296,385 square feet. 

The terminal, concourses, and connectors in the Proposed Action would provide a net 

increase of 644,328 square feet, or 62 percent, compared to the existing facilities. Table 2-1 

compares the area of the passenger terminal and concourses that would be provided by the 

Proposed Action with existing conditions. 

TABLE 2-1 

Comparison of Existing and Proposed Terminal Facilities 

Area 

(square feet) 

Terminals and Concourses 

Existing 

Proposed Project 

Totals 1,034,689 a 1,679,017 b 

Terminals 679,153 c 684,174 

Concourses 355,536 994,843 d 

a Source: HNTB, 1997, Table 2.5 

Source: HOK, 2011 

Includes existing Terminal One and Terminal Two 

d Includes unfinished space under the concourse, at ground level (Terminal Building Development Concepts, 

September 9, 2011) 

4 Narrow-body equivalent gate” expresses the passenger handling capacity of an aircraft gate at a terminal in terms of the 




RDD/102790005 (NLH4349.DOCX) 2-3 

TBG012712153950RDD


The proposed terminal layout includes three levels: 

 

 

 

Level 1 – Level 1 would be at grade. Level 1 would include curbside lanes for 

passengers in commercial vehicles. This level would also include international baggage 

claim, employee security screening, and an inbound and outbound baggage handling 

system. Below Level 1 would be an area reserved for utilities. 

Level 2 – Level 2 would provide pedestrian bridges between the proposed parking 

garage and the terminal. The bridges would also provide grade-separated access to the 

arrivals curbside lanes to be used by motorists in private vehicles picking up deplaning 

passengers. This level would include domestic baggage claim, TSA security checkpoints, 

food courts and other retail concessions, and access to gate lounges located on the South 

Concourse. Level 2 would also provide the connection to the remaining existing 

concourses. The HOK Preliminary Plan (HOK, 2010) also shows a Level 2 mezzanine 

corridor for mechanical areas, airline support offices, and other airline uses. 

Level 3 – Level 3 is designated for airline ticketing and check-in counters. This level 

would provide the departure curbside lanes for motorists dropping off enplaning 

passengers. After ticketing, departing passengers would descend to Level 2 for security 

and access to gates. Airport administration offices would also be located on Level 3. 

2.1.3 Parking and Rental Car Facilities 

The proposed replacement parking garage would be a five-level building approximately 

400 feet deep and 900 feet wide, centered south of the new terminal building. Rental car 

facilities would be located on the first level of the parking garage. Two pedestrian bridges 

would connect the second level of the garage to the new terminal. The second level of the 

parking garage would be designated as short-term public parking and Levels 3, 4, and 5 

would be used for long-term public parking. These four levels of public parking would 

provide 3,636 parking spaces, compared to the 1,834 spaces provided in the existing parking 

garage. A new customer service building containing rental car customer service counters 

and office space would be located on the ground floor of a separate building on the north 

side of and immediately adjacent to the parking garage. The second floor of this building 

would contain the termini of the two pedestrian bridges, and provide space for the 

development of airline check-in counters and a station for the future light rail extension to 

the new terminal building. Depending on demand, the parking garage could be constructed 

in phases. 

Existing car rental facilities are located on the ground floor of the existing parking garage 

directly across from the terminal buildings. The new rental car facility would also be located 

on the first level of the new parking garage. Located south of the new parking garage would 

be the rental car QTA facility, which would be approximately 660 feet wide by 360 feet deep. 

Rental car employees would move the returned vehicles from the first level of the parking 

garage to the QTA facility, where the cars would be fueled and washed. The vehicles would 

then move to the short-term storage area located on the roof of the QTA facility. When 

needed, these “clean” vehicles would be moved from the short-term storage area back to 

Level 1, where they would be parked in “ready” car parking spaces. 

Additional facilities for rental car operations would be located south of the Airport’s 

economy parking lot. This area would become the rental car remote service site and would 

2-4 RDD/102790005 (NLH4349.DOCX) 

TBG012712153950RDD


provide space for vehicle maintenance bays, offices, and miscellaneous equipment storage. 

The area around the service buildings would be paved to provide an area for vehicle storage 

and fleet changeover. 

The existing parking garage is connected to Terminal One and Terminal Two. This existing 

parking garage provides 1,766 parking spaces on three levels. The existing economy parking 

lot is located south of the terminal complex and provides 10,040 stalls. The proposed QTA 

facility would be constructed on the northern portion of the economy lot and would 

displace between 1,000 and 1,100 existing surface parking spaces. 

Table 2-2 presents a comparison of the existing and proposed parking and rental car 

facilities. 

TABLE 2-2 

Comparison of Existing and Proposed Parking and Rental Car Facilities 

Parking and Roadways Existing a Proposed Project b 

Total Public Garage Parking Spaces 1,766 3,636 

Total Public Surface Lot Spaces 10,040 8,900 

Rental Car Parking Spaces (in garage) 805 1,170 

Rental Car QTA Facility Spaces NA 612 (stacking) 

a Source: SLCDA, 2010a 

b Source: HOK, 2011 

Note: 

NA = not applicable 

2.1.4 Roadways and Associated Infrastructure 

The Airport entrance roadway system would remain unchanged until reaching the exit 

leading to the new parking garage, which would be followed by successive exits for the new 

terminal. Entering motorists would continue to encounter the same sequence of decision 

points as today: (1) terminal versus commercial vehicles, (2) parking/rental cars versus 

terminal building, and (3) departures/check-in versus arrivals/baggage claim. The terminal 

curbside roadways would be new; however, most of the existing access and circulation 

roadways would remain unchanged. Outbound roadway sections could be widened to 

improve operations and accommodate forecast demands (HOK, 2010, Section 8). In 

addition, terminal roads would be temporarily relocated to accommodate terminal 

construction and road construction. 

2.1.4.1 Arrivals and Commercial Vehicle Roadway 

The at-grade arrivals roadway, adjacent to the ground floor of the terminal, would be used 

by commercial vehicles, such as courtesy vehicles, door-to-door vans, public transit buses, 

charter buses, taxicabs, and limousines picking up passengers. Private vehicle arrival lanes 

would be located next to the commercial vehicle lanes. There would be five at-grade lanes to 

serve motorists picking up arriving airline passengers. An overhead canopy would be 

installed over these curbside areas to protect passengers from rain and snow, and to 

provide shade. 

RDD/102790005 (NLH4349.DOCX) 2-5 

TBG012712153950RDD


2.1.4.2 Departure Roadway 

A five-lane, elevated roadway located at the terminal building passenger check-in level 

would provide curbside access for private vehicles, taxicabs, and limousines dropping off 

passengers. An overhead canopy would be installed over the departure lanes to protect 

passengers from the weather. This elevated departures roadway and curbside would 

replace the existing at-grade departure roadway. 

2.1.4.3 Garage and Rental Car Quick-turn-around Facility 

The new garage entrance roadway would have three lanes. All three lanes would diverge 

from the Airport entrance roadway and ascend a helical ramp to the second floor of the 

parking garage. Vehicles would enter the garage from the east and exit the garage to the 

west. 

The rental car QTA facility would be located south of the new parking garage. Dedicated 

roadways would link the parking garage to the QTA facility, providing a separate 

circulation path for moving rental cars between the parking garage and the QTA facility. 

2.1.5 Central Utility Plant 

A new CUP is included to serve the redeveloped terminal complex. The CUP would be 

located west of the proposed parking garage and southwest of the proposed terminal. The 

CUP would accommodate the following utilities: 

 

 

 

 

 

Chilled water 

Pre-conditioned air (PCA) glycol 

Thermal storage 

Steam boilers 

Standby power system 

The CUP layout would accommodate equipment throughout construction associated with 

the TRP. Construction of the facilities within the CUP would be phased into the future, 

when warranted. The size and storage capacity of the various components of the CUP 

would depend on the final systems selected for the terminal complex. Low-temperature 

chillers in the CUP would generate chilled glycol at approximately 20 degrees Fahrenheit to 

supply the cooling for PCA handlers at each gate. PCA air handlers typically deliver air for 

aircraft cooling at low temperatures, approximately 40 degrees Fahrenheit, and require 

cooling fluid near water’s freezing point. This cooling necessitates circulation of a mix of 

propylene glycol and water to the aircraft gates. The CUP would have a separate PCA 

glycol system with chillers, cooling towers, and pumps. Central, water-cooled chillers 

would be more energy efficient than point-of-use, air-cooled refrigeration systems at the 

PCA air handlers (HOK, 2010, Section 8). 

2.1.6 Relocated Light Rail Station 

According to the Utah Transit Authority (UTA), construction of the Airport TRAX Line was 

about 50 percent complete in January 2012 (UTA, 2012). The Airport TRAX Line will connect 

to Arena station at 400 West South Temple. UTA will construct the Airport Station just 

south of Terminal One, as shown on the current ALP. The Airport TRAX Line project also 

includes the construction of a welcome center within the Airport station. 

2-6 RDD/102790005 (NLH4349.DOCX) 

TBG012712153950RDD


The Proposed Action would reserve a suitable location adjacent to the QTA and parking 

garage facility for the future relocated light rail station. UTA is responsible for finalizing the 

design and is the responsible agency for funding the construction. The future light rail 

station relocation project is included in this EA because the final location of the light rail 

station is reflected on the ALP, making it a federal action subject to NEPA. 

2.2 Development Phasing 

Construction of the Proposed Action would entail redevelopment of the existing terminal 

complex at SLC while maintaining passenger, aircraft, and surface vehicle traffic. The TRP, 

which is estimated to be complete in about 2024, would be divided into 16 steps, as shown 

in Table 2-3. Appendix B shows the terminal area configuration and construction activities 

during these construction phases. 

2.3 Consistency with the Airport Layout Plan 

The Proposed Action represents partial build-out of the TRP reflected in the current ALP 

shown in Exhibit 2-2. The SLCDA, as the Airport sponsor, will request unconditional 

approval of an ALP amendment showing completion of the Proposed Action. Exhibit 2-2 

also shows that the Proposed Action is consistent with the long term terminal development 

plan for SLC reflected in the ALP. As shown in Exhibit 2-2, the ultimate future plan includes 

an additional North Concourse, which would be evaluated and designed when demand 

necessitates. 

RDD/102790005 (NLH4349.DOCX) 2-7 

TBG012712153950RDD


TABLE 2-3 

Proposed Action Construction Steps 

Step Construction/Demolition Number of Gates 

1 Renovation of Concourse A. 

Construction of QTA facility. 

Construction of rental car service site south of economy lot. 

2 Demolition of south portion of Concourse E and surrounding apron. 

Construction of CUP and entry and exit roadways to existing terminals, 

and demolition of support buildings around roadway. 

3 Construction of terminal and South Concourse West. 

Apron paving surrounding South Concourse West. 

Continued construction of CUP. 

4 Construction of rental car facility and parking garage. 

Continued construction of terminal and South Concourse West. 

5 Construction of entry and exit roadways between terminal and the rental 

car facility. 

 

Continued construction of rental car facility, parking garage, terminal, 

and South Concourse West. 

6 Demolition of roadways to existing terminals, Terminal One, 

Terminal Two, existing parking garage, and Concourse E. 

Paving of apron surrounding Concourse E. 

 

Renovation of walkways north of existing Terminal One and 

Terminal Two. 

7 There would be no renovation, demolition, or construction in Step 7. 70 (70–72) 

8 Construction of South Concourse East. 

Paving of apron south of South Concourse East. 

84 

72 

72 

72 

72 

72 

70 (70–72) 

9 There would be no renovation, demolition or construction in Step 9. 75 (75–77) 

10 Paving of apron north of South Concourse East. 

Demolition of existing walkways linking Concourses B, C, and D. 

75 (75–77) 

11 There would be no renovation, demolition or construction in Step 11. 78 (78–80) 

12 Construction of additional west concourse to South Concourse West. 

Paving of apron surrounding additional South Concourse West. 

77 (76–78) 

13 Renovation of remaining portion of existing Concourse B. 75 (75–77) 

14 Renovation of remaining portion of existing Concourse D. 

Demolition of existing International Arrivals Building. 

15 Renovation of remaining portion of existing Concourse B. 

Demolition of northern portion of existing Concourse B. 

16 Demolition of Concourse A. 

Paving of apron surrounding demolished area of Concourse A. 

74 (74–76) 

73 (73–75) 

72 (72–74) 

2-8 RDD/102790005 (NLH4349.DOCX) 

TBG012712153950RDD

Source: HNTB AutoCAD drawings, January 2009 

Existing Building 

Ultimate Terminal Development 

Exhibit 2-2 Airport Layout Plan – Terminal Area 



SLC \399292\FutureAirportPlan_v1.ai FEB-12 ckm

CHAPTER 3 

Alternatives 

This chapter discusses alternatives to the Proposed Action, consistent with the guidance 

provided in FAA Order 5050.4B, Paragraph 706.d., which describes the purpose of the 

alternatives analysis as follows: 

This section is based on the Purpose and Need statement. It is “the heart of the 

environmental document” (40 CFR [Code of Federal Regulations] 1502.14). 

This section compares the no action, the proposed action, and reasonable 

alternatives (if any), and each reasonable alternative’s expected environmental 

effects. 

As stated in Section 1.1, Purpose and Need Statement, the proposed improvements at the 

Airport are intended to replace aging terminal and landside infrastructure, respond to 

changes in the air transportation system, and enhance operational efficiency. The following 

sections describe the range of alternatives that could be considered to possibly meet these 

needs: 

 

 

 

Section 3.1 – Range of Potential Alternatives: Outlines the FAA’s guidance for 

establishing the range of alternatives to be considered and reviews a wide range of 

potential alternatives to the TRP. 

Section 3.2 – Alternatives Eliminated from Detailed Consideration: Explains why 

certain alternatives identified in Section 3.1 were not retained for detailed consideration. 

Section 3.3 – Evaluation of Reasonable Alternatives: Describes the alternatives retained 

for detailed consideration and compares these alternatives in terms of environmental, 

operational, and economic factors. 

3.1 Range of Potential Alternatives 

A wide range of alternatives has been considered to meet the needs identified in Chapter 1. 

These alternatives include ways to achieve the stated purpose and need that are within the 

sponsor’s or FAA’s purview as well as those outside the FAA’s jurisdiction. Alternatives 

within the purview of the SLCDA and FAA include development of other terminal 

concepts. Other types of alternatives, such as demand management, the use of other 

airports, or the use of other modes of transportation that may reduce the need for 

improvements at the Airport, are not within the control of the SLCDA or the FAA. 

3.1.1 Terminal Development Alternatives 

As the transfer point between surface and air transportation, passenger terminals must be 

easily accessible from the surface transportation systems and the airfield circulation system. 

At a major airport, such as SLC, the area required for passenger handling facilities, automobile 

access and parking, and airfield circulation is extensive. The existing terminal 

complex at SLC is well located in all of these respects. Although other sites on or adjacent to 

the Airport might be considered for a replacement terminal complex, no other site offers 

similar benefits. This section describes the major constraints limiting the range of potential 

RDD/102790005 (NLH4349.DOCX) 3-1 

TBG012712153950RDD

CHAPTER 3 ALTERNATIVES 

terminal sites at the Airport and examines the effects of these constraints on possible 

alternatives to the existing site. 

3.1.1.1 Constraints to Terminal Development 

Exhibit 3-1 shows the major site constraints limiting terminal development options at SLC. 

These constraints include surrounding transportation facilities and urban development as 

well as the existing runway system. Altering this development pattern sufficiently to 

accommodate a new terminal complex would entail substantial additional costs and impacts 

to the human and/or natural environment. The following discussion reviews these planning 

considerations for specific areas in and around the Airport: 

 

 

 

 

Size of Area Needed and Separation from Existing Runways. The existing terminal 

complex, shown as Area A in Exhibit 3-1, includes the terminal buildings (shown as 

Airport buildings) as well as the associated roadways, parking facilities, and airfield 

circulation areas (shown as Airport paving). This area must also provide space for the 

taxiway system serving the runways. 

Airfield Circulation. As noted previously, the terminal complex must be easily 

accessible from the runways used by commercial aircraft. At SLC, passenger aircraft 

primarily use the two longest parallel runways on either side of the terminal complex. A 

terminal location between two primary runways (Areas A and B in Exhibit 3-1) would 

be well located with respect to airfield access and circulation. Locating terminals outside 

these parallel runways would cause a substantial increase in ground taxi time for about 

half of the aircraft operations, and would likely create additional delays because aircraft 

using the more distant runway would have to taxi long distances around the closer 

runway or wait for opportunities to cross the closer runway. 

Proximity to Access Roadways. As an intermodal facility, a passenger terminal must 

provide access to and from the regional surface transportation network. Exhibit 3-1 

shows that the existing terminal complex is served by a system of exit and entrance 

ramps on Interstate 80 (I-80), which is located near the interchange with Interstate 215 

(I-215). This existing network of interstate highways and access ramps provides easy 

access to the Airport from anywhere in the Salt Lake City metropolitan area. As shown 

in Exhibit 3-1, Area A is already served by the existing freeway entrance and exit ramps. 

Surrounding Development, Infrastructure, and Environmental Factors. A new 

terminal location would entail either development of previously undeveloped areas or 

redevelopment of existing facilities. The areas north and west of the existing terminal 

complex (Areas B and D in Exhibit 3-1) are generally undeveloped; these areas include 

water bodies and wetlands that would require substantial modification. Areas south of 

the terminal complex include an interstate highway and associated entrance and exit 

ramps and several water bodies. Terminal development to the south (Area F in 

Exhibit 3-1) would, therefore, require relocating major transportation facilities and 

substantially altering water bodies. Exhibit 3-1 also shows that Area C, east of the 

terminal complex, is already occupied by Airport uses and that Area E, farther east, is 

occupied by the Airport, General Aviation (GA), and urban development. Displaced 

Airport facilities would need to be relocated elsewhere on the Airport property. 

Displaced off-Airport development would be acquired and might be relocated 

anywhere in the region. 

3-2 RDD/102790005 (NLH4349.DOCX) 

TBG012712153950RDD

B 

215 

D 

A 

C 

E 

C 

80 

F 


Airport Building 

Water Body 

Airport Pavement 

Air Carrier Runway 

GA Runway 

Air Carrier Runway Circulation 

Off-Airport Development 

Interstate Highway 

Major Airport Access Route 

Exhibit 3-1 Site Constraints 



SLC\399292\SLCAirport\SiteConstraints.ai NOV-10 ckm


3.1.1.2 Conceptual Terminal Locations 

The previous section identified a series of potential terminal development sites in the 

context of the major constraints to development at SLC (see Exhibit 3-1). A summary 

evaluation of these potential terminal development locations follows: 

 

 

 

 

 

Area A. As noted previously, the existing terminal area is centrally located with respect 

to the airfield and the surface transportation system. This area also has sufficient room 

to accommodate the required facilities and is largely paved, thus limiting the amount of 

additional impervious surface needed. 

Area B. This potential terminal location is north of the existing terminal complex and 

shares some of the existing terminal’s benefits in terms of airfield circulation and, to a 

lesser degree, surface access. This area is also located between the primary air carrier 

runways and would have similar accessibility. This area could also be served by the 

existing ramps to and from I-80; however, the on-Airport travel distance would increase 

by a mile or more, depending upon the location of future curbside and parking facilities. 

Alternatively, access might be provided from I-215, although this option would require 

substantial expansion of the ramp system at that location. This site would also require 

construction of a substantial amount of impervious surface because much of this area is 

not paved. Finally, development in this area would likely require alteration of existing 

drainage systems and could cause wetlands impacts north of the Airport. 

Area C. This area is located between Runway 16L/34R, one of the Airport’s two primary 

air carrier runways, and Runway 17/35, a secondary air carrier runway. Airfield access 

from this area would not be as easy, especially for aircraft assigned to Runway 16R/34L, 

and the space available for terminal development would not be as large as in Areas A or 

B. In addition, a new access roadway system would be required to serve this site. The 

proximity of this area to the intersection of I-80 and I-215 would make development of a 

new access roadway from I-80 difficult. Alternative access might be provided from I-215; 

however, as noted for Area B, such an option would require substantial expansion of the 

I-215 ramp system. 

Area D. This area is located on the western perimeter of the Airport, west of 

Runway 16R/34L, which is the westernmost primary air carrier runway. Providing 

airfield access to this site would require crossing the Surplus Canal and numerous other 

drainage courses, introducing a substantial amount of impervious surface into a largely 

undeveloped drainage basin, and potentially significant wetland impacts. This area is 

located on the periphery of the airfield and would have poor access to two of the 

Airport’s three air carrier runways. Providing surface access into this area would require 

substantial expansion or relocation of the existing ramps to and from I-80. Constructing 

new terminal and surface access facilities would also require the acquisition of existing 

off-Airport development located immediately west of the Airport, along I-80. 

Area E. Located on the eastern perimeter of the Airport, east of Runway 17/35, this 

area is similar to Area D in that it is on the periphery of the airfield and would have 

poor access to both of the Airport’s primary air carrier runways. Providing sufficient 

area for terminal development would likely require acquisition of the entire area 

between Runway 17/35 and I-215 and relocation of most of the GA facilities. The area 

3-4 RDD/102790005 (NLH4349.DOCX) 

TBG012712153950RDD


available for the terminal would be substantially smaller than the area that would be 

provided in Areas A or B. 

Area F. Developing a new terminal complex to the south, shown as Area F in Exhibit 3-1, 

would require extensive realignment of the I-80 corridor and redevelopment of both the 

airfield and landside circulation systems. This concept would also entail the 

introduction of impervious surface in undeveloped areas and substantial property 

acquisition. 

Of the potential terminal sites at SLC, Area A is the best located with respect to airfield 

circulation and the regional surface transportation system. Continued use of this area would 

minimize impacts to the natural and manmade environments compared to developing a 

new site by avoiding the need to develop undeveloped areas, or to acquire and relocate off- 

Airport development. For these reasons, alternatives that would relocate the terminal 

complex from Area A would not be prudent. 5 

3.1.1.3 Potential Terminal Configurations 

The purpose of an airport passenger terminal is to facilitate the transfer of passengers from 

various modes of surface transportation to aircraft and vice versa. An airport passenger 

terminal connects the National Air Transportation System to the regional surface 

transportation system(s). A terminal must also accommodate passenger movement between 

aircraft loading positions and arrival and departure curbsides, as well as vehicular parking 

facilities. In addition, a terminal provides various supporting passenger handling facilities, 

including ticketing, baggage claim, security checkpoints, and concessions. 

During the last 35 years, the SLCDA has examined dozens of concepts for providing these 

facilities. For the most part, these concepts have focused on the existing terminal area as the 

most logical location for a passenger terminal complex. Exhibit 3-2 shows examples of the 

terminal concepts developed through the following planning efforts: 

 

Salt Lake City International Airport Master Plan Study (TRA Airport Consultants et al., 

1975) 

Salt Lake City International Airport Master Plan Update (TRA Airport Consultants, 1981) 

Special Terminal Area Study (TRA Airport Consultants, 1986) 

 

 

 

Airport Master Plan Update, Salt Lake City International Airport (TRA Airport Consulting 

et al., 1988) 

Airport Master Plan Update and FAR Part 150 Study Update, Salt Lake City International 

Airport (HNTB, 1997) 

Terminal Development Program, Salt Lake City International Airport, Task 2, Program 

Validation and Preliminary Planning (HOK, 2010) 

5 FAA Order 5050.4B, Paragraph 1007.e(5)(a), defines prudent as follows: “The term, ’prudent’ refers to rationale 

judgment…A project may be possible, but not prudent when one considers its safety, policy, environmental, social, or 

economic consequences.” 

RDD/102790005 (NLH4349.DOCX) 3-5 

TBG012712153950RDD


The concepts shown in Exhibit 3-2 generally approach terminal development in one of the 

following ways: 

 

 

 

Multiple Terminals. Earlier planning studies (1975 and 1981) generally linked passenger 

handling functions such as ticketing, baggage claim, curbsides, and security checkpoints, 

to individual concourses containing the airline gates, associated hold rooms, and 

supporting facilities. Although this concept minimizes the distance between passenger 

handling functions and their associated gates, the resulting layout requires redundant 

facilities and can become inefficient when individual airlines need more gates than can 

be accommodated in the connected concourse. In such cases, passengers on connecting 

flights may need to transfer between terminals, which greatly increases walking 

distances and complicates the separation of secure and non-secure terminal areas. 

Single Terminal. More recent planning studies (1997 and 2010) have recommended 

consolidating passenger handling facilities in a single location with direct access to all 

concourses and gates. This layout is much more flexible in accommodating the changing 

needs of individual airlines, especially when airlines need more gates than can be 

provided in a single concourse. In addition, this concept eliminates the need for multiple 

curbsides, ticketing lobbies, security check points, and baggage claim areas. 

Hybrid. Several concepts link a limited number of individual terminals to multiple 

concourses (1981 through 1997). This approach provides more flexibility than the earlier 

concepts linking multiple terminals to individual concourses, but still requires more 

redundancy and is less flexible than single-terminal concepts. The existing terminal 

complex is essentially a hybrid serving five concourses from two domestic terminals and 

an international arrivals building. 

The terminal concepts shown in Exhibit 3-2 would be developed within the existing 

terminal area and all would, therefore, have similar effects in terms of new impervious 

surface, changes in stormwater flows, and downstream effects on the natural environment. 

These concepts also would have similar effects on the surrounding roadway systems 

because they would continue to use the existing access roadways. 

These concepts differ with respect to flexibility and efficiency. Single-terminal concepts 

(1997 Concept H and 2010 Proposed Action) would minimize the need for duplicate 

facilities and would provide maximum flexibility in responding to changes in air 

transportation service patterns. Single-terminal concepts would also minimize congestion 

and delay in the terminal area by eliminating dead-end taxilanes and chokepoints between 

concourses. The multiple-terminal and hybrid concepts described above do not meet the 

purpose and need for the Proposed Action shown in Exhibit 1-1 and are not retained for 

detailed consideration. 

3-6 RDD/102790005 (NLH4349.DOCX) 

TBG012712153950RDD

Existing 

1975 Terminal Area Plan 

1981 Alternative 1 1981 Alternative 5 1986 Alternative 10 

1986 Alternative "B-3" 

1988 Recommended 

1997 Concept "B" 

1997 Concept "H" 

2010 Proposed Action 

SOURCES: Salt Lake City International Airport Master Plan Study, prepared for the SLCDA, 1975; Salt Lake City International Airport Master Plan 

Update, Passenger Terminal Area Alternatives Evaluation, prepared for the SLCDA, 1981; Special Terminal Area Study, Final Report, Salt Lake City 

International Airport Master Plan Update, prepared for the SLCDA, 1986; Salt Lake City International Airport Master Plan Update, prepared for the 

SLCDA, 1988; Salt Lake City International Airport Master Plan Update and Part 150 Study Update, prepared for the SLCDA, 1997; Terminal 

Development Program, Task 2, Program Validation and Preliminary Planning, prepared for the SLCDA, 2010. 

0 

¹ 

SEA \\JAFAR\PROJ\SLC_405943\MAPFILES\HISTORICALALTERNATIVES.MXD SSAVAGE 10/20/2011 3:46:00 PM 

750 1,500 3,000 Feet 

Existing Airport Building Selection 

Existing Pavement 

Stream 

Water Body 

Exhibit 3-2 Historical Alternatives 




3.1.2 Other Salt Lake City International Airport Alternatives 

The SLCDA has investigated other means of meeting at least some of the needs identified in 

Section 1.1, Purpose and Need Statement, without redeveloping the terminals. In addition, 

FAA Order 1050.1E, Paragraph 506.e., states that “Alternatives not within the jurisdiction 

of the lead agency, but within the jurisdiction of the federal government, should be 

considered.” This section identifies other alternatives that might be considered to meet the 

purpose and need described in Section 1.1. 

3.1.2.1 Renovation and Rehabilitation 

In addition to considering the terminal development concepts described earlier, the SLCDA 

has also investigated the cost of maintaining the existing terminal complex. In 2009, the 

SLCDA commissioned an Asset Preservation Study (Jacobs Engineering, 2009) that 

estimated the cost of renovating the existing terminal facilities at more than $61 million (see 

Exhibit 1-2). This study only looked at the items needed to maintain the structures and did 

not address the cost of bringing the facilities into compliance with current seismic design 

standards or industry standard LOS. An assessment of the ability of this alternative to meet 

the purpose and need for the Proposed Action follows: 

 

 

 

Problems with Existing Aging Infrastructure. The Asset Preservation Study 

(Jacobs Engineering, 2009) identified and estimated the costs of component renewal, 

cyclic maintenance (for example, carpet and paint), deferred maintenance, demolition, 

life cycle maintenance and repair, preventive maintenance, and meeting safety 

requirements to maintain the existing terminal complex over the next 10 years. This 

effort focused on needs not typically addressed in the course of normal operation and 

maintenance efforts. Completing all of these maintenance and renewal actions would 

preserve the existing facilities, but would not enhance the efficiency of major building 

systems, as described in Section 1.2. 

Respond to Changes in the Air Transportation System. This concept would retain the 

existing terminal complex and, therefore, perpetuate existing problems in reacting to 

changes in air service patterns and airline requirements, as described in Section 1.3. 

Enhance Operational Efficiency. By retaining the existing terminal layout, this concept 

would also perpetuate existing problems, including redundant passenger handling 

facilities, excessive walking distances, inefficient aircraft circulation in the terminal 

complex, and inefficient surface vehicle circulation on the terminal roadways, as 

described in Section 1.4. 

The alternative of renovating and rehabilitating the existing terminal facilities does not meet 

the purpose and need for the Proposed Action outlined in Section 1.1. 

3.1.2.2 Implementing Demand Management Measures 

Historically, measures such as slot quotas or congestion pricing have been proposed to 

reduce congestion at airports with excessive levels of airfield congestion and delay. In 

concept, activity or demand management might address some of the needs identified in 

Section 1.1 by spreading peak activity levels over a longer period, thus reducing congestion 

RDD/102790005 (NLH4349.DOCX) 3-9 

TBG012712153950RDD


and enhancing passenger LOS. An assessment of the potential for demand management 

measures to meet the purpose and need of the Proposed Action follows: 

 

 

 

Problems with Existing Aging Infrastructure. Demand management measures are 

intended to maximize the capacity of the existing infrastructure, and would not address 

the needs described in Section 1.2. 

Respond to Changes in the Air Transportation System. Demand management 

measures would not alter the function or configuration of the existing terminals and 

would not enhance the Airport’s flexibility to accommodate changes in air service 

patterns and airline requirements described in Section 1.3. Also, because demand 

management seeks to modify the behavior of users by encouraging or mandating 

patterns of use that do not arise naturally, its application would not be consistent with 

the purpose of responding to the changing needs of the air transportation system. 

Enhance Operational Efficiency. Demand management measures would not eliminate 

the duplication of passenger handling facilities, excessive walking distances, inefficient 

aircraft circulation, or inefficient surface vehicle circulation described in Section 1.4. 

This alternative would not meet the purpose and need for the Proposed Action. In addition, 

federal law and grant assurances that the SLCDA has entered into with the federal 

government require access to the Airport on fair and reasonable terms, without unjust 

discrimination, and without imposing an undue burden on interstate commerce. Measures 

that would restrict airlines’ flexibility in providing air service could be viewed as imposing 

an undue burden on interstate commerce and being contrary to the tenets of airline 

deregulation. Although such measures have been supported in rare cases of high-density 

airports with excessive levels of airfield delay, there is no precedent for such measures being 

imposed to reduce terminal and landside congestion in the United States. 

3.1.3 Non-Salt Lake City International Airport Alternatives 

Other non-development concepts might enhance the efficiency of existing terminal facilities 

by reducing the level of activity these facilities must accommodate. In concept, reducing the 

intensity of peak period demand might reduce congestion and enable the terminals to 

provide higher passenger LOSs. Alternatively, diverting demand to other airports or modes 

of transportation might also reduce congestion and provide higher LOSs with a less 

intensive development program. 

In practice, alternatives that manage or divert demand typically address broad congestion 

and LOS issues rather than site-specific problems. For example, the lack of airport capacity 

in general might be addressed if current or future demand at a given airport were reduced 

through diversion to some other mode of transportation or alternative airport. In contrast, 

correcting inefficient terminal layouts and outdated infrastructure would require a sitespecific 

solution even if total demand were reduced. Although the SLCDA and the FAA 

have little ability to limit, divert, or manage demand, the FAA, as the lead federal agency, 

must consider alternatives beyond those in its (or the sponsor’s) direct control. Conceptually, 

alternatives that would reduce the demand for passenger facilities at SLC could meet 

some of the needs identified in Section 1.1. An assessment of the ability of such alternatives 

to meet the purpose and need for the Proposed Action follows. 

3-10 RDD/102790005 (NLH4349.DOCX) 

TBG012712153950RDD


3.1.3.1 Replacing the Airport (New Airport) 

A replacement Airport would presumably be designed to accommodate the current and 

forecast needs of the airlines serving SLC and would, therefore, meet the needs identified in 

Section 1.1, as described below: 

 

 

 

Problems with Existing Aging Infrastructure. A new Airport would entail the 

development of new infrastructure. 

Respond to Changes in the Air Transportation System. A new Airport could be 

designed to accommodate current and forecast airline needs and would likely provide 

the flexibility needed to respond to the evolving requirements of a dynamic air 

transportation system. 

Enhance Operational Efficiency. A new Airport could be designed to avoid redundant 

passenger handling facilities, excessive walking distances, inefficient aircraft circulation, 

and inefficient surface vehicle circulation. 

Although this concept could meet the needs identified in Section 1.1, the cost of such an 

alternative would be extremely high compared to the Proposed Action. Furthermore, the 

resulting airport would likely be less convenient to population centers and would likely 

have a much greater impact on the natural and/or manmade environment because it would 

either develop previously undeveloped lands or displace existing urban development. The 

Wasatch Mountains to the east and the Oquirrh Mountains to the west of the Salt Lake City 

Metropolitan Area would also limit the possible locations of a new airport serving the 

region. This concept would not, therefore, be prudent because of its environmental, social, 

and economic consequences. 

3.1.3.2 Using Another Airport 

SLC, located about 5 miles west of downtown Salt Lake City on I-80, is conveniently located 

to serve the air transportation needs of the Salt Lake City Metropolitan Area. The FAA 

National Plan of Integrated Airport Systems (NPIAS) lists two airports, South Valley 

Regional and Bolinder Field/Tooele Valley, within 25 miles of SLC (FAA, 2010a). The 

NPIAS identifies three additional airports within 50 miles of SLC. None of these airports has 

the airfield or surface access capacity to accommodate air carrier operations without 

essentially being rebuilt. 

Using another airport as either a replacement or a supplement for SLC would, therefore, 

require nearly the same level of investment as building a replacement Airport, and would 

have similar potential for environmental impacts. Although this concept could meet the 

needs identified in Section 1.1, it would not be prudent because of its environmental, social, 

and economic consequences. 

3.1.3.3 Using Other Modes of Transportation or Communications 

Alternative modes of transportation offer feasible alternatives for air travelers, particularly 

for trips of 1 day or less (about 500 road miles). At longer distances, alternative modes of 

transportation become less desirable because of the amount of time lost by travelers. 

Diverting demand to other modes of transportation or communications, such as video 

conferencing, might address some of the needs identified in Section 1.1 by reducing 

congestion in the terminals, thereby enhancing passenger LOS. An assessment of the 

RDD/102790005 (NLH4349.DOCX) 3-11 

TBG012712153950RDD


potential for alternative modes of transportation or communications to meet the purpose 

and need of the Proposed Action follows: 

 

 

 

Need to Replace Aging Infrastructure. Use of alternative modes of transportation or 

increased use of communications would not address the need to replace aging 

infrastructure described in Section 1.2. 

Need to Respond to Changes in the Air Transportation System. Using other modes of 

transportation would not alter the function or configuration of the existing terminals 

and would not enhance the Airport’s flexibility to accommodate changes in air service 

patterns and airline requirements described in Section 1.3. 

Need to Enhance Operational Efficiency. Diverting traffic to other modes of 

transportation or communications would not eliminate the duplication of passenger 

handling facilities, excessive walking distances, inefficient aircraft circulation, or 

inefficient surface vehicle circulation described in Section 1.4. 

This alternative would not meet the purpose and need for the Proposed Action. Although 

neither the FAA nor the SLCDA has the authority to mandate the use of alternative modes 

of transportation, automobiles already attract some passengers that might otherwise use air 

transportation. Two of the Airport’s top 20 destinations (Denver and Las Vegas) are within 

500 miles of SLC and collectively account for 9 percent of the Airport’s passenger traffic 

(LeighFisher, 2010, Table 11). The effects of diversion to automobile travel are already 

reflected in existing and forecast aviation passenger demand. To the extent that 

conventional rail traffic and telecommunications, including video conferencing, compete 

with air transportation, those effects are also reflected in existing levels of air passenger 

demand. Improvements in rail transportation, such as the introduction of high-speed rail 

service, and/or increased use of video conferencing could affect the growth in air travel in 

the future, but would not alleviate existing deficiencies. 

3.2 Alternatives Eliminated from Detailed Consideration 

FAA Order 1050.1E, Paragraph 405.d., states that “Other reasonable alternatives are to be 

considered in preparing an EA to the degree commensurate with the nature of the proposed 

action and agency experience with the environmental issues involved. Generally, the greater 

the degree of impacts, the wider the range of alternatives that should be considered” [emphasis 

added]. 

Alternatives that would not meet the needs identified in Chapter 1, Purpose and Need, are 

not reasonable alternatives to the Proposed Action and are not carried forward for detailed 

consideration. Similarly, alternatives that would entail substantially 6 greater environmental, 

social, or economic costs than the Proposed Action are not considered to be prudent and are 

not carried forward. Table 3-1 lists the alternatives eliminated from detailed consideration 

and summarizes the reasons these alternatives are not carried forward. 

Of the alternatives considered, only consolidating passenger handling facilities in a single 

location with direct access to all concourses and gates is recommended for detailed 

6 The term, “substantially,” must be considered in the context of the offsetting benefits associated with the action that would 

cause the environmental, social, or economic costs. 

3-12 RDD/102790005 (NLH4349.DOCX) 

TBG012712153950RDD


consideration. This alternative, the Proposed Action, together with the alternative of taking 

no action (the No Action Alternative) are carried forward. In accordance with NEPA, the No 

Action Alternative must be considered (as further explained in Section 3.3.1). The No Action 

Alternative also serves as the basis of comparison for assessing environmental 

consequences. 

TABLE 3-1 


Alternative 

Reason for Elimination 

Multiple Terminals 

Hybrid Terminal 

Renovation and Rehabilitation 

Replacing the Airport (New Airport) 

Using Another Airport 

Implementing Demand Management 

Measures 

Using Other Modes of Transportation or 

Communications 

Would not meet the purpose and need for the Proposed Action 

and would have environmental consequences similar to those of 

the Proposed Action. 

Would not meet the purpose and need for the Proposed Action 

and would have environmental consequences similar to those of 

the Proposed Action. 


Some degree of renovation and rehabilitation would be 

undertaken as part of the No Action Alternative. 







3.3 Evaluation of Reasonable Alternatives 

FAA Order 1050.1E, Paragraph 405.d., states that, “The EA briefly presents the 

environmental impacts of the Proposed Action and the reasonable alternatives in 

comparative form to sharply define the issues and provide a clear basis for choice among 

options by the approving official.” Consistent with this guidance, this section first describes 

the physical and operational characteristics of the two alternatives retained for detailed 

consideration and then compares these alternatives in terms of environmental, operational, 

and economic factors and compares the ability of these alternatives to meet the purpose and 

need for the Proposed Action. 

3.3.1 Alternatives Considered in Detail 

FAA Order 5050.4B, Paragraph 706.d.(5), gives the following additional guidance on the 

range of alternatives to be considered in an EA: 

If there are no unresolved conflicts concerning alternative uses of available 

resources, the range of alternatives may be limited to the no action and proposed 

action alternatives.” 

RDD/102790005 (NLH4349.DOCX) 3-13 

TBG012712153950RDD


This section of FAA Order 5050.4B also provides the following guidance on the 

consideration of “unresolved conflicts” and other factors in establishing the range of 

alternatives to be considered: 

(a) Unresolved conflicts may exist between the project proponent and those 

wishing to use affected environmental resources for non-airport purposes. 

Typically, an unresolved conflict exists when an airport development project 

concerns involves or more special purpose law (see paragraph 9t) 7 . Each 

reasonable alternative description should contain only that information needed 

to explain it to someone unfamiliar with airport planning or operations and 

documentation to support it. An example of an unresolved conflict would be 

when an airport sponsor proposes locating a runway in a wetland, while a 

project opponent states the same wetland is valuable for flood retention. 

(b) In addition to the unresolved conflicts noted in paragraph 706.d.(5)(a), an 

EA’s range of reasonable alternatives may expand after considering: 

1. The proposed action’s complexity. 

2. The variety of expected environmental impacts. 

3. Agency experience in dealing with the action’s expected environmental 

issues. 

The Proposed Action would not generate significant environmental impacts (see 

Section 3.3.2) and would not adversely affect resources addressed by special purpose laws 

as defined in FAA Order 5050.4B. Given the Proposed Action’s lack of potentially significant 

environmental impacts, and the absence of unresolved conflicts, only the No Action 

Alternative and the Proposed Action Alternative are retained for detailed consideration. 

3.3.1.1 No Action Alternative 

As noted earlier, the No Action Alternative must be considered in detail under NEPA and 

FAA orders. Under this alternative, no physical development requiring environmental 

review approvals under NEPA would be undertaken. As described below, the No Action 

Alternative would accommodate the same level of activity as the Proposed Action 

Alternative, the lack of proposed terminal improvements would lead to increased airfield, 

roadway, and terminal congestion and associated increases in air emissions and energy 

consumption. 

Physical Development 

Under the No Action Alternative, only previously approved development and/or 

development projects that would not require FAA NEPA approval would be constructed. In 

2009, the Airport had about 80 NBE gates 8 . Although new terminal facilities would not be 

constructed under this alternative, the number of aircraft gates could vary, depending on 

7 FAA Order 5050.4B, Paragraph 9.t., defines “Special Purpose Laws” as “Federal laws, regulations, executive orders, or 

departmental orders that are outside NEPA.” Examples include the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (ESA), 

U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) Section 4(f), Section 404 of the Clean Water Act, and others. 





3-14 RDD/102790005 (NLH4349.DOCX) 

TBG012712153950RDD


the mix of gates in the existing terminals. Use of the Airport facilities shown in Exhibit 1-1 

would continue. 

The following ongoing and previously approved development projects would be 

constructed under this alternative: 

Completion of the Light Rail Station (ongoing). This project received a FONSI in 2009 

and is under construction. 

 

 

 

 

End-of-Runway Deicing Pads (ongoing). SLCDA has initiated a program to construct a 

total of six deicing pads at the ends of Runways 16R/34R and 16L/34L, the primary air 

carrier runways, as well as on Taxiways L and S on the east side of the airfield. The 

program was initiated in 2008 and is expected to continue through 2020. 

North Cargo Apron Expansion (planned for 2012). To accommodate deicing operations 

on the approach end of Runway 16L/34R and associated taxiways, the FedEx facility 

will require relocation to the north cargo area. The North Cargo Apron Expansion will 

provide ramp space for FedEx and other future cargo needs. This project will enable the 

SLCDA to locate all cargo carriers in the newer north cargo area as shown and planned 

on the ALP. 

Snow Equipment Storage Building (planned for 2012). This project will construct a 

storage facility and an access road to the airfield for snow equipment and materials. 

Pavement Overlay and Rehabilitation Projects (planned for 2012 to 2014). The first of 

five projects is scheduled to start construction in early 2012 and the last is scheduled to 

start construction in early 2014. 

In addition to these previously approved projects, renovations to the existing terminal 

facilities might occur under the No Action Alternative. The No Action Alternative would 

not modify the Airport entrance road or otherwise alter surface transportation patterns in 

the surrounding area. 

Operational Characteristics 

In the absence of airside, landside, or terminal improvements, levels of congestion and delay 

for aircraft in the terminal apron area and vehicles on the terminal area roads would 

increase as demand levels increased over time. As described in Section 1.5, the 

FAA-approved aviation demand forecasts for this EA project passenger demand to increase 

from 10.2 million annual enplanements (MEP) in 2009 to 14.2 MEP by 2024, an annual 

growth rate of about 2.2 percent. These forecasts also project passenger airline aircraft 

departures 9 to increase from 139,084 in 2009 to 171,800 by 2024, an annual growth rate of 

about 1.4 percent (see Appendix A, Technical Memorandum: Aviation Demand Forecasts, 

for more details). Section 1.4.1 shows that, under the No Action Alternative, aircraft taxi 

time, including delays, would increase from an average of 11.9 to 13.6 minutes per operation 

by 2025. 

Average roadway speeds, a measure of traffic congestion, would drop from 19.5 miles per 

hour in 2009 to 19.0 miles per hour by 2025. Peak period roadway LOSs on the most 

congested arrival and departure roadways will degrade from C and D (acceptable to 

9 Passenger airline aircraft represent the types of aircraft that would use the gates and aircraft circulation areas in the terminal 

complex. 

RDD/102790005 (NLH4349.DOCX) 3-15 

TBG012712153950RDD


unsatisfactory) in 2009 to E and F (very unsatisfactory) by 2025. Although curbside 

congestion would reach undesirable levels by the end of the planning period, forecast 

increases in demand, congestion, and delay would not constrain growth or otherwise alter 

the operational characteristics of the Airport because of the lack of alternative airports and 

the ability of passengers to avoid congested curbsides by entering Airport parking lots 

before the curbsides or allowing extra time during peak periods. 

Potential Effect of Increased Congestion and Delay on Levels of Activity 

The FAA NPIAS notes that 17 of the nation’s 35 busiest air carrier airports operated at 

between 3 and 5 minutes of average delay per operation in 2009; this is similar to the 

forecast level of delay at SLC (FAA, 2010a, Chapter 2). The NPIAS also shows that average 

delay levels have been higher in recent years, indicating that higher levels of delay are 

acceptable. The FAA’s guidance on benefit-cost analysis (FAA, 1999) states that experience 

at congested airports shows that average delays of more than 10 minutes per operation may 

be considered “severe” and that “… it would be more realistic to reflect a flat or only 

slightly escalating rate of growth once delay reaches 20 minutes [per operation].” Projected 

levels of delay at the Airport would not approach the levels at which experience indicates 

that demand would be constrained. Under the No Action Alternative, SLC would, therefore, 

accommodate forecast aircraft and associated passenger activity through the forecast period. 

Potential Effect of Increased Congestion and Delay on Runway Use 

As at most airports, FAA air traffic controllers assign runways at SLC on the basis of an 

aircraft’s route of flight, not on the location of an aircraft in the terminal complex. Aircraft 

arriving from or departing to the east are typically assigned to the eastern parallel runway, 

and aircraft arriving from or departing to the west are typically assigned to the western 

parallel runway. An increase in airfield congestion would not alter that practice. 

Long-term Development Potential 

Although the No Action Alternative would not increase the number of gates or other 

terminal facilities at the Airport, it would not preclude future development in response to 

growth in demand. Exhibit 3-2 shows that a wide range of expansion concepts could be 

based on the existing terminal complex. 

3.3.1.2 Proposed Action – Terminal Redevelopment Program 

The Proposed Action would consolidate separate passenger processing facilities into a 

single facility serving all concourses and gates. This alternative would be developed within 

the physical envelope of the existing terminal complex and would have minimal effects 

outside that envelope. The Proposed Action would accommodate the same level of 

passenger, aircraft, and vehicular activity as the No Action Alternative but, because of 

increased efficiency in aircraft circulation, would cause lower levels of congestion, delay, 

and associated energy consumption and air emissions. 

Physical Development 

As described in Chapter 2, the proposed replacement terminal consists of a 684,174-squarefoot 

facility located south and west of the existing terminal complex and directly west of the 

existing parking garage (see Exhibit 2-1). This central processing facility would serve a series 

of new and existing concourses. Depending on the level of demand at completion, the 

concourses supported by this central processing facility would provide between 72 and 

3-16 RDD/102790005 (NLH4349.DOCX) 

TBG012712153950RDD


74 gates, or about 76 NBE gates 10 (see Exhibit 2-2). The Proposed Action would also include 

the following supporting facilities: 

 

 

 

 

Replacement parking garage 

Replacement rental car facilities, including a new ready return area, service counters, 

QTA facility, and remote service site (located at the south end of the Airport) 

New terminal roadways and terminal roadway improvements within the terminal 

complex 

New mechanical plant located west of the replacement parking garage 

 

Light rail platform at the new terminal 

Operational Characteristics 

The proposed airside, landside, and terminal improvements would reduce aircraft and 

vehicular congestion and delay, compared to the No Action Alternative. As described 

previously, congestion and delay associated with the No Action Alternative would not 

constrain forecast growth in aviation activity. Under the Proposed Action Alternative, the 

Airport would, therefore, experience the same volume of aircraft and passenger traffic as 

under the No Action Alternative. 

Potential Effect of Reduced Congestion and Delay on Levels of Activity 

The Proposed Action Alternative would increase airfield and roadway efficiency compared 

to the No Action Alternative. By 2025, the Proposed Action would reduce annual average 

aircraft taxi in and out time from 4.6 to 4.0 minutes per operation and increase average 

roadway speeds from 19.0 to 20.2 miles per hour compared to the No Action Alternative. As 

described in the previous discussion of the No Action Alternative, forecast increases in 

demand, congestion, and delay would not be so severe as to constrain growth or otherwise 

alter the operational characteristics of the Airport. Decreased airfield and roadway 

congestion would enhance airfield and roadway efficiency compared to the No Action 

Alternative, but would not result in increased levels of activity. 

Potential Effect of Reduced Congestion and Delay on Runway Use 

As noted in the previous discussion of the No Action Alternative, FAA air traffic controllers 

assign runways at SLC on the basis of an aircraft’s route of flight, not on the location of an 

aircraft in the terminal complex. Neither the increase in airfield congestion associated with 

the No Action Alternative nor the terminal area improvements of the Proposed Action 

Alternative would alter that practice. The Proposed Action Alternative would, therefore, 

experience the same runway use patterns as the No Action Alternative. 

Long-term Development Potential 

Although the Proposed Action would not increase the number of aircraft gates, it would set 

the direction for future terminal development. Exhibit 3-2 shows that the Proposed Action 

would be compatible with future development of a north concourse as proposed in 

“Concept H,” which was the preferred alternative in the 1997 Master Plan Update (HNTB, 

2007). Exhibit 3-2 also shows that future terminal growth could be accommodated else- 

10 The number of NBE gates could vary from 74 to 76, depending on the mix of aircraft anticipated as the program nears 

completion. 

RDD/102790005 (NLH4349.DOCX) 3-17 

TBG012712153950RDD


where. The Proposed Action, therefore, establishes a pattern for future growth, but does not 

increase the development potential of the site. 

3.3.2 Comparison of Reasonable Alternatives 

Table 3-2 compares the technical, operational, environmental, and regulatory characteristics 

of the No Action and the Proposed Action Alternatives. 

TABLE 3-2 


Alternatives 


Ability to Meet Purpose and Need 

Replace Aging Infrastructure 

Respond to Changes in the Air 

Transportation System 

Enhance Operational Efficiency 

Technical and Economic Factors 

No Action 

Would not replace existing 

infrastructure. Renovation and 

rehabilitation efforts described in 

Section 3.1.2.1 would be required 

to maintain the existing facilities, 

but would not eliminate existing 

inefficiencies. 

Would not reconfigure terminals to 

support current and future air 

service patterns. 

Would continue redundancy in 


inefficient aircraft circulation in the 

terminal area. 


Would replace existing 



Would provide flexible facilities 

to meet functional needs of the 

current air transportation system 

and avoid functional 

obsolescence in the future. 

Would reduce redundancy in 


enhance the efficiency of aircraft 

circulation in the terminal area. 

Average Aircraft Delay (minutes per 

operation) 

Annual Cost of Aircraft Delay and 

Taxi In and Out Time 

Roadway LOS (peak period, on 

arrival and departure roadways) 

4.55 (2025). 4.04 (2025). 

$153 million (2025). $145 million (2025). 

E/F (2025). A/B (2025). 

Passenger Terminal LOS 

Public Circulation Areas – 


Departure Lounge Areas – 



2025). 


2025). 


2025). 


2025). 

Baggage Claim Areas – 


Industry Standard = 17.2 ft 2 /PHP a 2025). 


Security Screening Checkpoints – 

1,750 ft 2 /checkpoint b 

Industry Standard = 

2025). 


2025). 

Public Restrooms – 


Industry Standard = 3.5 ft 2 /PHP c 2025). 

3-18 RDD/102790005 (NLH4349.DOCX) 

TBG012712153950RDD


TABLE 3-2 


Alternatives 


No Action 



Retail and Food/Beverage 

10,000 ft 2 /MEP c 

Concessions – Industry Standard = 2025). 


2025). 

Environmental Impacts 

Air Quality – Operations 

Would have higher annual 

emissions from aircraft and surface 

vehicle operations than the 


Would have lower annual aircraft 

and surface vehicle emissions 

than the No Action Alternative. 

Air Quality – Construction Not applicable. Construction emissions would 

be less than de minimis. 

Water Quality 



Building Efficiency 



Aircraft Fuel Use 

Regulatory Requirements 

Continued compliance with water 

discharge permit requirements 

would maintain water quality 

standards. 

Would continue use of old, 

inefficient terminal buildings. 

Not applicable. 


water discharge permit 

requirements would maintain 

water quality standards. 

Would increase building 

envelope, but would also 

increase energy efficiency. 

Would reduce fuel consumption 

compared to the No Action 

Alternative. 

Stormwater Discharge Permit 

Revision 

a Source: IATA, 2004 (LOS C assumed) 

b Source: TSA, 2010 

c Source: de Neufville and Odoni, 2003 


UPDES Permit No. UT0024988. 

Update UPDES Permit 

No. UT0024988. 

Notes: 

ft 2 = square feet 

PHP = peak hour passenger 

UPDES = Utah Pollutant Discharge Elimination System 

RDD/102790005 (NLH4349.DOCX) 3-19 

TBG012712153950RDD

CHAPTER 4 

Affected Environment 

In compliance with FAA Order 5050.4B, National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) 

Implementing Instructions for Airport Actions, this chapter describes existing environmental 

conditions of the potentially affected geographic area for the SLC TRP. This chapter is 

organized as follows: 

 

 

 

 

Section 4.1 – Project Location: Describes the proposed project location and the area 

surrounding the Airport. This section also provides a synopsis of the existing Airport 

facilities. 

Section 4.2 – Human Environment: Describes the human environmental characteristics 

of the area that are likely to be affected by the TRP. 

Section 4.3 – Natural Environment: Describes natural environmental resources that are 

likely to be affected by the TRP. 

Section 4.4 – Past, Present, and Reasonably Foreseeable Future Actions: Describes past, 

present, and reasonably foreseeable projects in the project environs that might contribute 

to cumulative impacts when considered in combination with the effects of the TRP. 

As described in Chapter 2, the TRP comprises the phased replacement of the Airport’s main 

terminal and concourses, including a replacement parking garage, new rental car facilities 

that include a remote service site, and associated access improvements in the terminal 

complex area. A new mechanical plant located west of the future parking garage is also 

included. 

This chapter describes only the environmental resources that the Proposed Action and the 

No Action Alternative are likely to affect. Three resources identified in the Environmental 

Desk Reference for Airport Actions (FAA Desk Reference) (FAA, 2007a) – coastal resources, 

farmlands, and wild and scenic rivers – are not present in the project footprint, would not be 

affected by the Proposed Action and its alternatives, and are not discussed in this chapter. 

4.1 Project Location 

As shown in Exhibit 4-1, the site of the TRP at SLC would occupy the existing terminal 

complex area, between the Airport’s two main parallel runways. Construction of the TRP 

would be limited to previously developed areas on Airport property. 

The project would be located 5 miles northwest of downtown Salt Lake City, mainly within 

the city limits, in Salt Lake County, as shown in Exhibit 4-2. Salt Lake City is located in 

northwestern Utah. 

Three major interstate highways are located around SLC. I-80 runs east and west and is 

located just south of Airport property. Interstate 15 (I-15) runs north and south and is 

located east of Airport property; I-215 is the loop from I-15 that provides access to Salt Lake 

City, and is also located east of the Airport. 

RDD/102790005 (NLH4349.DOCX) 4-1 

TBG012712153950RDD

16 R 

16 L 

17 

14 


WRIGHT 

BROTHERS DR 


TERMINAL DR 

32 

§¨¦ 80 

34 L 

100 N 

34 R 

35 



Rental Car Remote Service Site 

0 500 1,000 2,000 Feet 

\\JAFAR\PROJ\SLC_405943\MAPFILES\AFFECTEDENVIRONMENT\PROJECTMAP.MXD SSAVAGE 2/24/2012 11:00:27 AM 

¹ 

Exhibit 4-1 Project Map 



DAVIS COUNTY 

Centerville 

West 

Bountiful 

Woods Cross 

Bountiful 

North Salt Lake 

SALT LAKE COUNTY 

§¨¦ 80 §¨¦ 215 §¨¦ 15 £¤ 89 


UV201 

West Valley City 

Taylorsville 

South Salt Lake 

§¨¦ 15 §¨¦ 15 §¨¦ 80 

Holladay 

Murray 

West Jordan 


Light Rail 

City 

Freeway 

Runway 

County 

Highway 

Water Body Existing Renovated 

0 0.5 1 2 Miles 

Street 

Open Space New Construction 

¹ 

\\JAFAR\PROJ\SLC_405943\MAPFILES\AFFECTEDENVIRONMENT\LOCATIONAREA.MXD SSAVAGE 1/27/2012 11:19:59 AM 

Exhibit 4-2 Location Map 



CHAPTER 4 AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT 

SLC is operated and managed by the SLCDA, a department of Salt Lake City Corporation. 

Salt Lake City’s Mayor, City Council, and a nine-member advisory board of citizen 

volunteers oversee the Airport. 

The airfield consists of three air carrier runways and a GA runway. The three air carrier 

runways are as follows: 

 

 

 

Runway 16L/34R – 12,003 feet long 

Runway 16R/34L – 12,000 feet long 

Runway 17/35 – 9,596 feet long 

Runway 14/32 is the GA runway and is 4,900 feet long. The Airport has three terminals and 

five concourses. The terminals are called Terminal One, Terminal Two, and the International 

Terminal, and the concourses are lettered A through E. In 2009, the base year for this EA, the 

Airport had about 80 NBE gates 11 (the Airport now has 86 gates [SLC, 2011]). Delta Air 

Lines operates at Terminals One and Two. SkyWest Airlines operates from Terminal Two. 

Other domestic airlines use Terminal One. International air service, chartered flights, and 

U.S. Customs are located in the International Terminal. 

The existing short-term parking garage is located just south of the terminals and can 

accommodate 1,766 vehicles. The economy parking lot, located farther south, can 

accommodate approximately 10,040 vehicles (SLCDA, 2010a). 

4.2 Human Environment 

The proposed project footprint boundaries are centered between the Airport’s two primary 

parallel runways, completely within Airport property, on developed land (see Exhibit 4-1). 

This section describes resources related to the human environment that are located on 

Airport property and in the surrounding area. The following discussion of the human 

environment begins with a review of the existing noise environment. The subsequent 

sections describe historic and DOT Section 4(f) resources, and social and socioeconomic 

characteristics. 

4.2.1 Existing Noise and Compatible Land Use 

According to the Salt Lake City Planning and Zoning Department, the Airport is buffered 

on all sides by compatible land uses 12 . Compatible land uses generally include industrial, 

manufacturing, and open spaces. Non-compatible land uses generally include residential 

areas and noise-sensitive facilities, such as schools, churches, hospitals, and libraries. 

North of Airport property, there are wetlands, floodplains, and waterways. The areas west 

and south of Airport property are zoned light and heavy industrial (manufacturing), along 

with open space that borders the I-80 corridor where Wingpointe Golf Course is located (on 

Airport property). The areas east and northeast of Airport property are zoned commercial 





12 http://www.slcgov.com/ced/planning/. 

4-4 RDD/102790005 (NLH4349.DOCX) 

TBG012712153950RDD


(BP – business park). Adjacent to the commercial development is the I-215 corridor. On the 

east side of I-215 is residential development. 

The most current noise contours for both existing conditions and future forecast activity 

levels were provided in the 1997 Part 150 Noise Study (HNTB, 1997). There are no 

incompatible zoning and land use designations within the 65-decibel (dB) day-night average 

sound level (DNL) noise contour. 

4.2.2 Historic Cultural Resources and U.S. Department of Transportation Act 

Section 4(f) 

This section describes existing historic resources and resources addressed under Section 4(f) 

of the DOT Act of 1966 that are located in the terminal area. 

4.2.2.1 Historic Cultural Resources 

A literature review at the Utah Division of State History revealed that the entire Airport 

property has been previously surveyed for cultural resources. During previous construction 

projects, cultural resources have been unearthed on Airport property. The closest cultural 

resource site, located within 1 mile of the Airport terminals, is 42SL302, the Surplus Canal. 

The Surplus Canal has been considered eligible for listing on the National Register of 

Historic Places (NRHP) because of its importance in the growth and development of 

Salt Lake City. The canal has been modified several times, most recently in the 1990s, to 

accommodate construction of Runway 16R/34L. 

An architectural field visit on May 11, 2009, included an interview with the SLCDA staff 

architect (Spader, 2009, personal communication). Information gathered during the 

interview concluded that Terminal One, Concourses A and B, and the mechanical plant 

were all built in 1958 (with occupancy in 1961) and, therefore, have reached the 50-year 

threshold for consideration as historic resources under the National Historic Preservation 

Act. Each potentially historic building has been extensively remodeled, and no building 

retains its original, historic integrity (Spader, 2009, personal communication). A letter from 

the Utah State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) concurring with the finding that no 

historic properties would be affected by the Proposed Action (Utah SHPO, 2012) was 

received on February 27, 2012. 

4.2.2.2 U.S. Department of Transportation Act Section 4(f) 

DOT Section 4(f) resources under the DOT Act consist of any publicly owned lands, 

including public parks, recreation areas, wildlife refuges, or any land from a historic site of 

national, state, or local significance. No Section 4(f) resources are located within the project 

footprint. The closest Section 4(f) resource to the project footprint is Wingpointe Golf 

Course. Wingpointe is owned by the SLCDA, is part of Airport property, and is located just 

north of I-80. 

4.2.3 Social and Socioeconomic Characteristics 

The Airport in an integral part of the state and local social and socioeconomic environment. 

This section describes the economic and population characteristics of this environment, as 

well as the contributions the Airport makes through direct employment and aviation-related 

or dependent businesses located at and around the Airport. 

RDD/102790005 (NLH4349.DOCX) 4-5 

TBG012712153950RDD


4.2.3.1 Employment 

The 2010 Economic Report to the Governor (Governor’s Report) reported the unemployment 

rate almost doubling, from 3.4 percent in 2008 to 6.5 percent in 2009 (Governor’s Office 

of Planning and Budget, 2010). Construction employment declined 22.6 percent, after a 

decline of 12.5 percent in 2008, and is forecast to decline 13.6 percent in 2010, for a third year 

of contraction. 

The 2010 Governor’s Report shows that Airport vendors and companies related to air 

transportation include Delta Air Lines and SkyWest Airlines, which employ 3,000 to 

4,000 individuals. United Parcel Service uses the cargo terminal at the south end of the 

Airport, and also employs 3,000 to 4,000 individuals. 

4.2.3.2 Population 

According to the 2009 Governor’s Report, the State of Utah’s population increased 

1.5 percent during 2008, to approximately 2,800,100 (Governor’s Office of Planning and 

Budget, 2009). A total of 42,310 people was added to Utah’s population in 2009, with 

3.7 percent of this increase coming from people moving into the state. The Governor’s 

Report projected that population would grow to 3.7 million in 2020, 4.4 million in 2030, 

5.2 million in 2040, 6.0 million in 2050, and 6.8 million in 2060. 

4.2.3.3 Airport Economic Impact 

The 2004 Economic Impact of Utah’s Airports, prepared for the Utah Airport Systems by the 

Utah Department of Transportation’s Division of Aeronautics, determined that the direct 

economic output from the Airport was $1.56 billion dollars annually (Utah Department of 

Transportation, 2004). The Airport and the businesses at the Airport provided 13,500 jobs, 

with wages of $505 million dollars. With these direct impacts added to secondary impacts 

attributed from the Airport, such as visitor-related spending and secondary off-airport 

businesses supported by aviation activity, the Airport contributed $2.70 billion in payroll 

from 101,257 jobs and provided an economic output of $5.34 billion dollars (Utah 

Department of Transportation, 2004). 

A 2007 study, the Utah Continuous Airport System Plan, also conducted by the Utah 

Department of Transportation’s Division of Aeronautics, assessed the needs of Utah airports 

(Utah Department of Transportation, 2007). This study stated that the Airport provides the 

greatest economic benefit to the statewide and local economies. 

4.3 Natural Environment 

As mentioned earlier, the project footprint boundaries are centered between the Airport’s 

two primary parallel runways, completely within Airport property, on developed land. This 

section describes resources within that project footprint related to the natural environment. 

This section also describes the limited resources related to the natural environment that are 

located within Airport property and the surrounding area, including climate and air quality, 

water resources, biotic resources, and hazardous and solid waste. 

4.3.1 Climate and Air Quality 

Salt Lake City sits in a valley at the foot of three mountain ranges: the Wasatch range to the 

east, the Oquirrhs to the west, and the Traverse to the south. These mountain ranges shelter 

4-6 RDD/102790005 (NLH4349.DOCX) 

TBG012712153950RDD


the valley from storms in the winter, but are also instrumental in developing thunderstorms 

that drift over the valley in the summer. 

The climate of Salt Lake County is characterized as semi-arid, with four well-defined 

seasons. The mean wind speed averages 8.8 miles per hour. Some strong winds are 

associated with easterly winds blowing from the canyons or local severe thunderstorms. 

However, overall prevailing winds are from the south-southeast 13 . 

4.3.1.1 Air Pollutants and Ambient Air Quality Standards 

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) has established criteria for airborne 

concentrations of carbon monoxide (CO), ozone (O 3 ), nitrogen dioxide (NO 2 ), sulfur dioxide 

(SO 2 ), particulate matter 10 microns in diameter and smaller (PM 10 ), particulate matter 

2.5 microns in diameter and smaller (PM 2.5 ), and lead. These standards are called the 

National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS), and the pollutants they address are 

often called “criteria pollutants.” Although states may establish more stringent air quality 

standards than the NAAQS, the state of Utah has not done so. 

For some criteria pollutants, separate standards have been set for different durations of time 

(for example, 1-hour, 24-hour, and annual standards). Most standards have been set to 

protect public health. For other criteria pollutants, standards have been based on other 

values, such as protection of crops, protection of materials, or avoidance of nuisance 

conditions. A summary of NAAQS for criteria pollutants, along with information on their 

health and environmental effects, is provided in Table 4-1. 

4.3.1.2 Existing Air Quality 

According to the Utah Department of Environmental Quality (UDEQ), Division of Air 

Quality, Salt Lake County is in nonattainment for PM 10 (moderate), PM 2.5 (no significance 

level designated), and SO 2 (request for redesignation to attainment was submitted to USEPA 

in 2005) (UDEQ, 2010a). The county is a maintenance area for O 3 . The county is also in 

maintenance for CO through a re-designation by USEPA in 1999. 

The Utah Air Monitoring Network includes six ambient air quality monitoring stations 

throughout Salt Lake County. These stations sample and record outdoor levels of air 

pollutants on a regular basis. Exhibit 4-3 shows the names and locations of monitoring sites 

in the vicinity of SLC. No air monitoring stations are currently located on or adjacent to 

Airport property. 

The results from these air monitoring stations show that O 3 , PM 10 , PM 2.5 , and NO 2 pollutant 

levels exceeded the NAAQS in 2006, 2007, and 2008. The O 3 standards were exceeded at the 

Hawthorne, Beach, Cottonwood, and Bountiful sites; the PM 2.5 standards at the Hawthorne, 

Cottonwood, Magna, North Salt Lake, Rose Park, and Bountiful sites; the PM 10 standards at 

the Hawthorne (only in 2008), Cottonwood (also only in 2008), and North Salt Lake sites; 

and the NO 2 standard at the Bountiful site (only in 2007). 

13 http://www.slcclassic.com/info/area_info/climate.htm. 

RDD/102790005 (NLH4349.DOCX) 4-7 

TBG012712153950RDD


TABLE 4-1 

National Ambient Air Quality Standards 

Pollutant Duration NAAQS Comments 

CO 1 hour 35 ppm 

(40 mg/m 3 ) 

8 hour 9 ppm 

(10 mg/m 3 ) 

CO is a colorless, odorless, tasteless gas; can temporarily accumulate 

in localized “hot spots” in calm weather conditions and in the winter. 

O 3 1 hour 0.12 ppm O 3 is a secondary pollutant, formed by daytime reactions of NO x and 

8 hour 0.08 ppm 

volatile hydrocarbons rather than being directly emitted by natural or 

human-made sources. 

NO 2 1 hour 100 ppb NO 2 , nitric oxide, and the nitrate radical are collectively called NO x , 

Annual 

and NO 2 is the compound commonly measured with air quality 

0.053 ppm 

monitors. NO x is generally emitted in the form of nitric oxide, which is 

(100 µg/m 3 ) 

oxidized to NO 2 . 

SO 2 1 hour NA For human-made sources, SO 2 is emitted primarily by the combustion 

3 hour 

of sulfur-containing fuels and sulfuric acid manufacturing. SO 2 can lead 

0.5 ppm 

to the formation of acidic precipitation and in elevated concentrations 

(1,300 µg/m 3 ) 

impair human lung functions and plant growth. 

24 hours 0.14 ppm 

(365 µg/m 3 ) 

Respirable 

Particulate 

Matter 

(PM 10 ) 

Fine 

Particulate 

Matter 

(PM 2.5 ) 

Annual 

0.03 ppm 

(80 µg/m 3 ) 

24 hours 150 µg/m 3 Particulate matter comprises very small particles of dirt, dust, soot, or 

Annual 

24 hours 

NA 

35 µg/m 3 

liquid droplets called aerosols. The regulatory standards are 

segregated by sizes (respirable is 10 microns or less [PM 10 ] and fine is 

2.5 microns or less [PM 2.5 ]). Particulate matter is formed from both 

natural and human-made sources, including wind erosion, 

overexposed soils (that is, fugitive dust), the burning of fossil fuels and 

Annual 15 µg/m 3 incineration of solid wastes, and exhaust from internal combustion 

engines. 

Lead Monthly 

Quarterly 

NA 

1.5 µg/m 3 

Lead is a heavy metal most commonly associated with emissions from 

industrial sources, including waste oil and solid waste incineration, iron 

and steel production, lead smelting, and battery and lead alkyl 

manufacturing. 

Source: http://www.airquality.utah.gov/Public-Interest/about_pollutants/About_pollutants.htm 

Notes: 

µg/m 3 = microgram(s) per cubic meter 

mg/m 3 = milligram(s) per cubic meter 

NA = not applicable 

NO x = oxides of nitrogen 

ppb = part(s) per billion 

ppm = part(s) per million 

4-8 RDD/102790005 (NLH4349.DOCX) 

TBG012712153950RDD

HARO LD GAT TY D R 

AMEL IA EARH ART DR 

15 0 S 

80 

10 0 N 

21 0 N 

2 0 W 

26 70 N 

17 0 N 

70 0 N 

215 

O 

Great Salt Lake 

Bountiful - BV 

68 

106 

89 

106 

SLC 

International 


32 0 W 

CO R AL L N 

North Salt Lake - N2 

M R T ON DR 

C ST 

80 

WRIG HT BRO T HERS D R 

TER MI NAL D R 

NORT H TEM PL E ST 

19 50 W 

15 

52 00 W 

26 50 W 

Beach -B4 

215 

270 

Hawthrone - HW 

201 

Magna -MG 

201 

Rose Park - RP 

89 

Cottonwood -CW 

Air Quality Monitor Station 


Limited Access Highway 

Residential 

Arterial 

Water Body 


National Forest 

0 0.5 1 2 Miles 

Exhibit 4-3 Air Monitoring 

Stations in the Vicinity of the Airport 



SEA \\JAFAR\PROJ\SLC_405943\MAPFILES\AIRQUALITY.MXD JBRENTIN 2/22/2011 09:33:09


4.3.2 Water Resources 

This section describes the existing water resources located in the project footprint and 

around the Airport. These resources include natural bodies of water and drainage systems, 

wetlands, and floodplains. 

4.3.2.1 Water Bodies and Drainage Systems 

The Airport is located south of the Great Salt Lake, which makes up the delta wetlands on 

the southeast arm of the lake. The Jordan River, which drains Utah Lake and the Salt Lake 

valley, flows north into the Great Salt Lake, passing the Airport approximately 2 miles to the 

east. 

As shown in Exhibit 4-4, a large canal system is used to convey water from the Jordan River, 

along the south and west sides of the Airport, and then farther west to lands that are 

irrigated. The Surplus Canal crosses I-80 just south of the Airport, then continues west along 

the south boundary of the Airport until it wraps around the west side and turns to the west. 

Another canal, the North Point Consolidated Canal (NPCC), branches off from and parallels 

the Surplus Canal until the two canals separate from each other on the west side of the 

Airport. A branch of the NPCC wraps around the west and north sides of the Airport 

property. No natural creeks or rivers enter the project footprint, and all open channels have 

been rerouted and channelized over the years. These channels are controlled by the NPCC 

operators, wetland management, and staff from local duck clubs that are located near 

Airport property. 

The canal system that wraps around the Airport is used to discharge stormwater from the 

Airport and for irrigation and water supply to maintain wetlands and areas used by duck 

clubs. Stormwater from the Airport drains into the Surplus Canal, and stormwater from the 

east side of the property drains into a canal that conveys the stormwater to the City Drain. 

The City Drain closely follows the Jordan River and also empties into Farmington Bay in the 

Great Salt Lake. As described in the 2006 UPDES permit for the Airport, five points of 

discharge are regulated. The authorization to discharge provided under this permit is 

limited to outfalls specifically designated in Table 4-2 as discharge locations. Discharges at 

any location not authorized under the UPDES permit may be subject to penalties. 

The topography, structures, and pipe system layout define the boundaries of the drainage 

areas. Most of the Airport terminal complex and parking are located in the south drainage 

area. In this area, stormwater flows into a pipe that carries it south of the parking lot, into a 

series of detention ponds, before discharging into the Surplus Canal at UPDES Outfalls 002 

and 005. 

As shown in Exhibit 4-4, the stormwater runoff from the project footprint is divided into 

three basins: the West Drainage Area, South Drainage Area, and East Drainage Area. The 

receiving waters for each drainage area are as follows: 

East Drainage Area: City Drain (UPDES Outfalls 001 and 004) 

South Drainage Area: Surplus Canal (UPDES Outfalls 002 and 005) 

West Drainage Area: Surplus Canal (UPDES Outfall 003A) 

4-10 RDD/102790005 (NLH4349.DOCX) 

TBG012712153950RDD

2670 N 

2 2 0 0 W 

3 200 W 

2100 N 


16 R 

16 L 

West 

Drainage 

Area 

1700 N 

Drain 

C O RR A L L N 


17 

M OR TON DR 

Surplus Canal 

003A 

East 

Drainage 

Area 

001 

C S T 

215 


14 

700 N 

Surplus Canal 



WRIGHT BROTHERS DR 

005 

South 

Drainage 

Area 

TERMINAL DR 

32 

C ity Drai n 

1 950 W 

80 

34 L 

002 

100 N 

34 R 

Surplus Canal 

004 

35 


150 S 

5200 W 

2 6 5 0 W 

UPDES Outfall 

Drainage Boundary 

Detention Pond 

0 750 1,500 3,000 Feet 

Exhibit 4-4 Project Water Bodies 



SEA \\JAFAR\PROJ\SLC_405943\MAPFILES\WATERBODIES.MXD JBRENTIN 2/22/2011 09:20:23


TABLE 4-2 

Discharge Points 

Outfall Number 

Location of Discharge Point 

001 The discharge point is located on the east side of the Airport, at the eastside pump station. 

The discharge will include a midfield basin groundwater component during non-storm 

periods. The receiving water is the City Drain. 

002 The discharge point is on the south boundary of the Airport. The receiving water is the 

Surplus Canal. 

003A 

This discharge point is on the west side of the Airport. The receiving water is the Surplus 

Canal. 

004 The discharge point is on the eastern side of the south boundary of Airport property. The 

discharge will include a midfield detention basin groundwater component during storm 

periods. The City Drain is the receiving water under normal conditions, and the Surplus 

Canal is the receiving water during storm events. 

005 The discharge point is located on the western side of the south boundary of Airport 

property, from ponds south of the main middle runway. The receiving water is Surplus 

Canal. 

4.3.2.2 Wetlands 

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) National Wetlands Inventory online database 

shows palustrine emergent temporarily flooded wetlands near the proposed South 

Concourse West and the proposed future concourse expansion area at the North Concourse 

West (USFWS, 2010a). However, because of previous Airport development, these features 

no longer exist. No wetlands are present in the project footprint. National Wetlands 

Inventory data for the surrounding area show wetlands northwest of the Airport, toward 

the Surplus Canal and the Great Salt Lake (USFWS, 2010a). 

4.3.2.3 Floodplains 

The existing Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) map for the area surrounding 

the Airport is based on Flood Insurance Rate Maps from November 2011. These are the 

currently approved FEMA maps for the area. A review of these maps showed that the 

Proposed Action is not within the Special Flood Hazard Area. 

4.3.3 Biotic Resources 

As discussed earlier, habitats near the Airport include open water and wetland habitats of 

the Great Salt Lake to the west and north, and urban development to the south and east. The 

project footprint is completely developed, and contains little to no natural vegetation and 

limited landscaped vegetation. Pavement, buildings, runways, and gravel dominate the 

project footprint. 

The Airport’s Wildlife Hazard Management Plan (SLCDA, 2007a) describes management 

techniques used to minimize the aviation hazards posed by wildlife found on Airport 

property. The plan includes management of species including ducks, gulls, Canada goose 

(Branta canadensis), white-faced ibis (Plegadis chihi), swallows, European starlings (Sturnus 

vulgaris), horned lark (Eremophila alpestris), raptors, American white pelican (Pelecanus 

erythrorhynchos), and red fox (Vulpes vulpes). Other avian species that may be found in the 

area include mourning dove (Zenaida macroura), house sparrow (Passer domesticus), house 

4-12 RDD/102790005 (NLH4349.DOCX) 

TBG012712153950RDD


finch (Carpodacus mexicanus), American robin (Turdus migratorius), and rock dove (Columba 

livia). Mammal species that may be found in the area include skunks, domestic cats, and 

mice. 

As shown in Table 4-3, USFWS lists six threatened, endangered, or candidate species for Salt 

Lake County (USFWS, 2010b). 

TABLE 4-3 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Endangered, Threatened, and Candidate Species for Salt Lake County, Utah 

Scientific Name Common Name Status Habitat Association 

Falco peregrinus 

tundrius 

Arctic peregrine 

falcon 

Recovery 

Various open situations, especially with suitable 

nesting areas, such as cliffs, mountains, forests, 

and human population centers 

Coccyzus 

americanus 

Yellow-billed 

cuckoo 

Candidate 

Dense lowland riparian areas 

Charadrius 

montanus 

Mountain plover 

Proposed 

threatened 

Grazed shortgrass prairie and fallow fields 

Lotichthys 

phlegethontis 

Least chub Candidate Alkaline springs 

Chasmistes liorus June sucker Endangered Utah Lake and tributaries 

Lynx canadensis Canada lynx Threatened Boreal and montane regions 

Source: USFWS, 2010b 

The Utah Division of Wildlife Resources also maintains a list of species of concern for the 

state. This list is based on known species occurrences and species observations from the 

Utah Natural Heritage Program Biodiversity Tracking and Conservation System (BIOTICS) 

(Utah Division of Wildlife Resources, 2010a). Twenty-five species are listed for Salt Lake 

County (Utah Division of Wildlife Resources, 2010a). However, on the basis of species 

distributions and habitat associations, none of these species are expected to be found in the 

project footprint. 

Although they are no longer listed under the federal ESA, bald eagles (Haliaeetus 

leucocephalus) are still protected under the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act 

(16 U.S. Code [USC] 668–668c). Bald eagles nest in tall trees, usually near water bodies where 

fish and waterfowl prey are available. Wintering areas are also commonly associated with 

open water (Utah Division of Wildlife Resources, 2010b). Bald eagles use the Great Salt Lake 

and other water habitats near the Airport; however, in general, bald eagles avoid areas with 

nearby human activity and development. 


state. This list is based on known species occurrences and species observations from 

BIOTICS (Utah Division of Wildlife Resources, 2010a). Twenty-five species are listed for 

Salt Lake County (Utah Division of Wildlife Resources, 2010a). On the basis of species 

distributions and habitat associations with these species, none of these species are expected 

to be found in the project footprint. 

RDD/102790005 (NLH4349.DOCX) 4-13 

TBG012712153950RDD


4.3.4 Hazardous Materials and Solid Waste 

This section describes existing conditions related to solid waste generation, handling, and 

disposal, as well as current practices related to hazardous material storage and use at SLC. 

This section also describes existing hazardous material sites and contaminated properties in 

the project footprint. 

4.3.4.1 Solid Waste 

Solid waste generation and disposal is overseen by the Airport Facility Maintenance 

Division of the SLCDA. The Airport currently generates approximately 3,650 tons per year 

(ton/year) of solid waste. This estimate is based on an average of the annual tonnage 

disposed of from 2002 through 2009. Solid waste diversion in the terminals is encouraged by 

the placement of recycling receptacles, which accept appropriate plastic materials and 

paper; however, this diversion only removes a small amount of refuse from the overall solid 

waste stream. Cardboard materials and newspaper are removed from the solid waste 

stream and placed in onsite compactors. Together, the cardboard, paper, and plastic account 

for an average of 255 ton/year of waste removed from the waste stream, or a little more 

than 7 percent of the average annual solid waste tonnage. Remaining cardboard, aluminum, 

and some other recyclables are removed by the disposal contractor offsite, at a solid waste 

transfer station. The removed recyclables are then recycled at a local recycling facility. Waste 

Management of Utah is the designated contractor responsible for collecting and removing 

solid waste and recyclables from the Airport. 

Solid waste from the Airport is disposed of at the Salt Lake Valley Landfill by Waste 

Management of Utah. This landfill is a permitted Class I facility that is capable of accepting 

municipal waste, commercial solid waste, small-quantity household hazardous waste, 

industrial waste, asbestos waste, and infectious waste (UDEQ, 2010b). According to existing 

data from the UDEQ Division of Solid and Hazardous Waste, the Salt Lake Valley Landfill 

has a remaining capacity of 450 acres or 29 million tons (UDEQ, 2010b). On the basis of 

current and historical disposal rates and the available capacity, the Salt Lake Valley Landfill 

is anticipated to have a remaining life of 25 years. 

Solid waste from passenger airplanes (including flight kitchens), individual airline offices 

and ticketing centers, cargo airplanes and cargo shipment centers, and Airport tenants 

(retail stores and restaurants) and other Airport users is managed individually by each 

entity through its own waste and recycling removal contracts. 

4.3.4.2 Hazardous Materials 

Various products and chemicals classified as hazardous materials under state or federal law 

are used at the Airport. The most commonly used hazardous materials are petroleum 

products, such as diesel fuel, motor oil, asphalt tack, used oil, hydraulic fluid, transmission 

fluid, dielectric oil, and gear oil. Other hazardous materials stored and used in large 

quantities include deicing and anti-icing chemicals used for snow and ice removal on paved 

areas and runways at the Airport. Smaller quantities of other hazardous materials may be 

used in daily operations to clean and maintain equipment or vehicles and as part of 

janitorial services; however, these hazardous materials are typically stored and used in 

quantities that are considered de minimis. Table 4-4 summarizes the hazardous materials that 

are used or generated in material quantities in Airport operations. 

4-14 RDD/102790005 (NLH4349.DOCX) 

TBG012712153950RDD


TABLE 4-4 

Summary of Hazardous Materials Currently Used in Airport Operations 

Hazardous Material Quantity (gallons) Use 

Diesel Fuel 67,132 Vehicles and emergency generators 

Motor Oil 1,162 Vehicles and mechanical equipment 

Asphalt Tack 1,204 Surfacing of runways and paved areas 

Used Oil 1,440 Generated from equipment and vehicle maintenance 

Hydraulic Fluid 3,264 Vehicles and equipment 

Transmission Fluid 100 Vehicles and equipment 

Dielectric Oil >700 a Electrical transformers 

Gear Oil 228 Equipment 

a Dielectric oil is stored in 55-gallon drums in varying quantities throughout the year. A minimum of 700 gallons is 

typically present onsite at any time. 

Deicing at the Airport occurs at aircraft deicing facilities located in the terminal area. The 

end-of-runway deicing facilities will include new glycol collection systems, glycol storage 

facilities, deicing operations control facilities and other support facilities for deicing 

personnel. These new deicing facilities will further reduce deicer discharge and runoff to the 

environment. The deicing facility projects are in various phases of design and construction. 

Additional information is provided in Section 4.4. 

In addition to the hazardous materials identified in Table 4-4, hazardous materials are 

stored in underground and aboveground storage tanks (UST and AST, respectively) that are 

operated by other entities on Airport property. For example, the Air National Guard owns 

and operates its own fuel system, as does the GA area east of the terminal area. The Airport 

owns and operates a hydrant fuel system that consists of large ASTs at the fuel farm and an 

underground network of piping that conveys the fuel to hydrants at the terminal. Rental car 

agencies store gasoline and diesel fuel in smaller ASTs and USTs that are located in the 

project footprint. It is possible that some of the ASTs and USTs located at the rental car 

facilities would need to be properly closed and removed as part of construction activities, 

particularly construction associated with the proposed rental car parking garage and rental 

car QTA lot and the road improvements south of the proposed terminal. 

4.3.5 Existing Hazardous Sites and Contaminated Properties 

A hazardous waste site/environmental incident database search was conducted for the 

project footprint. The assessment was performed by Environmental Data Resources, Inc. 

(EDR), and included reviews of various federal, state, local, and tribal databases. To capture 

potential hazardous waste sites and environmental incidents that might be located outside 

Airport boundaries, the search radius was extended to 2 miles beyond the proposed project 

footprint. The complete EDR database search report is included as Appendix C. 

The EDR database search revealed the presence of more than 300 database entries or 

incidents within the 2-mile search radius. There were 12 database records within the project 

footprint. Exhibit 4-5 shows the EDR database search results. Chapter 5, Environmental 

Consequences, discusses these sites and whether they would cause a low, moderate, or high 

potential impact to the project footprint. 

RDD/102790005 (NLH4349.DOCX) 4-15 

TBG012712153950RDD

20 

B2 

B18 

A1 

A 

A14 

C 

C19 

D 

E 

D23 

E 

Sights at Elevation Equal to or 

Higher than Target Property 

Site at Elevation Lower than 

Target Property 

Target Site Quarter Mile Buffer 

0 250 500 1,000 Feet 

Exhibit 4-5 Hazardous Record 

Locations 



\\JAFAR\PROJ\SLC_405943\MAPFILES\AFFECTEDENVIRONMENT\BASEMAPJLB.MXD JBRENTIN 2/25/2011 09:59:26


4.4 Past, Present, and Reasonably Foreseeable Future 

Actions 

This section identifies past, present, and reasonably foreseeable projects in the project 

environs that might contribute to cumulative impacts when considered in combination with 

the effects of the TRP at SLC. Section 5.18, Cumulative Effects, describes the potential 

cumulative impacts of these projects when considered in combination with the Proposed 

Action. 

4.4.1 Past Projects 

The Airport became a commercial aviation facility in the 1950s, when it upgraded its gravel 

airstrips to three runways to support commercial aircraft and equipped the primary runway 

with an instrument landing system. Terminal One was dedicated in the 1960s and 

Terminal Two was built in the late 1970s. Through the 1980s and 1990s, ground access 

improvements were made; a new runway was built; existing runways were rehabilitated 

and extended; and support facilities were built, including a new Aircraft Rescue Firefighting 

Facility in 1997, a cargo complex in 1998, and a new air traffic control tower and terminal 

radar approach control facility in 1999. 

A review of recently completed Environmental Categorical Exclusion (CatEx) reports 

helped determine projects completed at the Airport in the last 3 years and their potential 

contribution to cumulative impacts. Most of the CatEx reports prepared referred to the 2005 

Salt Lake City Environmental Baseline Conditions Report (PB Aviation, 2005), which was 

prepared as an “existing conditions” document to assist the SLCDA in preparing CatEx 

reports. Only two of the CatEx reports, for the two projects listed in Table 4-5, listed an 

environmental resource that required analysis. 

TABLE 4-5 

Summary of Past Environmental Categorical Exclusions at Salt Lake City International Airport 

Project Name 

Construction 

Start Date 

Environmental Resource 

Runway 16R-34L Storm Drainage Improvements May 2007 Surface Water and Stormwater 

Reconstruction of Taxiway H (H4-H7) 2008 Stormwater 

Sources: Runway 16R-34L Storm Drainage Improvements CatEx Report (SLCDA, 2007b); Reconstruction of 

Taxiway H CatEx Report (SLCDA, 2008) 

The Emergency Access Road to 16R/34L project, originally planned for 2012 in the June 30, 

2010, SLC Capital Improvement Program (SLCDA, 2010b), has recently been completed. In 

this project, an existing dirt road was regraded and improved with asphalt millings to 

provide better fire and emergency access to the south end of Runway 34L. 

Another recently completed project is the North Support Tunnel Rehabilitation Project, 

which involved repairing the concrete overlay in the tee intersection of the North Support 

Tunnel. The concrete overlay material was removed and replaced with an asphalt surface 

RDD/102790005 (NLH4349.DOCX) 4-17 

TBG012712153950RDD


course on the road. Vertical joints and cracks in the tunnel walls have been routed and 

resealed as part of the project. 

The Airport is implementing an end-of-runway deicing program. This multi-phased 

program involves constructing a total of six deicing pads at the ends of Runways 16R/34L, 

16L/34R, and 17/35. The program began in 2008, and construction of the program will be 

completed in 2020. The Taxiway L deicing pad has been completed. 

4.4.2 Current Projects 

The Runway 34L deicing pad is under construction. In addition, the light rail station, which 

received a FONSI in 2009, is under construction. 

4.4.3 Reasonably Foreseeable Future Projects 

To identify reasonably foreseeable projects that could contribute to the cumulative effect of 

the Proposed Action, all projects on the SLCDA’s 2011–2012 capital improvement project list 

(SLCDA, no date) were considered. 

Most of the future projects listed in the Capital Improvement Program relate to the terminal 

and airfield projects incorporated in the TRP and are addressed in the analysis of projectrelated 

impacts. The following three projects are not incorporated in the TRP and, therefore, 

have the potential to contribute to cumulative impacts when considered in combination 

with the Proposed Action: 

 

 

 

Snow Equipment Storage Building. This project is being planned in response to FAA 

Advisory Circular 150/5220-18A, Buildings for Storage and Maintenance of Airport Snow 

and Ice Control Equipment and Materials (FAA, 2007b). This project will involve 

constructing a storage facility and an access road to the airfield for snow equipment and 

materials. During development of the previous Capital Improvement Program, this 

project was delayed to 2012. It is anticipated that this project will begin in spring 2012 

and be completed by the end of 2012. 

End-of-Runway Deicing Pads. As mentioned in Section 4.4.1, the runway deicing 

program at the Airport is scheduled for construction between 2008 and 2020. The 

SLCDA has initiated a program to construct a total of six deicing pads at the ends of 

Runways 16R/34L and 16L/34L; the primary air carrier runways; and Taxiways L 

and S, on the east side of the airfield. Runway deicing pads are scheduled on Runway 

End 34L in two phases. Phase I is scheduled to be constructed between late 2011 and the 

first half of 2012. Phase II of Runway End 34L is scheduled to be constructed between 

late 2012 and the first half of 2013. Runway deicing pads are also scheduled on Runway 

End 34R in two phases. Phase I of Runway End 34R is scheduled to be constructed 

between late 2013 and the first half of 2014. Phase II of Runway End 34R is scheduled 

between late 2014 and the first half of 2015. 

North Cargo Apron Expansion. To accommodate deicing operations on Runway 

End 34R and associated taxiways, the FedEx facility would also require relocation to the 

north cargo area. The new ramp in the north cargo area would provide ramp space for 

FedEx and other future cargo needs. The design for the ramp is complete and 

implementation of this project will depend on funding approval. This project will enable 

the SLCDA to locate all cargo carriers in the newer north cargo area as shown and 

4-18 RDD/102790005 (NLH4349.DOCX) 

TBG012712153950RDD


planned on the ALP. This project is planned to begin in the spring of 2012 and be 

completed by the end of 2012. 

 

 

Pavement Overlay and Rehabilitation Projects. The following pavement overlay and 

pavement rehabilitation projects are phased across 2 years. The first project is scheduled 

to start construction in early 2012 and the last project is scheduled to start construction 

in early 2014. The pavement overlay and rehabilitation projects include the following 

elements: 

 

 

 

 

 

Apron reconstruction between the existing service road and Taxiway H 

Asphalt Overlay, Phase VIII (includes miscellaneous roads and parking lots) 

Pavement Rehabilitation at Runway 16L/34R 

Asphalt Overlay, Phase IX (includes miscellaneous roads and parking lots) 

Pavement Reconstruction at Taxiway S 

Potential Future Development. Future terminal development might include a north 

concourse located about 1,450 feet north of the proposed south concourse. This northern 

concourse would potentially mimic the southern concourse, with a North Concourse 

West wing and North Concourse East wing (see Exhibit 2-2). The possible consequences 

of this potential future terminal development plan are not addressed in the analysis of 

cumulative impacts because of its speculative nature. For example, the extent and timing 

of development and the nature of the aircraft that would use the new terminal in the 

future are not reasonably foreseeable. Development of such a northern concourse would 

occur if growth continued at the Airport beyond the current forecast period and demand 

warranted additional concourse space. 

RDD/102790005 (NLH4349.DOCX) 4-19 

TBG012712153950RDD

CHAPTER 5 

Environmental Consequences 

In compliance with FAA Order 5050.4B, National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) 

Implementing Instructions for Airport Projects (FAA, 2006), this chapter describes 

environmental consequences of implementing the two alternatives retained for detailed 

consideration: the No Action Alternative, and the TRP (the Proposed Action). In addition, 

this section describes the cumulative environmental consequences associated with 

implementing the Proposed Action in combination with other past, present, and reasonably 

foreseeable future actions. The analysis of environmental consequences examines the effects 

of the Proposed Action in 2025, which represents the first full year of operation for the TRP 

and is the end of the forecast period. 

The analysis of environmental consequences conforms to the listing of resource categories 

provided in the FAA Desk Reference (FAA, 2007a). As noted in Chapter 4, Affected 

Environment, the following resources identified in the FAA Desk Reference are not present 

in the project area, would not be affected by the Proposed Action and its alternatives, and 

are not evaluated in this chapter: coastal barriers and coastal zone management, farmlands, 

and wild and scenic rivers. 

As described in Section 3.3, the alternatives retained for detailed consideration would not 

require any physical development beyond the area currently occupied by the terminal 

complex and supporting facilities. The terminal complex is separated from the surrounding 

off-airport environment by extensive airfield and surface transportation facilities. This area 

is largely paved and is served by adequate airfield and surface transportation facilities. 

Section 3.3 also explains that these alternatives would not increase Airport capacity or 

energy consumption, alter flight patterns, or change off-airport surface transportation 

patterns. For these reasons, the alternatives under consideration would have no material 

effect with respect to off-airport noise and land use compatibility or community 

development. The analyses of related resource categories explain the reasons that these 

resources would not be affected. 

Other resources found in the surrounding environment could be affected by the alternatives 

under consideration. After an introduction summarizing the nature of each alternative’s 

effect on the potentially affected resource, the sections in this chapter provide the following 

information: 

 

 

 

 

 

Description of regulatory requirements 

Definition of thresholds of significance 

Methodology used in the analysis of impacts 

Environmental impacts of the alternatives 

Mitigation measures for significant impacts, and measures to avoid and minimize less 

than significant impacts 

RDD/102790005 (NLH4349.DOCX) 5-1 

TBG012712153950RDD

CHAPTER 5 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES 

This chapter also examines the potential for the Proposed Action to contribute to cumulative 

effects when considered in combination with other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable 

actions. 

5.1 Air Quality 

Redevelopment of the terminal complex as proposed by the Proposed Action would reduce 

congestion and delay both for aircraft on the taxiways and ramps surrounding the terminal 

complex and for surface vehicles on the terminal roadway system. As a result, air emissions 

from aircraft and vehicles would be reduced compared to the No Action Alternative. 

As described in Section 1.4, the existing terminal complex does not take advantage of 

energy-efficient technologies and designs developed during the last 50 years. Salt Lake City 

has adopted the policy that public buildings owned and controlled by Salt Lake City 

Corporation be built or renovated using the USGBC LEED standards at the Certified level. 

This goal was updated to LEED Silver level certification in January 2006. Although the new 

terminal complex would increase the terminal area by about 62 percent, it would 

incorporate more energy-efficient design and materials. Thus, the new facilities are expected 

to reduce energy consumption and associated air emissions compared to the No Action 

Alternative. 

Redevelopment of the terminal complex would entail the demolition of existing structures, 

as well as the construction of new structures, airfield pavement, and roads. Although this 

construction activity would generate air emissions, those emissions would be well below the 

de minimis levels that would require a conformity demonstration under the General 

Conformity Rule. 

5.1.1 Regulatory Setting 

The Airport is subject to federal, state, and local air quality regulations, which are enforced 

primarily by the UDEQ, Division of Air Quality. Section 4.3.1, describes applicable air 

quality standards and existing conditions at the Airport. This section describes the 

regulatory requirements and responsibilities for compliance with these regulations. 

5.1.1.1 Clean Air Act 

Pursuant to the federal Clean Air Act (CAA), the USEPA has established NAAQS for the 

following criteria pollutants: CO, O 3 , NO 2 , SO 2 , PM 10 , PM 2.5 , and lead (see Table 4-1). These 

NAAQS have been established to protect human health and public welfare. Although 

individual states may establish more stringent air quality standards than the NAAQS, the 

State of Utah has not done so. 

USEPA designates areas where air quality does not meet the NAAQS as “nonattainment” 

areas. Nonattainment areas where air quality has improved to levels that meet the NAAQS 

are redesignated as “maintenance” areas. The Airport is located in Salt Lake County, a 

designated maintenance area for O 3 and CO, and a nonattainment area for PM 10 , PM 2.5 , 

and SO 2 . Any state with nonattainment or maintenance areas must develop a State 

Implementation Plan (SIP) to bring such areas into attainment with the NAAQS 14 . The Salt 

14 The time by which areas must reach attainment varies depending upon the date an area is designated as non-attainment or 

maintenance, the degree of non-attainment, and the specific pollutant. For CO, the revised SIP for Salt Lake City extends 

through 2019; for ozone, the revised SIP for the 8-hour standard extends through 2014; for SO 2 , the revised SIP extended 

through 2003 and a re-designation has been requested; for PM 10 , the SIP extended through 2003. 

5-2 RDD/102790005 (NLH4349.DOCX) 

TBG012712153950RDD


Lake County portion of the Utah SIP 15 addresses O 3 and CO, PM 10 , PM 2.5 , and SO 2 . Volatile 

organic compounds (VOC) and NO x are precursor pollutants for the formation of O 3 and 

are, therefore, included in emissions inventories developed for plans to achieve or maintain 

the O 3 NAAQS. 

Under Section 176(c)(1) of the CAA, federal agencies that “engage in, support in any way or 

provide financial assistance for, license or permit, or approve any activity” must 

demonstrate that such actions do not interfere with state and local plans to bring an area 

into attainment with the NAAQS (42 USC Section 7506(c)). Federal agencies cannot fund or 

approve activities that do not conform to the applicable SIP. 

5.1.1.2 General Conformity Rule 

CAA Section 176(c) requires USEPA to publish regulations and develop procedures for 

federal agencies to ensure that federal actions conform to the applicable SIP and do not 

interfere with strategies employed to attain the NAAQS. USEPA has developed the 

Transportation Conformity Rule to cover highways and similar projects, and the General 

Conformity Rule to cover other projects, such as airport development. 

The General Conformity Rule establishes de minimis levels for project-related direct and 

indirect emissions, below which the action is presumed to conform to the SIP (40 CFR 

Part 93, Subpart 153). These de minimis levels depend on the degree of nonattainment for a 

given pollutant in the region. The de minimis levels are 100 ton/year for the relevant 

pollutants in Salt Lake County (CO, VOCs, NO x , SO 2 , PM 10 , and PM 2.5 ). 

A general conformity determination is required for any federal action proposed in a 

nonattainment or maintenance area if total project-related direct and indirect emissions 

would equal or exceed the annual de minimis emissions levels. FAA Order 1050.1E, 

Appendix A, Section 2, defines direct and indirect emissions as follows: 

Direct emissions are those that are caused by or initiated by the Federal action 

and occur at the same time and place as the action. Indirect emissions are those 

caused by the Federal action, but occur later in time and/or may be removed in 

distance from the action. Temporary construction emissions must be considered 

in determining whether emission threshold levels are exceeded. (See EPA General 

Conformity Questions and Answers, dated November 1994.) 

The order further defines direct and indirect emissions as follows: 

In addition, the General Conformity Rule adopted the exclusive definition of 

indirect emissions, which excludes emissions that may be attributable to the 

Federal action, but that the FAA has no authority to control. The FAA is 

responsible for assessing only direct and indirect emissions of criteria pollutants 

and precursors that are caused by a Federal action, are reasonably foreseeable, 

and can practicably be controlled by the FAA through its continuing program 

responsibility. The FAA may compare emissions with and without the proposed 

Federal action during the year in which emissions are projected to be greatest in 

determining whether emission threshold levels are exceeded. 

15 http://www.airquality.utah.gov/Planning/SIP/index.htm. 

RDD/102790005 (NLH4349.DOCX) 5-3 

TBG012712153950RDD


5.1.1.3 Indirect Source Review 

The State of Utah requires an Indirect Source Review (ISR) for a federal action that has the 

potential to cause an increase in net emissions from indirect sources 16 , such as motor 

vehicles on highways, parking at sports and entertainment facilities, or aircraft operations. 

The ISR sets thresholds for increased operation of the indirect sources. When a federal 

action has the potential to exceed these thresholds, an air quality review is required to assess 

the character and impact of the additional emissions. The Utah ISR program no longer 

requires permitting for new or expanded parking facilities 17 . 

5.1.1.4 Federal Aviation Administration Responsibilities 

As lead agency, the FAA is responsible for ensuring that federal actions at airports located 

in designated nonattainment and maintenance areas conform to the applicable SIP. The 

FAA may not, therefore, approve or fund a project that, through additional air pollutant 

emissions, would have the following result: 

 

 

 

Cause or contribute to a new violation of any NAAQS. 

Increase the frequency or severity of any existing NAAQS violations. 

Delay the timely attainment of NAAQS, planned interim emissions decreases, or other 

SIP milestones. 

5.1.2 Thresholds of Significance 

FAA Order 1050.1E, Change 1, Appendix A, Section 2.3, provides the following guidance 

regarding the significance of a project’s air quality impacts: “Potentially significant air 

quality impacts associated with an FAA project or action would be demonstrated by the 

project or action exceeding one or more of the NAAQS for any of the time periods 

analyzed.” Chapter 1, Paragraph 6.e.(5) of the FAA Desk Reference (FAA, 2007a) provides 

the following additional guidance on determining significance: 

(b) When the emissions inventory shows total net emissions are below 

de minimis levels. If total net emissions of the proposed airport action or 

alternative analyzed are below de minimis thresholds, and is determined not 

regionally significant 18 , no further air quality analysis is needed. Therefore, the 

responsible FAA official may conclude the following: 

(1) For NEPA purposes. The action and/or alternatives (if alternatives 

are evaluated) will not cause a significant air quality impact, since it is 

unlikely the pollutant concentration analyzed would exceed a NAAQS 

(See FAA Air Quality Handbook, pg. 14, Section 2.1.5); and/or 

(2) For General Conformity purposes. FAA need not conduct 

additional analysis or make a General Conformity Determination. 

16 Indirect sources are defined as sources of emissions that would occur later in time or are removed in distance from the 

federal action. 

17 Telephone conversation with Jay Morris, Section Manager, Minor Source Compliance, Utah Division of Air Quality, May 

2012. 

18 The requirement to consider regional significance has been eliminated by the USEPA in the 2006 Revisions to the General 

Conformity Regulations, EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0669; FRL-9131-7. 

5-4 RDD/102790005 (NLH4349.DOCX) 

TBG012712153950RDD


5.1.3 Methodologies 

The analysis of air quality impacts consisted of developing comparative air emissions 

inventories of airport-related criteria pollutants for the two alternatives being considered. 

The following discussion outlines the methods used to prepare these emissions inventories 

for aircraft and surface vehicle activity; stationary sources, such as generators; and 

construction. More detailed descriptions of model inputs and assumptions are provided in 

Technical Memorandum: Emissions Modeling (see Appendix D). 

5.1.3.1 Emissions from Aircraft Operations 

As required by FAA guidance (FAA, 2007a), the evaluation of Airport-related emissions was 

conducted by using the current version (5.1.3) of the FAA’s Emissions Dispersion Modeling 

System (EDMS). Emissions were estimated for existing conditions (2009), 2020, and 2025 

year by using the FAA-approved activity forecasts for the Airport, which are provided in 

Appendix A, Technical Memorandum: Aviation Demand Forecasts. 

Aircraft emissions were estimated for each aircraft by landing and takeoff (LTO) cycle. An 

LTO consists of two operations, a landing and a takeoff. A complete LTO cycle includes four 

modes of operation: approach, taxi (in and out)/idle, takeoff, and climb-out. In addition, at 

SLC, some aircraft conduct pilot training activities called a touch-and-go (TGO). TGOs also 

comprise two operations and the TGO cycle consists of the same modes of operation as the 

LTO, except that there is no taxi/idle time while the aircraft is on the ground. Aircraft 

operations below 3,000 feet above ground level, including TGO operations, are included in 

the air emissions inventory. FAA’s EDMS produces estimates of the fuel burned by each 

aircraft as it operates in these modes, as well as emissions of criteria pollutants. 

The amount of time that each type of aircraft typically spends in each mode of operation 

described above was used in emissions calculations. The TRP would affect the time aircraft 

spend taxiing on the ground, but would not affect airborne time. The EDMS calculations, 

therefore, assume default time values included in the EDMS model for the airborne times in 

each mode (approach, take-off, and climb-out). These values are specific to the performance 

characteristics of each type of aircraft. Without the project (that is, under the No Action 

Alternative), the estimated total taxi-in and -out times, including delay, would increase from 

11.9 minutes per operation under existing (2009) conditions to 13.6 minutes in 2025. This 

increase in taxi times reflects the increasing levels of aircraft delay as demand increases over 

time. The Proposed Action would reduce average aircraft taxi time by 0.7 minute, or 

approximately 5 percent, per operation in 2025, compared to the No Action Alternative. 

Technical Memorandum: Airfield Simulation (see Appendix D) describes the analysis of 

aircraft taxi and delay times in more detail. 

5.1.3.2 Emissions from Surface Vehicles 

The current version (5.1.3) of EDMS was also used to estimate emissions from surface 

vehicles. The EDMS Default Fleet Mix, which includes vehicles of all types, fuels, and ages, 

was assumed to accurately represent the distribution of surface roadway traffic. No 

distinction was made between vehicle miles travel from passenger cars and heavy-duty 

vehicles. This standard distribution was applied to all Airport roadway segments. 

This analysis is based on roadway data that include curbside dwell times, transportation 

mode splits, crosswalk pedestrian volumes, crosswalk pedestrian speeds, traffic splits per 

RDD/102790005 (NLH4349.DOCX) 5-5 

TBG012712153950RDD


terminal, free-flow speeds, and roadway geometry. Parking data used in this analysis were 

provided by Airport staff and include hourly entrance volumes, exit volumes, and parking 

durations. Annual traffic volumes are assumed to increase in direct proportion to the 

forecast growth in originating passengers (see Appendix A, Technical Memorandum: 

Aviation Demand Forecasts). Technical Memorandum: Traffic Analysis (see Appendix D) 

describes the analysis of vehicle miles traveled and average speeds in more detail. 

5.1.3.3 Emissions from Stationary Sources 

Stationary emissions sources at the Airport consist of boilers, a fire training burn pit, 

emergency generators, fuel tanks, an incinerator for waste from international flights, roads 

(where vehicle travel results in particulate matter from dust), aircraft painting spray booths, 

and fuel tanks. The SLCDA submits emissions inventory reports to the UDEQ Division of 

Air Quality on a 3-year cycle. Table 5-1 summarizes the results of the most recent report, 

submitted for 2012 (data from 2011). Emissions from stationary sources would represent less 

than 5 percent of estimated 2012 Airport emissions from aircraft and surface vehicle 

operations for any pollutant. 

TABLE 5-1 

Stationary Source Emissions, 2011 

Estimated Emissions 

Sources 

CO VOCs NO x SO x PM 10 PM 2.5 

Boilers (ton/year) 1.08 0.25 7.60 0.03 0.34 0.34 

Burn Pit (ton/year) 1.91 2.35 0.35 0.00 0.00 0.00 

Generators (ton/year) 0.61 0.16 2.61 0.11 0.12 0.12 

Incinerator (ton/year) a 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 

Roads (ton/year) 0.78 

Spray Booths (ton/year) 0.39 

Fuel Tanks (ton/year) 

Vacuum (ton/year) 0.03 0.03 

Totals (ton/year) 3.60 3.15 10.56 0.14 1.27 0.49 

Percent of Operations 0.1 1.1 0.8 0.1 4.7 1.9 

Emissions b 

a Incinerator is no longer used because refuse from international flights is disposed of offsite. 

b See Table 5-4. 

Sources: Stationary sources – UDEQ, Division of Air Quality, Emission Inventory for Calendar Year 2011, 

Form A; mobile sources – Technical Memorandum: Emissions Modeling (see Appendix D) 

Emissions from stationary sources can be affected by a wide range of activities. For instance, 

fuel tank emissions are related to the number and type of aircraft taking on fuel. Emissions 

from sources such as boilers are related to heating and cooling demand in buildings, and 

could be affected by changes in passenger demand and the size and energy efficiency of 

buildings. Other stationary emissions sources, such as spray booths, serve commercial 

5-6 RDD/102790005 (NLH4349.DOCX) 

TBG012712153950RDD


activities such as aircraft maintenance, and may not be related to changes in aircraft activity. 

Table 5-2 lists the primary factors affecting emissions from stationary sources. 

TABLE 5-2 

Stationary Sources and Related Activities 

Sources 

Related Activities 

Boilers 

Burn Pit 

Generators 

Incinerator 

Roads 

Spray Booths 

Emissions from use of boilers in heating and cooling of buildings are related to passenger 

volumes and building types. 

Fire training requirements are not directly related to Airport activity levels. 

Emergency power requirements and maintenance testing are not directly related to Airport 

activity levels. 

International waste disposal rates are related to international aircraft arrivals. 

Dust emissions from roadways are related to the volume of vehicular activity. 

Emissions from aircraft painting are not directly related to activity levels. 

Source: JBR Environmental Consultants for the SLCDA, 2009 

5.1.3.4 Emissions from Construction Activity 

Construction activity is estimated from the volume of material and the equipment required 

for construction and/or demolition for the individual projects incorporated in the TRP. 

These materials estimates are derived from planning and programming studies prepared by 

the SLCDA architectural consultant, HOK. Technical Memorandum: Construction 

Emissions Calculations (see Appendix D) provides more detailed information on the 

development of these emissions estimates. Construction-related emissions would be 

generated by the following activities: 

 

 

 

Construction. Heavy, diesel-powered equipment would be used during site preparation 

and project construction to perform activities such as clearing, grading, excavating, and 

paving. Total hours of operation for each piece of equipment were estimated and 

applied to emissions factors from the USEPA NONROAD model to estimate the exhaust 

emissions of criteria pollutants. 

Material transport. The quantities of materials reflected in the cost estimates developed 

by HOK were used to determine the amount of material that would be transported to 

the construction site. It was assumed that heavy, diesel-powered trucks would be used 

to haul the materials from offsite suppliers over distances ranging from about 2 to 

nearly 7 miles, depending on the typical supplier locations for specific materials (see 

Technical Memorandum: Construction Emissions Calculations, Attachment A 

[Appendix D]). 

Construction worker travel. Employee vehicle trips to and from the work site were 

represented as light-duty vehicles. The number of trips was based on the assumption 

that there would be an average of 10 workers per crew, each driving a separate vehicle. 

The average round-trip distance is assumed to be 20 miles, at an average speed of 

30 miles per hour. 

RDD/102790005 (NLH4349.DOCX) 5-7 

TBG012712153950RDD


Analysis of quarterly construction equipment activity levels indicates that the peak year for 

construction emissions would be 2016 because of the overlap of individual projects (see 

Technical Memorandum: Construction Emissions Calculations, Attachment C, Project 

Schedule [Appendix D]). Emissions for individual projects were assumed to be evenly 

distributed throughout the duration of that project. Technical Memorandum: Construction 

Emissions Calculations, Attachment D, Peak Period Emissions (see Appendix D), shows the 

overlap of projects used to calculate the peak construction emissions by quarter and 

calendar year. 

5.1.4 Environmental Impacts 

In accordance with the requirements of NEPA and FAA guidance (FAA, 2007a), this section 

compares the air emissions estimated for the Proposed Action versus the No Action 

Alternative. The following subsections address conditions in 2025, reflecting the first full 

year of operations of the TRP and the end of the forecast period. This evaluation of 

environmental impacts is divided into the following sections: 

 

 

 

 

 

No Action Alternative. Summarizes the operational emissions of the No Action 

Alternative as a baseline for assessing the impacts of the Proposed Action. This 

alternative does not have associated construction emissions. 

Proposed Action. Describes the Proposed Action. As described in Section 3.3, both of the 

alternatives retained for detailed consideration would accommodate the same volume of 

aircraft and surface vehicle activity each year, but the Proposed Action would reduce 

emissions from aircraft and surface vehicles due to improvements in airside and 

landside efficiency and reduction in congestion. Unlike the No Action Alternative, the 

Proposed Action would also involve construction and associated emissions. 

Conformity Analysis. Compares project-related direct and indirect emissions, including 

construction emissions for the Proposed Action and the No Action Alternative for the 

peak construction year (2016), to determine whether a conformity determination is 

required. 

Toxic Air Contaminants and Hazardous Air Pollutants. Explains the effects of the 

Proposed Action, compared to the No Action Alternative, with respect to toxic air 

contaminants and hazardous air pollutants. 

Greenhouse Gases. Summarizes the contribution of the Airport to national greenhouse 

gas emissions. 


Under the No Action Alternative, the existing terminal complex would continue to be used 

and, although substantial renovation would be required, new terminal construction projects 

would not be undertaken. Proposed non-terminal development projects would continue as 

planned. As described in Section 3.3.1.1, implementation of five projects would continue 

under this alternative. These projects would be constructed with or without implementation 

of the proposed terminal improvements; therefore, the effects of these projects are included 

in the baseline against which the Proposed Action Alternative is compared. 

5-8 RDD/102790005 (NLH4349.DOCX) 

TBG012712153950RDD


Construction Emissions 

Although the No Action Alternative does not entail development of new terminal 

or landside facilities, several ongoing or planned projects would be constructed (see 

Sections 4.4.2 and 4.4.3). Table 5-3 shows that construction of these facilities would generate 

less than de minimis emissions levels; that is, less than 100 ton/year of the relevant pollutants 

in Salt Lake County. Emissions for ongoing construction would likely be similar in the 

future. 

TABLE 5-3 

No Action Alternative Ongoing Construction Project Emissions 

Estimated Emissions (ton/year) 

Year 

CO VOCs NO x SO x PM 10 

2009 4.12 1.28 12.22 1.12 1.06 

2010 14.13 4.43 43.08 3.93 3.82 

2011 (projected) 5.80 1.90 17.69 1.63 1.57 

Source: SLCDA, 2010c 

Operational Emissions 

Table 5-4 shows that, by 2025, emissions of criteria pollutants, except CO, would increase 

from existing levels under the No Action Alternative. This projected increase in emissions is 

due to the forecast growth in aircraft activity and surface vehicle activity, coupled with the 

resulting increase in congestion and delay. CO emissions would decrease over the analysis 

period and VOC emissions would decrease between 2009 and 2020 as a result of projected 

improvements in surface vehicle emissions rates. 

TABLE 5-4 

No Action Alternative Mobile-source Emissions, Existing (2009), 2020, and 2025 


Year 


Existing (2009) 2,917.3 298.8 1,296.5 124.7 26.9 26.3 

2020 1,949.1 289.1 1,437.6 147.4 27.6 27.0 

2025 2,014.1 316.8 1,563.4 160.8 29.5 28.9 

Source: Technical Memorandum: Emissions Modeling (see Appendix D) 

5.1.4.2 Proposed Action 

The Proposed Action would involve a multi-year construction process with associated 

construction-related emissions that would not occur under the No Action Alternative. As 

described in Section 3.3, the Proposed Action would accommodate the same volume of 

passengers, aircraft, and surface vehicles as the No Action Alternative. As a result, the 

operational emissions would differ from those of the No Action Alternative only with 

respect to the relative efficiency of the alternatives. Thus, because the proposed TRP would 

enhance airfield and landside efficiency, it would have lower emissions from aircraft and 

surface vehicles compared to the No Action Alternative. 

RDD/102790005 (NLH4349.DOCX) 5-9 

TBG012712153950RDD


Temporary construction emissions represent the only project-related increase in direct 

emissions. In the absence of increased traffic levels (see Section 3.3), the Proposed Action 

would not lead to indirect emissions. The total emissions related to the Proposed Action 

would be below the applicable de minimis levels, indicating that no further air quality impact 

or general conformity analysis is required. Implementing the Proposed Action would not 

cause an exceedance of any threshold of significance for air quality impacts. 

Construction Emissions 

The emissions estimates shown in Table 5-5 reflect construction activity in 2016, the peak 

construction year for the TRP. The reason 2016 would be the peak year is that eight projects 

would overlap in the first quarter of 2016 and six projects would overlap during the 

remaining three quarters of 2016. These projects include the landside roads, terminal 

building, apron facility, rental car building, rental car service facility, and the parking 

garage, which will generate the highest levels of emissions. A more detailed description of 

the calculation methodology is provided in Technical Memorandum: Construction 

Emissions Calculations (see Appendix D). Attachment D of that technical memorandum 

(see Appendix D) provides a detailed breakout of emissions by quarter. As shown in 

Table 5-5, peak year construction emissions would remain well below the de minimis level 

of 100 ton/year for the applicable criteria pollutants: CO, VOCs, NO x , SO 2 , PM 10 , and PM 2.5 . 

TABLE 5-5 

Peak Year Construction Emissions, 2016 

Emissions (ton/year) 


Total Emissions 4.78 3.97 14.34 0.45 0.60 0.53 

Source: Technical Memorandum: Construction Emissions Calculations, Attachment D (see Appendix D) 

Operational Emissions 

Table 5-6 shows the aircraft and surface vehicle emissions inventories for the Proposed 

Action for 2020 and 2025. As described in Chapter 3, the TRP would reduce emissions of 

relevant criteria pollutants from both aircraft and surface vehicles, compared to the 

No Action Alternative. This reduction would result from the fact that, although both 

alternatives would accommodate the same level of aircraft and surface vehicle activity, the 

Proposed Action would reduce congestion and delay, compared to the No Action 

Alternative. 

TABLE 5-6 

Proposed Action Mobile-source Emissions, Existing (2009), 2020, and 2025 


Year 


Existing (2009) 2,917.3 298.8 1,296.5 124.7 26.9 26.3 

2020 1,916.1 284.9 1,434.4 146.6 27.5 26.9 

Compared to No Action -33.0 -4.2 -3.2 -0.8 -0.1 -0.1 

2025 1,989.9 316.7 1,563.0 160.7 29.3 28.7 

Compared to No Action -24.2 -0.2 -0.3 -0.2 -0.2 -0.2 

Source: Technical Memorandum: Construction Emissions Calculations, Attachment D (see Appendix D) 

5-10 RDD/102790005 (NLH4349.DOCX) 

TBG012712153950RDD


The proposed TRP would not affect the levels of aircraft, passenger, or vehicular activity 

compared to the No Action Alternative and, therefore, would not affect emissions from 

stationary sources that are related to activity levels. Similarly, the TRP would not alter the 

need to test generators or conduct fire training. Although the proposed new terminal 

facilities would be 62 percent larger than the existing facilities, they would be designed to 

current energy-efficiency standards (the City of Salt Lake requires new public buildings to 

be designed to LEED Silver standards). New energy-efficient building techniques can 

substantially reduce energy consumption and associated emissions from boilers or similar 

equipment, compared to the design standards incorporated in the existing structures. 

Because the level of energy savings would depend upon the final design, it is not possible to 

assess the tradeoff between increased building size and decreased energy consumption per 

unit area. On the basis of the information available at this stage of the development process, 

this analysis assumes that stationary source emissions would be the same for the Proposed 

Action and the No Action Alternative, and does not further address emissions from 

stationary sources. 

Indirect Emissions 

As noted earlier in this section, indirect emissions might be caused by future actions that are 

reasonably foreseeable consequences of the Proposed Action and over which the FAA 

would have control through its continuing program responsibility. Such actions might 

include future Airport development that might be triggered by the Proposed Action. 

Although future Airport development is inevitable over the long term, implementing the 

Proposed Action would not necessarily cause or accelerate such development. As described 

in Section 3.3, the No Action Alternative would accommodate the same volume of aircraft, 

passenger, and vehicular activity as the Proposed Action. Implementation of the proposed 

TRP would not eliminate a constraint on forecast growth that would lead to additional 

aviation activity and associated economic growth that could generate indirect emissions. 

As noted in Table 2-2, the proposed TRP would increase the number of public parking 

spaces from 12,611 to 14,318 and increase the number of rental car parking spaces from 805 

to 1,782. The total number of passenger and rental car parking spaces would increase by 

1,707, or 13.5 percent, compared to the No Action Alternative. Without the proposed 

increase in parking spaces, passengers might not find a convenient parking space during 

peak periods. This shortage would likely have the following consequences: 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Increased time spent circulating in parking lots 

Increased use of off-airport parking facilities 

Increased passenger drop-off and pick-up traffic 

Increased use of taxicabs and shuttle service 

Increased use of the curbside roads by recirculating vehicles 

Increased use of public transit 

Because of the numerous options available for passengers to access an airport, the lack of 

convenient parking does not materially constrain passenger activity. All but one of the 

potential consequences listed above would increase the vehicle miles traveled per 

passenger. That exception, use of public transit, accounts for a relatively small proportion of 

passenger access at airports. A recent review of public transportation mode share at major 

U.S. airports found that public transportation accounts for between 6 and 23 percent of 

RDD/102790005 (NLH4349.DOCX) 5-11 

TBG012712153950RDD


passenger trips to and from airports (Transportation Resource Board, 2008). The proportion 

of transit use is greatest at airports located in dense urban areas with extensive transit 

infrastructure, such as the San Francisco Bay Area, the New York Metropolitan Area, and 

Boston. On balance, a shortage of convenient parking opportunities would likely increase 

the volume of traffic on Airport roads and associated air emissions. 

As described in Section 3.3.1.1, the No Action Alternative would accommodate the same 

number of passengers and vehicles as the proposed TRP, but at higher levels of congestion. 

Table 5-6 shows that the TRP would decrease emissions from mobile sources, including 

surface vehicles. In 2025, the TRP would reduce surface vehicle CO emissions by 4.1 percent 

and VOC emissions by 3.6 percent, compared to the No Action Alternative (see, Technical 

Memorandum: Emissions Modeling [Appendix D]). 

5.1.4.3 Conformity Analysis 

A General Conformity determination is required for federal actions if total net direct and 

indirect emissions would exceed any applicable de minimis levels. The General Conformity 

rules require consideration of the following analysis years [40 CFR 93.183]: 

1. The year mandated by the federal CAA amendments for attainment by the region or the 

latest year for which emissions are projected in the maintenance plan. The current CO 

maintenance plan shows continued attainment through 2019. 

2. The year in which the total direct and indirect emissions from the project are greatest. As 

is noted in previous sections, once constructed, the Proposed Action would reduce 

operational emissions. Temporary emission increases due to construction would occur, 

and the peak year of construction emissions would be 2016. 

3. Any year for which the SIP (or a maintenance plan included in the SIP) specifies an 

emissions budget. The CO maintenance plan, which is part of the SIP 19 , contains 

forecasts for point sources, area sources, on-road sources, and non-road sources for 1993, 

2004, 2005, 2008, 2011, 2014, 2017, and 2019. The PM 10 maintenance plan contains 

forecasts for 2008, 2011, 2014, and 2017. The SO x maintenance plan demonstrates 

continued attainment through 2016. 

In accordance with the General Conformity requirements, the first test is to compare projectrelated 

emissions to the applicable de minimis levels. The construction schedule for the 

Proposed Action extends beyond the SIP demonstration years listed above, and the full 

operational efficiencies of the Proposed Action would not be realized until completion of 

construction in 2024. Construction emissions, therefore, represent the only project-related 

emissions during the period covered by the SIP. As shown in Table 5-5, construction 

emissions in 2016, the peak year for construction emissions, would be below the applicable 

de minimis levels; therefore, project-related emissions would be less than de minimis levels 

for the demonstration years identified in the relevant SIP documents. Technical 

Memorandum: Construction Emissions Calculations, Attachment D, Peak Period Emissions 

(see Appendix D), tabulates construction emissions by quarter for the entire construction 

period. A General Conformity determination would not be required because the total net 

direct and indirect emissions would not exceed any applicable de minimis level. 

19 http://www.airquality.utah.gov/Planning/SIP/SIP_Areas/Salt-Lake.htm. 

5-12 RDD/102790005 (NLH4349.DOCX) 

TBG012712153950RDD


5.1.4.4 Toxic Air Contaminants and Hazardous Air Pollutants 

Toxic air contaminants and hazardous air pollutants are components of VOC and 

particulate emissions. The Proposed Action would reduce aircraft-related VOC and 

particulate emissions compared to the No Action Alternative (as shown in Table 5-4). 

Operation of this alternative would, therefore, reduce toxic air contaminant and hazardous 

air pollutant emissions compared to the No Action Alternative. 

5.1.4.5 Greenhouse Gases 

FAA TAF data indicate that aircraft operations at the Airport represented 0.35 percent of 

U.S. aviation activity in 2009 (FAA, 2010b). Assuming that greenhouse gases are generated 

in proportion to the level of activity, greenhouse gas emissions associated with existing and 

future aviation activity at the Airport would be expected to represent less than 0.01 percent 

of U.S.-based greenhouse gases (FAA, 2005b). Therefore, greenhouse gas emissions from the 

Proposed Action would not be significant. 

Table 5-6 shows that the Proposed Action would reduce emissions of all pollutants, 

compared to the No Action Alternative. These reductions would be due to reduced airfield 

and landside congestion and delay compared to the No Action Alternative as described in 

Section 3.3.1.2. These improvements would also reduce greenhouse gas emissions, 


5.1.5 Potential Mitigation 

The Proposed Action would not result in significant air quality impacts; therefore, no 

mitigation would be required. Although construction emissions would not require 

mitigation, measures to minimize construction emissions would include incorporating the 

provisions of FAA Advisory Circular 150/5370-10F, Standards for Specifying Construction of 

Airports (FAA, 2011), in project specifications. 

5.2 Water Quality 

The Proposed Action would be largely restricted to areas that are currently paved or 

otherwise developed impervious surfaces, and would not materially increase the amount or 

alter the nature of surface water runoff. The new terminal complex would require paving 

about 60 acres of currently undeveloped area, which represents an increase of about 

4.7 percent in the Airport’s existing impervious surface 20 . The current mix of development 

and activities in this area, and the level of such activities, would remain the same as under 

the No Action Alternative. Consequently, the quality of the water flowing from these 

surfaces would remain essentially unchanged. 

The Airport maintains a network of drainage infrastructure that includes catch basins, 

manholes, trunk line and lateral pipes, ditches and swales, detention ponds, pump stations, 

sub-drains, diversion and overflow structures, outfalls, and water quality treatment facilities 

(for example, oil-water separators). As described in Section 4.3.2.1, stormwater generated 

and collected on Airport property discharges to one of five outfalls, three of which primarily 

discharge to the Surplus Canal and two of which primarily discharge to the City Drain (see 

Table 4-2 and Exhibit 4-4). The Surplus Canal, which is part of an extensive regional 

20 Based on 1,284 acres of impervious surface, as estimated for the Master Drainage Study (CH2M HILL, 1997). 

RDD/102790005 (NLH4349.DOCX) 5-13 

TBG012712153950RDD


drainage system, crosses I-80 just south of the Airport, then continues west along the south 

boundary of the Airport until it wraps around the west side and turns to the west. 

The Airport holds a UPDES permit with the UDEQ Division of Water Quality. UPDES 

Permit No. UT0024988 establishes guidelines for stormwater quality monitoring, sampling, 

and effluent limitations for various constituents. Salt Lake County Flood Control 

Permit No. 1547 restricts the Airport to a combined total allowable discharge of 100 cubic 

feet per second (cfs) for the five outfalls. The proposed redevelopment of the terminal 

complex would remain within these parameters. 


The federal Clean Water Act, Section 303(d), requires states to identify waters that do not 

meet water quality standards and for which a total maximum daily load (TMDL) needs to 

be developed. TMDLs are developed for individual water bodies and for each pollutant 

within that water body that does not meet water quality standards. A TMDL establishes 

limits for pollutants to allow the water body to meet water quality standards. 

UPDES Permit No. UT0024988 establishes monitoring and effluent limits for the outfalls 

shown in Exhibit 4-4. The Airport also operates under Salt Lake County Flood Control 

Permit No. 1547, which restricts effluent rate to a combined total of 100 cfs or less for the 

five outfalls. The UPDES regulates development to prevent the Surplus Canal from 

exceeding its mandated discharge rate. Table 5-7 shows the discharge limitations and 

monitoring requirements at these outfalls. 


FAA Order 1050.1E, Change 1, Appendix A, Section 17.3, provides the following guidance 

in establishing the threshold of significant impact for water resources: 

When an action has the potential to exceed water quality standards, there are 

water quality problems that cannot be avoided or satisfactorily mitigated, or 

there would be difficulty in obtaining a permit or authorization, there may be a 

significant impact. 


As noted previously, water quality impacts could be caused if the proposed TRP resulted in 

exceedances of water quality standards in any receiving water. As noted in Section 4.3.2.1, 

stormwater from the Airport drains into the Surplus Canal, which ultimately empties into 

the Great Salt Lake. Outlets to these drainage systems are regulated under UPDES Permit 

No. UT0024988 and Salt Lake County Flood Control Permit No. 1547. Water discharged 

from the Airport into the receiving waters currently meets applicable water quality 

standards. Therefore, the analysis of water quality impacts determined whether the 

proposed development would alter the pattern or volume of stormwater discharge 

sufficiently to cause exceedances of any of the discharge limitations listed in Table 5-7. 

5-14 RDD/102790005 (NLH4349.DOCX) 

TBG012712153950RDD


TABLE 5-7 

Discharge Limitations and Monitoring Requirements 

Limitations 

Monitoring Requirements 

Metrics 

30-Day 

Average 

7-Day 

Average 

Daily 

Minimum 

Daily 

Maximum Frequency Sample Type 

Flow (cfs) -- -- -- -- Monthly Instantaneous 

Oil, grease (mg/L) -- -- -- 10 Monthly Grab 

pH (s.u.) -- -- 6.5 9.0 Monthly Grab 

BOD 5 (mg/L) -- -- -- -- Monthly Grab 

Source: UPDES Permit No. UT0024988 

Notes: 

-- = not applicable 

BOD 5 = 5-day biochemical oxygen demand 

Grab = grab sample; a single “dip and take” at a representative point 

Instantaneous = instantaneous sample; a single reading, observation or measurement 

mg/L = milligrams per liter 

s.u. = standard unit 

The 1997 Master Drainage Study for SLC (CH2M HILL, 1997) developed hydrologic and 

hydraulic models using the Hydrologic Engineering Center (HEC)-1 model and the USEPA 

Stormwater Management Model, respectively. These numeric models were used to simulate 

the system’s performance during specific design storm events to determine the ability of the 

drainage system to continue meeting regulatory requirements and develop recommended 

drainage improvements. The analysis of the proposed TRP examined the proposed 

development to assess its consistency with the recommendations of the 1997 Master 

Drainage Study, the potential for altering drainage basin boundaries, and the ability of 

existing and planned drainage infrastructure to accommodate the proposed increase in 

impervious surface area. Appendix E, Technical Memorandum: Salt Lake City International 

Airport – Drainage Impacts, describes this analysis in more detail. 



compares the water quality impacts of the No Action and Proposed Action Alternatives. The 

following subsections address conditions in 2025, reflecting completion of the TRP. This 

evaluation of environmental impacts addresses impacts from construction activities as well 

as post-construction operations. 






under this alternative. Because these projects would be constructed with or without 

implementation of the proposed terminal improvements, the effects of these projects are 

included in the baseline against which the Proposed Action is compared. 

RDD/102790005 (NLH4349.DOCX) 5-15 

TBG012712153950RDD


Construction Activity 

Although the No Action Alternative does not entail the development of new terminal or 

landside facilities, several ongoing or planned projects would be constructed (see 

Sections 4.4.2 and 4.4.3). Use of the best management practices described in Item 1156 of 

FAA Advisory Circular 150/5370-10F, Standards for Specifying Construction of Airports 

(FAA, 2011), would prevent significant impacts to the receiving waters. 

Ongoing Operation 

Although no additional terminal facilities or associated aircraft ramp areas would be 

constructed, passenger, aircraft, and surface vehicle activity would continue to increase as 

described in Section 3.3.1.1. This additional activity would increase the deposition of soot on 

airfield and roadway pavements, which would eventually flow into the stormwater system. 

This growth would also increase water use, wastewater generation, and use of deicing 

materials. The existing and planned water supply and drainage systems have been designed 

to accommodate this growth and continue to maintain water quality standards. 


The Proposed Action would increase the amount of impervious surface at the Airport by 

about 60 acres, or 4.7 percent. As described in Section 3.3.1.2, the Proposed Action would 

accommodate the same volume of passengers, aircraft, and surface vehicles as the No 

Action Alternative. For that reason, water use, wastewater generation, and use of deicing 

materials would be the same as under the No Action Alternative. Exhibit 5-1 shows the 

areas representing new impervious surface in relation to the existing drainage basins, major 

drain lines, and outfalls. 


With the exception of 60 acres of new impervious surface, construction activity would be 

restricted to existing paved areas and would not expose large areas of soil to erosion. Use of 

the best management practices described on page 156 of FAA Advisory Circular 150/ 

5370-10F, Standards for Specifying Construction of Airports (FAA, 2011), would prevent 

significant impacts to the receiving waters. 


Existing detention and pumping facilities are designed to limit discharge to levels at or 

below allowable rates specified in the UPDES permit. The Airport would be required to 

maintain these standards by designing, constructing, and operating new facilities in 

continued compliance with the conditions and discharge limitations of the permit. Although 

construction of the proposed TRP would increase the amount of impervious surface at the 

Airport by 4.7 percent, the project would not alter the drainage system, meaning that the 

same outfalls would connect the Airport’s drainage system to the receiving waters (see 

Exhibit 5-1). Appendix E, Technical Memorandum: Salt Lake City International Airport – 

Drainage Impacts, describes this analysis in more detail. 

As described in Section 5.1.4.2, the Proposed Action would reduce particulate emissions 

compared to the No Action Alternative, which would, therefore, reduce the deposition of 

soot onto airfield and roadway pavements (see Table 5-6). The Proposed Action would, 

therefore, slightly reduce pollutants in runoff compared to the No Action Alternative. 

5-16 RDD/102790005 (NLH4349.DOCX) 

TBG012712153950RDD

West 

Drainage 

Area 

17 

! 

003A 

East 

Drainage 

Area 

001 

! 

C ST 


14 

Surplus Canal 

WRIGHT BROTHERS DR 

34 L 

! 

005 

South 

Drainage 

Area 

TERMINAL DR 

! 

002 

100 N 

34 R 

32 

City Drain 

Surplus Canal 

! 

004 

35 


2650 W 

! UPDES Outfall 

Major Drain Lines 

Drainage Boundary New Impervious Surface 

Detention Pond 

Project Area 

0 750 1,500 3,000 Feet 

Water Body ¹ 

\\JAFAR\PROJ\SLC_405943\MAPFILES\AFFECTEDENVIRONMENT\NEWIMPERVIOUSSURFACE.MXD SSAVAGE1 04/16/2012 10:36:04 AM 

Exhibit 5-1 New Impervious Surface 





The Proposed Action would not result in significant water quality impacts; therefore, no 

mitigation would be required. Although construction effluent would not require mitigation, 

measures to minimize construction effluent would include incorporating the provisions of 

FAA Advisory Circular 150/5370-10F, Standards for Specifying Construction of Airports (FAA, 

2011), in project specifications. 

5.3 Floodplains 

The project area is located outside regulated floodplains. As discussed in Section 5.2, the 

proposed TRP would add 60 acres of impervious surface, which would increase the amount 

of impervious surface at the Airport by 4.7 percent. This increase is within the water 

discharge volume permitted for the Airport and could be accommodated by the existing 

storm drainage facilities; therefore, no impact to floodplain capacity is expected. 


Federal, state, and local development regulations prohibit substantial floodplain 

encroachment and reduction of flood capacity storage. Floodplains are regulated under 

several federal statutes, including those that follow: 

Executive Order 11988, Floodplain Management (1977) 

DOT Order 5650.2, Floodplain Management and Protection 

Executive Order 11988 directs federal agencies to take actions to reduce the risk of flood 

loss; minimize flood impacts on human safety, health, and welfare; and restore and preserve 

floodplain natural and beneficial values. Executive Order 11988 bans approving actions in a 

floodplain unless no other practicable alternative exists, and measures to minimize 

unavoidable short-term and long-term impacts are included. DOT Order 5650.2 establishes 

DOT policies and procedures to carry out Executive Order 11988. To comply with Executive 

Order 11988 and DOT Order 5650.2, Airport development actions must avoid floodplains, if 

a practicable alternative exists. 


On the basis of FAA Order 1050.1E, Change 1, Appendix A, Section 9.3, a significant impact 

on floodplains would occur if the Proposed Action resulted in “notable adverse effects on 

natural and beneficial floodplain values.” 


Analysis of current FEMA floodplain mapping shows that the proposed TRP would not 

encroach into the floodplain. Section 5.2, Water Quality, concludes that proposed 

development at the Airport would not materially increase the volume of stormwater 

flowing from the Airport boundary to the extent that it could affect floodplain levels. 



compares the floodplain impacts of the alternatives retained for detailed consideration. The 

following subsections address conditions in 2025, reflecting completion of the TRP. This 

5-18 RDD/102790005 (NLH4349.DOCX) 

TBG012712153950RDD


evaluation of environmental impacts addresses impacts from construction activities as well 

as post-construction operations. 








included in the baseline against which the Proposed Action is compared. 


The projects under the No Action Alternative were approved through a previous CatEx 

report dated April 1, 2004 (SLCDA, 2004). 


Although passenger and aircraft activity would continue to increase at the Airport, this 

growth would not result in any projects that would encroach into floodplains. 


The Proposed Action would be located outside the floodplain. 


Construction activity associated with the Proposed Action would not occur within the 

floodplain. Therefore, no impacts to the floodplain would occur. 


The Proposed Action would not directly affect floodplains through encroachment. Although 

it would increase the amount of impervious surface on the Airport by about 60 acres, or 

4.7 percent, continued compliance with the Airport’s UPDES permit requirements would 

prevent increased flow to receiving waters that might affect floodplain elevations. 

Therefore, the proposed TRP would not directly or indirectly affect floodplains, when 



The Proposed Action would not result in impacts to floodplains. Therefore, no mitigation 

would be necessary or proposed. 

5.4 Wetlands 

Although wetlands are present at and adjacent to the Airport, the proposed TRP would not 

directly or indirectly affect wetlands. As noted in previous sections, redevelopment of the 

terminal complex would largely be restricted to previously developed areas. Exhibit 5-1 

shows that the proposed terminal redevelopment would include three areas, totaling 

60 acres, that are not already paved or otherwise developed. The 2005 delineation of the 

Airport’s wetlands (SLCDA, 2005) included a survey of the project area, generally the area 

between Runways 16R/34L and 16L/34R, because the area had been disturbed during 

RDD/102790005 (NLH4349.DOCX) 5-19 

TBG012712153950RDD


previous Airport expansion, resulting in modified wetlands hydrology and soils (see 

Exhibit 5-2). In approving this document, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) did 

not suggest revisiting this area. Section 5.2 explains that the Proposed Action would not 

materially alter the volume or quality of water flowing from the Airport into the 

surrounding waterways; therefore, the Proposed Action would not indirectly affect 

wetlands adjacent to the Airport. 


Wetlands at and around the Airport are subject to federal and state regulations. Federal 

wetland regulations are as follows: 

 

 

 

Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (Federal Water Pollution Control Act, as amended; 

33 USC, Part 1251 et seq.) and Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1889. 

USACE is authorized to implement Section 404 and Section 10 regulatory programs. 

Wetlands adjacent to, abutting, or with significant hydrologic connections to waters of 

the U.S. (WUS) are regulated by the USACE. Section 404 requires project proponents to 

demonstrate that all efforts have been made to avoid and minimize impacts to wetlands. 

Executive Order 11990, Protection of Wetlands. This executive order requires federal 

agencies to ensure that their actions minimize or avoid the destruction, loss, or 

degradation of wetlands and to ensure the protection, preservation, and enhancement of 

the nation’s wetlands to the fullest extent practicable during the planning, construction, 

funding, and operation of transportation facilities and projects. 

DOT Order 5660.1A, Preservation of the Nation’s Wetlands. This DOT order requires 

that transportation facilities should be planned, constructed, and operated to ensure 

protection and enhancement of wetlands. 

The State of Utah defines “waters of the state” as “all streams, lakes, ponds, marshes, 

watercourses, waterways, wells, springs, irrigation systems, drainage systems, and all other 

bodies or accumulations of water, surface and underground, natural or artificial, public or 

private, which are contained within, flow through, or border upon this state or any portion 

of the state….” 21 In addition, the UPDES states that, “‘waters of the State’ includes 

‘wetlands’ as defined in the federal Clean Water Act.” Utah has not adopted regulations or 

policies regarding mitigation of wetlands impacts, but does review actions that require 

federal Section 404 permits for consistency with state water quality standards under its 

Section 401 certification process. The Proposed Action does not trigger state wetland 

jurisdiction. 

21 http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/code/r317/r317-008.htm. 

5-20 RDD/102790005 (NLH4349.DOCX) 

TBG012712153950RDD

¹ 

0 500 3,000 Feet 

Imagery taken from 

National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency (NGA) 

1-foot resolution color aerial photography, 2003 

Map courtesy of SWCA 

Unpaved Areas to be Developed 

Project Area 

Exhibit 5-2 Wetlands Delineation Input 



\\snowbird\Saltlakecityairport\399292\Figures\Natives\Wetlands_Delineation_Input_v1.ai APR-12 ckm



FAA Order 1050.1E, Change 1, Appendix A, Section 18.3, specifies the following thresholds 

of significance for wetlands: 

A significant impact would occur when the proposed action causes any of the 

following: 

18.3a. The action would adversely affect the function of a wetland to protect the 

quality or quantity of municipal water supplies, including sole source, potable 

water aquifers. 

18.3b. The action would substantially alter the hydrology needed to sustain the 

functions and values of the affected wetland or any wetlands to which it is 

connected. 

18.3c. The action would substantially reduce the affected wetland’s ability to retain 

floodwaters or storm-associated runoff, thereby threatening public health, safety or 

welfare (this includes cultural, recreational, and scientific resources important to 

the public, or property). 

18.3d. The action would adversely affect the maintenance of natural systems that 

support wildlife and fish habitat or economically-important timber, food, or fiber 

resources in the affected or surrounding wetlands. 


Review of the 2005 Wetlands Delineation Report (SLCDA, 2005) determined that no 

wetlands or water bodies are within the proposed TRP footprint, indicating that the project 

would not directly affect wetlands or other WUS (see Exhibit 5-2). Potential indirect impacts 

to wetlands or other WUS elsewhere at the Airport and in the surrounding area could be 

caused by changes in the quantity or quality of water flowing out of the project area. 

Section 5.2.3 describes the methods used to evaluate potential changes in water quality and 

quantity. The analysis presented in Section 5.2.4 concludes that the Proposed Action would 

not materially alter the volume or quality of water flowing from the Airport into the 

receiving waters. 



compares the potential wetlands and WUS impacts of the alternatives retained for detailed 

consideration. The following subsections address conditions in 2025, reflecting completion 

of the TRP. This evaluation of environmental impacts addresses impacts from construction 

activities as well as post-construction operations. 

The project area is generally between Runways 16R/34L and 16L/34R. As noted previously, 

this areas was not surveyed for wetlands because it had already been disturbed as the 

Airport expanded, resulting in modified wetlands hydrology and soils. 





5-22 RDD/102790005 (NLH4349.DOCX) 

TBG012712153950RDD





included in the baseline against which the Proposed Action is compared. Any such projects 

would conform to UPDES Permit No. UT0024988, as described in Section 5.2. 


Although the No Action Alternative would not entail development of new terminal or 

landside facilities, the planned construction of the five non-terminal projects mentioned in 

Section 5.4.4.1 would continue. Construction activity associated with these projects would 

not directly affect wetlands. Use of the best management practices described in page 156 of 


2011), would prevent significant impacts to the receiving waters that could affect wetlands 

or other WUS elsewhere at or adjacent to the Airport. 


As noted previously, the project area has already been disturbed, resulting in modified 

wetlands hydrology and soils. Also, as described in Section 5.2.4.1, the existing and planned 

water supply and drainage systems have been designed to accommodate anticipated 

growth and continue to maintain the quality standards of water flowing from the Airport 

into receiving waters that might be classified as wetlands or other WUS. 


Exhibit 5-2 shows that the project area does not include wetlands or other WUS. As 

described in Section 5.2.4.2, the increases in the amount of impervious surface would not 

materially alter the volume or quality of water flowing from the Airport into receiving 

waters that could, in turn, affect wetlands elsewhere at or adjacent to the Airport. 


Construction activity would not occur in or adjacent to wetlands or other water bodies. 

Use of the best management practices described in page 156 of FAA Advisory 

Circular 150/5370-10F, Standards for Specifying Construction of Airports (FAA, 2011), would 

prevent significant impacts on the receiving waters that could, in turn, affect wetlands or 

other WUS elsewhere at or adjacent to the Airport. 


The proposed TRP would not directly affect wetlands or other WUS. In addition, 

Section 5.2.4.2 concludes that the proposed TRP would not materially alter the volume or 

quality of water flowing from the Airport into receiving waters. As described in 

Section 5.2.4.2, the continued compliance with the Airport’s permit requirements would 

preclude degradation of the quality of water flowing from the Airport into receiving waters. 

The Proposed Action would not indirectly affect wetlands and other WUS elsewhere on or 

around the Airport, when compared to the No Action Alternative. 


The Proposed Action would not affect wetlands, other WUS, or waters of the state; 

therefore, no mitigation would be required. As noted in Section 5.2.5, measures to minimize 

construction effluent would include incorporating the provisions of FAA Advisory 

RDD/102790005 (NLH4349.DOCX) 5-23 

TBG012712153950RDD


Circular 150/5370-10F, Standards for Specifying Construction of Airports (FAA, 2011), in project 

specifications. 

5.5 Biotic Resources 

The FAA Desk Reference (FAA, 2007a) defines “biotic resources” as the types of flora 

(plants) and fauna (for example, fish, birds, reptiles, amphibians, marine mammals, and 

coral reefs) in a particular area. The term also includes rivers, lakes, wetlands, forests, 

upland communities, and other habitat types supporting the flora and the aquatic and avian 

fauna. The project area is largely paved or otherwise developed, and contains little or no 

natural vegetation and limited landscaped vegetation. Although the new terminal complex 

would require paving about 60 acres of undeveloped area, this area has been graded and is 

surrounded by active aircraft movement areas and/or roadways. 


Biotic community protection is not limited to species identified as threatened or 

endangered. FAA Order 1050.1E states that, “An action need not involve a threat of 

extinction to federally listed species to meet the NEPA standard of significance.” The order 

directs NEPA practitioners to consider other factors, including population dynamics, after 

consulting with agencies and organizations having jurisdiction or special expertise. A list of 

potentially applicable regulations follows. 

 

 

 

 

16 USC Section 662(a), Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act. This law requires federal 

agencies taking an action or funding an action that would affect a stream or water body 

to consult with USFWS. 

49 USC Section 47106(c)(1)(B), Environmental Requirements. When review of an 

application for an airport development action involving a new airport, a new runway, or 

a major runway extension indicates that the action would have significant adverse 

effects on natural resources including fish and wildlife, the Secretary of Transportation 

may approve that application, but only after finding that no possible and prudent 

alternative exists and that every reasonable step has been taken to minimize the adverse 

effects. 

16 USC 668–668c (as amended), The Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act. This law 

protects bald and golden eagles by prohibiting (except under certain conditions) the 

taking, possession, and commerce of such birds. “Take” is defined under this act as “to 

harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture, or collect or attempt to 

engage in any such conduct,” including modification to species’ habitats. 

16 USC 703 et seq. (as amended), Migratory Bird Treaty Act of 1918. This law prohibits 

actions that may “take” a migratory bird species. If an action may take a migratory bird 

or affect its breeding habitat, consultation with USFWS is needed. If it is determined that 

there are no feasible alternatives to taking the migratory bird or its nest, USFWS must 

issue a permit for the taking. Mitigation is typically required as part of the permit. 


A significant impact to biotic resources would include effects to designated critical habitat 

for threatened and endangered species, including effects to water resources critical to fish, 

5-24 RDD/102790005 (NLH4349.DOCX) 

TBG012712153950RDD


wildlife, and plant resources. For this EA, biotic resources also include species protected by 

the Migratory Bird Treaty Act, which prohibits private parties from intentionally taking a 

migratory bird, its eggs, or nests. 


A review of the habitats on Airport property, particularly within the project footprint, and 

around the Airport, was used for assessing impacts to biotic resources. The review consisted 

of examining maps and documentation, such as maps from the Airport’s Wildlife Hazard 

Management Plan (SLCDA, 2007a) and documentation from Utah Division of Wildlife 

Resources. 


Neither the Proposed Action nor the No Action Alternative would affect high-quality 

habitat. The project area has been intensively developed to accommodate aircraft and 

surface vehicle circulation, and contains little to no natural vegetation and limited 

landscaped vegetation. As shown in Exhibit 4-1, the project area is dominated by existing 

airfield, roadway, and parking pavement, in addition to terminal and supporting buildings. 


The No Action Alternative serves as the baseline against which the impacts of the Proposed 

Action are measured. This alternative differs from existing conditions because passenger, 

aircraft, and surface vehicle activity would continue to increase as described in 

Section 3.3.1.1 even though no additional terminal facilities or associated aircraft ramp areas 

would be constructed. In addition, continued use of the existing terminal facilities would 

entail substantial renovation, and construction of previously approved non-terminal 

development projects would continue (see Section 3.3.1.1). Because these projects would be 

constructed with or without implementation of the proposed terminal improvements, the 

effects of these projects are included in the baseline. 


Construction of the previously approved projects described in Sections 4.4.2 and 4.4.3 could 

result in increased wildlife mortality, displacement, and temporary and permanent habitat 

loss. Small, less-mobile wildlife could be killed, injured, or buried during construction. 

Mobile species that may inhabit the low-quality habitat in the project area (for example, 

skunks, squirrels, birds, and mice) would likely move away from construction activities and 

seek other suitable habitat outside the project area. Tracts of similar and less-developed 

habitat are available adjacent to the project area, and most wildlife would be expected to 

relocate to these areas during project construction. It is also possible that effects on water 

discharged to receiving waters could affect biotic communities in the Airport vicinity. As 

noted in Section 5.2.4.1 and 5.2.4.2, use of the best management practices described in 

page 156 of FAA Advisory Circular 150/5370-10F, Standards for Specifying Construction of 

Airports (FAA, 2011), would prevent significant impacts on the receiving waters and 

associated habitats. 


This forecast growth in Airport activity would increase the potential for wildlife hazard 

incidents. Furthermore, the forecast growth could increase pollutant loading in the 

stormwater system, which might degrade water quality in receiving waters and associated 

RDD/102790005 (NLH4349.DOCX) 5-25 

TBG012712153950RDD


habitats. Continued implementation of the Airport’s Wildlife Hazard Management Plan 

(SLCDA, 2007a) would minimize potential impacts to wildlife. In addition, the existing and 

planned water supply and drainage systems have been designed to accommodate this 

growth and continue to maintain water quality standards. 


Compared to the No Action Alternative, the Proposed Action would entail paving 

about 60 additional acres of unpaved but previously disturbed land. As described in 

Section 3.3.1.2, the Proposed Action would accommodate the same volume of passengers, 

aircraft, and surface vehicles as the No Action Alternative. 


Construction of the Proposed Action would have minimal impacts on biotic resources. As 

with construction of the previously approved projects discussed under the No Action 

Alternative (see Section 5.5.4.1), impacts could include increased wildlife mortality, 

displacement, and temporary and permanent habitat loss. Small, less-mobile wildlife could 

be killed, injured, or buried during construction. Mobile species that may inhabit the lowquality 

habitat in the project area (for example, skunks, squirrels, birds, and mice) would 

likely move away from construction activities and seek other suitable habitat outside the 

project area. Tracts of similar and less-developed habitat are available adjacent to the project 

area, and most wildlife is expected to relocate to these areas during project construction. It is 

also possible that effects on water discharged to receiving waters could affect biotic 

communities in the Airport vicinity, but implementation of the management practices in 

page 156 of FAA Advisory Circular 150/5370-10F, Standards for Specifying Construction of 

Airports (FAA, 2011), would prevent significant impacts to the receiving waters and 

associated habitats. 


The operational impacts on biotic resources from the existing terminal facility would be 

essentially the same under the Proposed Action as under the No Action Alternative. The 

Airport’s Wildlife Hazard Management Plan (SLCDA, 2007a) describes management 

techniques used to minimize the aviation hazards posed by wildlife found on Airport 

property. The plan describes management of species including ducks, gulls, Canada geese 

(Branta canadensis), white-faced ibis (Plegadis chihi), swallows, European starlings (Sturnus 

vulgaris), horned larks (Eremophila alpestris), raptors, American white pelicans (Pelecanus 

erythrorhynchos), and red foxes (Vulpes vulpes). Other avian species that may be found in the 

area include mourning dove (Zenaida macroura), house sparrow (Passer domesticus), house 

finch (Carpodacus mexicanus), American robin (Turdus migratorius), and rock dove (Columba 

livia). Management of these species would be the same under the Proposed Action as under 

the No Action Alternative. The biotic resources in the project area that would be displaced 

or disturbed are species adapted to human presence and are likely to be only minimally 

affected. The Proposed Action would not significantly affect biotic resources, compared to 

the No Action Alternative. 

5-26 RDD/102790005 (NLH4349.DOCX) 

TBG012712153950RDD



The Proposed Action would not result in significant impacts to biotic communities; 

therefore, no mitigation would be required. Using best management practices during 

construction would minimize potential adverse effects on biotic communities in the Airport 

vicinity resulting from impacts to the receiving waters for Airport runoff (see Section 5.2). 

5.6 Federally Listed Endangered or Threatened Species 

The factors limiting the potential impacts to biotic resources from the alternatives under 

consideration also limit their potential effects on federally listed endangered or threatened 

species. As noted in Section 5.5, the project area is largely paved or otherwise developed, 

and contains little or no natural vegetation and limited landscaped vegetation. In addition, 

the project area does not contain federally designated critical habitat for any listed species. 


The ESA was enacted to protect and conserve species listed as threatened and endangered. 

Under the ESA, it is unlawful for anyone (private or public entities) to take a listed species 

without authorization. To “take” is defined as to harm, harass, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, 

kill, trap, capture, or collect a listed species. Harm includes destruction of habitat necessary 

for survival. According to the ESA, incidental taking, or taking that is “incidental to, not the 

purpose of, carrying out an otherwise lawful activity,” may be allowed, subject to specific 

terms and conditions and with approval from USFWS and/or National Marine Fisheries 

Service (NOAA Fisheries). 

Section 7 of the ESA, as amended, applies to federal agency actions and sets forth 

requirements for consultation to determine whether the Proposed Action may affect an 

endangered or threatened species. 


A significant impact to federally listed threatened and endangered species would occur if 

the regulatory agency determined that the Proposed Action would likely jeopardize the 

continued existence of the species in question, or result in the destruction or adverse 

modification of federally designated critical habitat in the affected area. 


A review of project area maps and an Internet research of the USFWS and Utah Division of 

Wildlife Resources databases were used to assess impacts to threatened and endangered 

species. 


Table 5-8 identifies the USFWS-listed endangered, threatened, and candidate species found 

in Salt Lake County (USFWS, 2010b). The project area, located in the intensively developed 

center of the Airport property, does not provide suitable habitats for these species, and 

neither alternative is expected to affect listed species. As shown in Exhibit 4-1, the project 

area is dominated by existing airfield and landside pavement, buildings, and graded earth. 

No federally designated critical habitat is located in the project area. 

RDD/102790005 (NLH4349.DOCX) 5-27 

TBG012712153950RDD


TABLE 5-8 

Endangered, Threatened, and Candidate Species for Salt Lake County, Utah 

Scientific Name Common Name Status Habitat Association 

Falco peregrinus 

tundrius 

Arctic peregrine 

falcon 

Recovery 

Various open situations, especially with suitable 

nesting areas, such as cliffs, mountains, forests, 

and human population centers 

Coccyzus 

americanus 

Yellow-billed 

cuckoo 

Candidate 

Dense lowland riparian areas 

Charadrius 

montanus 

Mountain plover 

Proposed 

threatened 

Grazed shortgrass prairie and fallow fields 

Iotichthys 

phlegethontis 

Least chub Candidate Alkaline springs 

Chasmistes liorus June sucker Endangered Utah Lake and tributaries 

Lynx canadensis Canada lynx Threatened Boreal and montane regions 

Source: USFWS, 2010b 


state. This list is based on known species occurrences and species observations from Utah 

Natural Heritage Program’s BIOTICS. Twenty-five species are listed for Salt Lake County 

(Utah Division of Wildlife Resources, 2010a). Although they are no longer listed under the 

ESA, bald eagles (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) are still protected under the Bald and Golden 

Eagle Protection Act (16 USC 668–668c). Bald eagles nest in tall trees, usually near water 

bodies where fish and waterfowl prey are available. Wintering areas are also commonly 

associated with open water (Utah Division of Wildlife Resources, 2010b). 

USFWS threatened and endangered species and Utah Division of Wildlife Resource listed 

species require habitats that are not present in the project area. Bald eagles use the Great Salt 

Lake and other water habitats near the Airport; however, in general, bald eagles avoid areas 

with nearby human activity and development. Given the existing operational activities at 

the Airport, the construction activities associated with the Proposed Action, and the 

continued operations at the Airport, these species would not likely use the project area as 

habitat. 








included in the baseline. 


Although construction of the current and reasonably foreseeable future projects described 

in Sections 4.4.2 and 4.4.3 would not directly affect habitats associated with listed species, 

effects on water discharged to receiving waters could, in turn, affect such habitats. As 

5-28 RDD/102790005 (NLH4349.DOCX) 

TBG012712153950RDD


noted in Section 5.5.4.1, use of the best management practices described in Item 1156 of 


2011), would prevent significant impacts on the receiving waters and associated habitats. 


The ongoing operation of the Airport would not directly affect listed species because 

habitats in and around the project area do not support federally listed threatened, 

endangered, or candidate species or species of state concern. Although increased activity 

levels will increase pollutant loading, which might indirectly affect listed species by 

degrading water quality in receiving waters, the existing and planned water supply and 

drainage systems have been designed to accommodate this growth and continue to 

maintain water quality standards (see Section 5.2.4.1). 


Compared to the No Action Alternative, the Proposed Action would entail paving about 

60 additional acres of unpaved, but previously disturbed, land. As described in 

Section 3.3.1.2, the Proposed Action would accommodate the same volume of passengers, 

aircraft, and surface vehicles as the No Action Alternative. 


Because habitat supporting federally listed species or species of state concern is not present 

in the project area, construction activity associated with the Proposed Action would not 

directly affect these species. As mentioned in the discussion of the No Action Alternative, 

effects on water discharged to receiving waters could, in turn, affect such habitats. As 

noted in Section 5.5.4.2, use of the best management practices described in Item 1156 of 


2011), would prevent significant impacts on the receiving waters and associated habitats. 


The operational impacts on listed species would be essentially the same under the Proposed 

Action as under the No Action Alternative. As noted in the description of the No Action 

Alternative, ongoing operation of the Airport would not directly affect listed species 

because habitats in and around the project area do not support federally listed threatened, 

endangered, or candidate species or species of state concern. In addition, the existing and 

planned water supply and drainage systems have been designed to accommodate this 

growth and continue to maintain water quality standards, thus preventing indirect impacts 

on listed species through degradation of receiving waters and associated habitats. For these 

reasons, the Proposed Action would not significantly affect endangered, threatened, or 

candidate species, compared to the No Action Alternative. 


The Proposed Action would not result in significant impacts to federally listed species or 

species of state concern; therefore, no mitigation would be required. Using best 

management practices during construction would minimize potential adverse effects on 

potential habitat for protected species in the Airport vicinity that could be affected by 

impacts to the receiving waters for Airport runoff (see Section 5.2). 

RDD/102790005 (NLH4349.DOCX) 5-29 

TBG012712153950RDD


5.7 Hazardous Materials 

To determine any known hazardous materials located in the project area, a records review 

was conducted by EDR. The EDR records review identified six previous incidents involving 

hazardous waste in the project area. All but one record have been closed by regulatory 

agencies. The one open incident involves the 1993 closure of a rental car company’s leaking 

UST (LUST). Contaminated soil was removed, but residual groundwater contamination 

could remain at the site, so the record continues to be administered by the UDEQ, Division 

of Environmental Response and Remediation (DERR). This site is located near the proposed 

rental car QTA facility. Thus, it is possible that contractors conducting excavation activities 

in the project area near this one site could encounter low amounts of soil contamination, as 

well as contaminated groundwater. 


As stated in the FAA Desk Reference (FAA, 2007a), federal, state, and local laws regulate 

hazardous materials use, storage, transport, or disposal. These laws may extend to past and 

future landowners of properties containing these materials. In addition, disrupting sites 

containing hazardous materials or contaminates could cause significant impacts to soil, 

surface water, groundwater, air quality, and the organisms using these resources. Therefore, 

Airport sponsors purchasing or developing land for Airport purposes could encounter 

hazardous materials contamination. Following is a list of applicable federal regulations 

controlling the use, storage, handling, and disposal of hazardous materials: 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Comprehensive Environmental Response Compensation and Liability Act 

Resource Conservation and Recovery Act 

Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act 

Toxic Substances Control Act 

Community Environmental Response Facilitation Act 

Oil Pollution Act 

Pollution Prevention Act 


According to the FAA Desk Reference (FAA, 2007a), additional information or analysis of 

solid waste is needed only if problems are anticipated with respect to meeting the applicable 

local, state, tribal, or federal laws and regulations on hazardous or solid waste management. 

Additional data needed may include results of any further consultation with affected 

agencies and measures to be taken to minimize the impacts. 


A hazardous waste site/environmental incident database search was conducted for the 

project area. The assessment was performed by EDR, and included reviews of various 

federal, state, local, and tribal databases. The following criteria were used to screen the 

searched records, to establish a list of sites with legitimate potential to affect the project area: 

 

Nature of Listing/Incident. A leak from a UST or AST, a spill of hazardous or 

dangerous materials, or other incidents involving contamination of soil and/or 

groundwater are considered to have potential impacts. Findings involving air quality 

5-30 RDD/102790005 (NLH4349.DOCX) 

TBG012712153950RDD


complaints or findings with no documented release of hazardous materials or petroleum 

substances to soils/groundwater are not included for further consideration. 

 

 

Location of Listing/Incident Relative to the Proposed Project Footprint. Database 

entries listed as being situated upgradient or crossgradient are taken into consideration 

for potential impacts. Downgradient listings/incidents are generally viewed as having 

less risk for environmental impacts, and are not further evaluated. 

Proximity of Listing/Incident Relative to the Proposed Project Footprint. Database 

entries listed as being located within or adjacent to the Proposed Action footprint (less 

than 0.25 mile) are taken into consideration for potential impacts. Listings/incidents 

located downgradient or more than 1 mile from the project footprint are generally 

viewed as having little to no risk and are not further analyzed. 


The EDR database records search resulted in six records involving hazardous waste 

incidents in the project area. All but one record within the project area is closed. The one 

open record involves the removal of contaminated soil from a previously removed rental car 

company LUST. The record remains open because there is a potential for residual 

groundwater contamination at the site. Four of the other five records also involved the 

closure of LUSTs from rental car agencies, and those incidents are closed. The sixth record 

indentified by EDR, which is also closed, involved a 2003 spill of jet fuel from a pipeline 

trenching project. Soil contaminated during the fuel spill was removed; no groundwater 

contamination was reported with this incident. 







implementation of the Proposed Action, the effects of these projects are included in the 

baseline against which the Proposed Action is compared. 


Hazardous impacts could occur under the No Action Alternative if renovation or 

construction of the previously approved non-terminal development projects affected 

hazardous waste sites. However, the No Action Alternative would not involve construction, 

demolition, or disruption of potential hazardous sites, such as USTs, related to the TRP, new 

parking garage, or QTA facility. 


The ongoing operation of the Airport would not directly affect hazardous waste sites. The 

No Action Alternative would not involve changes or alternations to the locations identified 

in the EDR records search. 


The Proposed Action would include construction, demolition, and potential impacts to 

hazardous waste sites. The EDR database search (see Appendix C) revealed the presence of 

RDD/102790005 (NLH4349.DOCX) 5-31 

TBG012712153950RDD


more than 300 database entries, or incidents, within the 2-mile search radius, 217 of which 

were on Airport property. Maps depicting the locations of these 217 records are included 

with the EDR database search report in Appendix C. 

After screening the 217 sites with the criteria from the Section 5.7.3, 12 database records 

were identified in the project vicinity (Exhibit 4-5 shows the locations of the 12 sites). Six of 

the 12 records were determined to have moderate to high potential to affect construction 

activities. Those six records, their associated locations, and descriptions of the hazardous 

materials incidents are listed in Table 5-9. 

TABLE 5-9 

Environmental Data Resources, Inc., Records within the Proposed Action Footprint 

Facility/Property 

Name Location Database a Description 

Dollar Rent A Car 3861 West Terminal Drive LUST CLOSED – UST release during UST 

closure in 1993; incident closed by 

regulatory agency in 1995, but low 

levels of residual contamination 

possible 

Hertz Rent A Car 3757 West Terminal Drive LUST CLOSED – UST release during UST 

closure in 1988; incident closed by 

regulatory agency in 1996, but low 

levels of residual soil and/or 

groundwater contamination possible 

National Car Rental 

3801 West Terminal Drive 

(adjacent to Airport parking 

structure) 

LUST 

OPEN – Leaks from a 10,000-gallon 

UST contaminated soil and groundwater; 

contaminated soil removed, but 

incident remains open because of 

ongoing groundwater remediation and 

high potential for encountering 

contaminated groundwater 

Budget Rent A Car 3833 West Terminal Drive LUST CLOSED – Release of gasoline from 

UST during UST closure in 1992; 

incident closed by regulatory agency in 

1999, but low levels of residual soil 

and/or groundwater contamination 

possible 

Avis Rent A Car 3781 West Terminal Drive LUST CLOSED – LUST incident reported in 

1993; incident closed by regulatory 

agency in 1999, but residual soil and/or 

groundwater contamination possible 

GA 776 West Terminal Drive SPILLS CLOSED – Release of 500 gallons of 

JP-8 jet fuel from pipeline during 

trenching activities; soil contamination 

reportedly removed and no groundwater 

contamination reported; residual 

soil contamination possible 

a Database Key: SPILLS – This database lists incidents of spills reported to the Utah Division of Environmental 

Response and Remediation. LUST – This database contains an inventory of reported LUST locations and 

indicates whether or not a site is closed; if not closed, additional cleanup action would be required. 

5-32 RDD/102790005 (NLH4349.DOCX) 

TBG012712153950RDD


Five of the six records for incidents within the project footprint are associated with rental car 

agencies located along 3800 West Terminal Drive and involve LUSTs. These five sites are 

located in the southern portion of the project footprint, near the proposed rental car QTA 

facility and the proposed roadway improvements. Four of the five rental car agency 

incidents have been closed by DERR. Incident closure by DERR indicates that DERR no 

longer considers the incident a significant risk to human health or the environment, and 

closure is often based on the presence or lack of receptors (that is, groundwater wells or 

places of public assembly) and the contaminant levels. However, contractors excavating 

soils in the area where a closed incident occurred could encounter low levels of residual soil 

and groundwater contamination (that is, below applicable risk-based levels) from these 

incidents. 

The single open incident, at National Car Rental, involved the release of gasoline from a 

10,000-gallon gasoline UST in 1993. Contaminated soil was removed from the site, but 

residual groundwater contamination remains. The site is being administered by DERR and 

is under active groundwater monitoring and remediation through natural attenuation. 

Contractors conducting excavation activities near this site could encounter low levels of soil 

contamination (that is, below applicable risk-based levels), as well as contaminated 

groundwater. 

The sixth record, which is also closed, involved a fuel spill during previous construction 

activities. According to the EDR database report, a fuel line carrying JP-8 jet fuel was 

ruptured during trenching activities by construction equipment. The EDR database report 

list the incident as occurring along Terminal Drive near Terminal One. The incident report 

indicates that the jet fuel and contaminated soils were removed. There is no indication that 

groundwater contamination resulted from the release; however, contractors could 

encounter contaminated soil as a result of this old fuel release. 


Construction of the Proposed Action could affect the one open incident identified in the 

EDR database search. The location of the open incident is along the existing rental car row 

and involved a 10,000-gallon gasoline leak from a UST at National Car Rental in 1993. The 

site continues to be administered by DERR and is under active groundwater monitoring. 

The site is located under the future entrance roadway, just east of the new parking 

garage. During construction, contractors should be made aware of the incident in case they 

encounter contaminated soil from this fuel release. In addition, the Airport operates an 

underground fuel hydrant system that would require relocation and/or reconfiguration 

under the Proposed Action. The existing fuel hydrant system aligns with the location of the 

existing aircraft gates. Under the Proposed Action, the gate locations would be 

reconfigured; therefore, the underground fuel hydrant lines would also require 

reconfiguration. The reconfigured fuel hydrant system would meet the same Part 139 

certification standards and UDEQ regulations as the existing system. 

To avoid and minimize impacts if low levels of residual soil and groundwater 

contamination were encountered during construction activity, SLCDA reviews 

environmental policies with contractors at pre-bid briefings and following contract award at 

pre-construction briefings. These briefings address SLCDA environmental policies, 

including policies with regard to hazardous materials. SLCDA routinely addresses health 

RDD/102790005 (NLH4349.DOCX) 5-33 

TBG012712153950RDD


and construction safety with contractors, conducts safety inspections, and provides a 

construction and safety manual on-line. 

Construction crews would likely bring fuel, cleaning solvents, paints, and raw materials 

onsite to build the proposed improvements. Proper handling, storage, and disposal of these 

materials, as required in bid specifications, would prevent adverse effects on the 

environment. 


Ongoing operation of the Proposed Action would not directly affect hazardous waste sites 

in the project area. All but one of the hazardous waste incidents within the project area have 

been closed by regulatory agencies. However, the construction contractor should be made 

aware of the locations of previously contaminated areas. In addition, construction in the 

area of the open incident at the National Car Rental site should be coordinated with DERR 

to avoid the potential for groundwater or soil contamination. Operation of the fuel hydrant 

system would comply with Part 139 standards and FAA Advisory Circular 1050.15A, Fuel 

Storage Tanks at FAA Facilities (FAA, 1997), to prevent contamination of soil or groundwater. 

For these reasons, the Proposed Action would not significantly affect hazardous waste sites. 


During construction, contractors conducting excavation activities in the project area could 

encounter low levels of soil contamination, as well as contaminated groundwater. Using 

best management practices and complying with FAA Order 1050.10C, Prevention, Control 

and Abatement of Environmental Pollution at FAA Facilities, and FAA Advisory 

Circular 1050.15A, Fuel Storage Tanks at FAA Facilities (FAA, 1997), would adequately avoid 

or minimize risks to contractors, the public, or the environment from any pre-existing 

hazardous waste. 

5.8 Solid Waste 

The No Action Alternative and the Proposed Action would experience the same volumes of 

passenger, aircraft, and vehicular activity (see Section 3.3.1.1) and would, therefore, generate 

the same volume of solid waste. The Proposed Action would include demolition and 

construction of several large structures, including Airport terminals, concourses, and 

parking garages, which would temporarily increase solid waste. Construction waste would 

be minimized by reusing building materials whenever possible. The Salt Lake Valley 

Landfill has a remaining capacity of 450 acres or 29 million tons. On the basis of current and 

historical disposal rates and the available capacity, the Salt Lake Valley Landfill is 

anticipated to have a remaining life of 25 years (UDEQ, 2010b). 


According to the FAA Desk Reference (FAA, 2007a), the Solid Waste Disposal Act defines 

the term “solid waste” as including garbage, refuse, or sludge from a waste treatment plant, 

water supply treatment plant, or air pollution control facility (42 USC Section 6903(27)). The 

definition also includes solid, liquid, semisolid, or contained gaseous material resulting 

from industrial, commercial, mining, agricultural, or community activities. 

5-34 RDD/102790005 (NLH4349.DOCX) 

TBG012712153950RDD



The FAA Desk Reference (FAA, 2007a) states that additional information or analysis of solid 

waste is needed only if problems are anticipated with respect to meeting the applicable 

local, state, tribal, or federal laws and regulations on hazardous or solid waste management. 

Additional data needed may include results of any further consultation with affected 

agencies and measures to be taken to minimize the impacts. 


A review of SLCDA solid waste policies and research into local waste management were 

used to determine impacts from the No Action Alternative and the Proposed Action. 

5.8.4 Environmental Impacts of the Alternatives 

Solid waste is overseen by the Airport Facility Maintenance Division of the SLCDA. Solid 

waste from the Airport is disposed of at the Salt Lake Valley Landfill by Waste Management 

of Utah. This landfill is a permitted, Class I facility that is able to accept municipal waste, 

commercial solid waste, small-quantity household hazardous waste, industrial waste, 

asbestos waste, and infectious waste (UDEQ, 2010b). According to existing data from the 

UDEQ Division of Solid and Hazardous Waste, the Salt Lake Valley Landfill has a 

remaining capacity of 450 acres or 29 million tons (UDEQ, 2010b). On the basis of current 

and historical disposal rates and the available capacity, the Salt Lake Valley Landfill is 

anticipated to have a remaining life of 25 years. 










Under the No Action Alternative, solid waste would include demolition and construction 

waste from the previously approved non-terminal development projects: completion of the 

light rail station, end-of-runway deicing pads, north cargo apron expansion, construction of 

a snow equipment storage building, and pavement overlay and rehabilitation projects (see 

Section 3.3.1.1). 


Under the No Action Alternative, solid waste disposal within the terminal would operate in 

a manner similar to existing conditions, but with an increased passenger activity level, as 

described in Section 3.3.1.1. 

RDD/102790005 (NLH4349.DOCX) 5-35 

TBG012712153950RDD



The Proposed Action would temporarily increase solid waste because of demolition and 

other construction-related activities. The only impact to solid waste during ongoing 

operation of the Proposed Action would be a slight increase in solid waste disposal 

comparable to the slight increase in passenger activity. 


Construction of the Proposed Action would temporarily increase solid waste because of 

demolition and other construction-related activities. Some types of construction debris 

would be reused onsite or salvaged, and the remaining material would be disposed of by 

contractors with sufficient capacity to handle this need. Examples of construction debris that 

would be stored onsite and reused for future construction projects include concrete, asphalt, 

and fill. Scrap metal and wood debris would be salvaged. 

The SLCDA plans to sort construction debris and use local options for salvage material to 

the extent practicable. No significant or unusual impacts from solid waste are expected to be 

generated from the Proposed Action. 


Solid waste generation and disposal would be essentially the same for either alternative. 

The Airport Facility Maintenance Division of the SLCDA would continue to oversee solid 

waste disposal, and the waste would be disposed of at the Salt Lake Valley Landfill by 

Waste Management of Utah. This landfill is a permitted, Class I facility that is able to accept 

municipal waste, commercial solid waste, small-quantity household hazardous waste, 

industrial waste, asbestos waste, and infectious waste (UDEQ, 2010b). According to existing 

data from the UDEQ Division of Solid and Hazardous Waste, the Salt Lake Valley Landfill 

has a remaining capacity of 450 acres or 29 million tons (UDEQ, 2010b). On the basis of 

current and historical disposal rates and the available capacity, the Salt Lake Valley Landfill 

is anticipated to have a remaining life of 25 years. 


No mitigation would be required. 

5.9 Energy Supply, Natural Resources, and Sustainable 

Design 

The TRP would increase the square footage of terminal and concourse space by about 

62 percent, compared to the No Action Alternative. However, the project would replace old, 

inefficient facilities with new facilities employing current technologies to save energy and 

reduce the use of natural resources, such as water. To be consistent with Salt Lake City 

policy, these new facilities would be built to USGBC LEED Silver standards. In its 

preliminary planning, the project team identified opportunities to enhance sustainability in 

the following areas: (1) aviation benchmarking, (2) designing for climate, (3) water 

conservation, (4) energy conservation, (5) electrical consumption, and (6) materials and 

waste. As the program enters the design phase, the project team will incorporate these 

opportunities. 

5-36 RDD/102790005 (NLH4349.DOCX) 

TBG012712153950RDD



FAA Order 1050.1E requires that all federal actions be examined to identify whether the 

Proposed Action would have a measurable effect on local supply of energy or natural 

resources. In addition to fuel, natural resources used would include construction materials, 

water, and physical labor. FAA Order 1050.1E states that, “the use of natural resources other 

than for fuel need be examined only if the action involves a need for unusual materials or 

those in short supply.” Because the Proposed Action would not require use of any unusual 

or scarce materials, this section focuses only on energy supply issues. 


To determine impacts on energy supplies and consumable natural resources, the FAA Desk 

Reference (FAA, 2007a) notes that environmental documents should contain the following 

information: 

1. Utility impacts. Proposed major changes in stationary facilities may 

require large demands on local existing or planned utilities. Examples of 

utility impacts include projected airport or terminal lighting or heating 

demands or water supply for terminal-related water usage and sewage 

disposal. 

2. Consumable materials. If scarce or unusual materials are needed to build 

the proposed action or a reasonable alternative, estimate the volumes of 

consumable construction material and their availability from local suppliers. 

3. Aircraft fuel consumption. The environmental document should discuss 

how proposed changes would affect existing aircraft fuel use. 


The effect of the Proposed Action on energy consumption is largely governed by the change 

in the size as well as the relative efficiency of the new buildings, compared to the existing 

facilities. The potential for new facilities to reduce energy consumption using current 

energy-efficient design and materials is outlined in the preliminary planning documents 

prepared by HOK (HOK, 2010, Book 6). 

Changes in aircraft and vehicular fuel consumption were inferred from airfield and 

roadway simulation studies (see Technical Memorandum: Airfield Simulation and 

Technical Memorandum: Traffic Analysis, both in Appendix D). These studies showed that 

the proposed TRP would both reduce congestion and delay for aircraft, and reduce 

congestion and the number of vehicle miles traveled for surface vehicles. 


As mentioned earlier, the TRP would increase the area of terminal and concourse space 

compared to the No Action Alternative. The terminal, concourses, and connectors in the 

Proposed Action would provide a net increase of 644,328 square feet, or 62 percent (see 

Table 2-1). The Proposed Action would provide an opportunity to install current technologies 

to save energy, reduce the use of natural resources, and implement sustainable 

building design elements. 

RDD/102790005 (NLH4349.DOCX) 5-37 

TBG012712153950RDD











The No Action Alternative would only involve construction-related impacts to energy or 

natural resources needed to complete the light rail station, end-of-runway deicing pads, 

north cargo apron expansion, snow equipment storage building, and pavement overlay and 

rehabilitation projects. Construction of these projects would consume energy and 

construction materials, but no use of scarce or unusual materials is anticipated. 


Under the No Action Alternative, the terminal building would need to operate and maintain 

utilities, including heating, cooling, water supply, and electricity, within an outdated, 

50-year old structure. Although these maintenance tasks would be necessary to operate any 

terminal building, the cost and energy use would be higher in an outdated, inefficient 

building compared to a modern, energy-efficient building. The No Action Alternative 

would not affect aircraft operations; therefore, aircraft fuel consumption would not change 

under this alternative. 


Compared to the No Action Alternative, the Proposed Action would reduce aircraft and 

surface vehicle fuel consumption and increase building efficiency. The Proposed Action 

would increase opportunities to implement sustainable design principles. 


Although construction of the Proposed Action would consume natural resources, none of 

the required materials is scarce or unusual. The Proposed Action would include 

construction of 994,843 square feet of concourse space and 684,174 square feet of terminal 

space, totaling 1,679,017 square feet of new construction. Construction of the Proposed 

Action would also include taxiways and ramps in the terminal complex, a replacement 

parking garage, replacement rental car facilities, terminal roadways, and a new CUP. The 

Proposed Action would not use scarce or unusual materials for construction. It is 

anticipated that the Proposed Action would use materials common to terminal construction, 

including concrete, wood, metals, and glass. 


A component of the Proposed Action is construction of a new CUP to serve the redeveloped 

terminal complex. The CUP would be located west of the proposed parking garage and 

southwest of the proposed terminal complex. The CUP would accommodate the following 

utilities: 

 

 

Chilled water 

PCA glycol 

5-38 RDD/102790005 (NLH4349.DOCX) 

TBG012712153950RDD


 

 

 

Thermal storage 

Steam boilers 

Standby power system 

The Proposed Action would take advantage of energy-efficient technologies and designs 

developed during the last 50 years. Thus, the Proposed Action offers opportunities to 

reduce utility impacts, including energy consumption and energy costs. Recognizing the 

growing concern for sustainable development and energy efficiency, Salt Lake City has 

adopted the policy that public buildings owned and controlled by Salt Lake City 

Corporation be built or renovated using the USGBC LEED standards at the Certified level. 

This goal was updated to LEED Silver level certification in January 2006. 

The Proposed Action would not use scarce or unusual materials. It is anticipated that the 

Proposed Action would use materials common to terminal construction, including concrete, 

wood, metals, and glass. To help meet LEED Silver goals, it is anticipated that local sources 

would be identified to obtain required construction materials. 

Although the Proposed Action would accommodate the same volume of passenger, aircraft, 

and surface vehicles as the No Action Alternative (see Section 3.3.1.2), the Proposed Action 

would reduce congestion and delay for aircraft and surface vehicles. Therefore, the 

Proposed Action would reduce fuel consumption, compared to the No Action Alternative. 



5.10 Historic Properties 

The potential impacts of the alternatives on historic resources are limited, because the 

potentially historic Airport buildings were extensively remodeled in the past and almost 

nothing remains from the original structures. A confirmation letter from the Utah SHPO 

(Utah SHPO, 2012) concurred that no historic resources would be affected within the project 

area. 


A number of federal laws and Executive Orders provide protection for cultural resources. 

Most notably, Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act requires federal agencies 

to consider the effects of their undertakings on properties on or eligible for inclusion on the 

National Register of Historic Places (NRHP). According to FAA Order 1050.1E, the FAA is 

responsible for making one of three determinations: no resources affected, no adverse effect, 

and adverse effect. 


The FAA Desk Reference (FAA, 2007a) defines a historic or cultural resource as, “any 

prehistoric or historic district, site, building, structure, or object included in, or eligible for 

inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) maintained by the Secretary of 

the Interior” (also see 36 CFR Section 800.16(l)). Generally, properties eligible for listing on 

the NRHP are at least 50 years old. Properties or sites having traditional religious or cultural 

RDD/102790005 (NLH4349.DOCX) 5-39 

TBG012712153950RDD


importance to Native American tribes and Hawaiian organizations may qualify if the 

property meets the criteria for eligibility under 36 CFR Section 60.4. 


Literature reviews, an architectural field visit, and coordination with the Utah SHPO were 

used to determine the historic, architectural, archaeological, and cultural impacts of the 

alternatives being considered. This effort is documented in Appendix F, Historic, 

Architectural, Archaeological, and Cultural Resources. 

5.10.3.1 Literature Review 

A literature review was conducted by CH2M HILL archaeologist, Aaron Fergusson, M.A., 

RPA, at the Utah Division of State History, Antiquities Section. Both antiquities and historic 

preservation records were examined. The records searches focused on known archaeological 

resources and known historic buildings and structures within a 1-mile radius of the Airport 

terminals and concourses. 

The project area has been surveyed for cultural resources. The pedestrian inventory can only 

identify artifacts or cultural resource sites that are visible on the surface, and much of the 

Airport property has been developed and covered with concrete or asphalt. The Airport 

property is known to contain sensitive cultural resources, and many of the sites have been 

found during various construction projects. One cultural resource site, 42SL302, is located 

within 1 mile of the Airport terminals. Site 42SL302 is the Surplus Canal, which has been 

considered eligible for listing on the NRHP under Criteria A and C because of the canal’s 

importance in the growth and development of Salt Lake City. The canal has been modified 

and rerouted several times, most recently in the 1990s, to accommodate Runway 16R/34L. 

This site is outside the area of potential effect for this project and would not be affected. 

Significant archaeological testing and research have been conducted at another site 

(42SL230) located 1.9 miles northeast of the terminals, near the eastern edge of the Airport 

property. This is a large, open site with evidence of occupation from the Archaic, Fremont, 

and Late Prehistoric periods (Allison et al., 1997). The site was discovered in 1994 and tested 

in 1995, and was then subject to more extensive surface collection and testing in 1996 and 

1997. This site is considered eligible for listing on the NRHP under Criterion D, but is well 

outside the area of potential effect and would not be affected by construction at the 

terminals. 

5.10.3.2 Architectural Field Visit 

The architectural field visit focused on an interview with SLCDA staff architect, 

Daniel Spader, on May 11, 2009. The interview with Mr. Spader concluded that 

Terminal One, Concourses A and B, and the mechanical plant were all built in 1958 and, 

therefore, have reached the 50-year threshold for consideration as historic resources under 

the National Historic Preservation Act (Spader, 2009, personal communication). Appendix F 

contains an exhibit showing the façade of Terminal One soon after its dedication (see 

Exhibit 1 in Historical/Architectural, Archaeological, and Cultural Resources Technical 

Memorandum). 

The potentially historic buildings at SLC have been extensively remodeled; remodeling 

started in 1978 and has been constant since then. For example, Concourses A and B were 

5-40 RDD/102790005 (NLH4349.DOCX) 

TBG012712153950RDD


originally constructed as a single-level building with passenger access to airplanes from the 

ground level. The 1978 remodeling efforts constructed the second level and moved 

passenger airplane access to the second level. Terminal One has been remodeled, added on 

to, and changed so significantly that the only portion of the building that remains from the 

original construction is the world map on the floor. The mechanical plant, likewise, has 

changed so dramatically from its original construction that almost nothing remains from the 

original building. The last original air handler in Terminal One is slated to be replaced in 

2012. 

5.10.3.3 State Historic Preservation Office Coordination 

In January, 2012, FAA initiated Section 106 coordination with the Utah SHPO. This 

coordination included preparing a technical memorandum to describe the project 

components (Appendix F) and boundary of the area of potential effect, and presenting a 

determination that no historic properties would be affected by the Proposed Action. A letter 

from SHPO concurring with the assessment that no historic properties would be affected 

(Utah SHPO, 2012) was received February 27, 2012, and is included in Appendix F. 


There would be no impacts to archaeological or historic resources because the resources are 

not present in the project area. Potentially historic buildings in the project area have been 

extensively remodeled in the past and almost nothing remains from the original structures. 










Under the No Action Alternative, the existing terminal complex would remain and no 

demolition or construction would occur. There would be no historic impacts under the 

No Action Alternative. 


Under the No Action Alternative, the existing terminal complex would remain and no 

demolition or construction would occur. Operation of the No Action Alternative would not 

affect archaeological or historic resources. 


The Proposed Action would not affect archaeological or historic resources because such 

resources are not present in the project area. The potentially eligible buildings at the Airport 

were extensively remodeled, starting in 1978, and have been under constant remodeling 

since; almost nothing remains from the original structures. Because of the extensive changes 

to the terminal buildings over the years, the Proposed Action would not affect historic 

RDD/102790005 (NLH4349.DOCX) 5-41 

TBG012712153950RDD


resources. A letter from SHPO concurring with the determination that no historic properties 

would be affected (Utah SHPO, 2012) was received February 27, 2012. 


Construction of the Proposed Action would not affect archaeological or historic resources. 

No archaeological or historic resources would be demolished under the Proposed Action 

because there are no archaeological or historic resources in the project area. 


Operation of the Proposed Action would not affect archaeological or historic resources. 

Operation of the Proposed Action would take place in a newly constructed terminal facility. 



5.11 Noise 

The FAA Desk Reference (FAA, 2007a) states the following: 

Airport development actions that change airport runway configurations, aircraft 

operations and/or movements, aircraft types using the airport, or aircraft flight 

characteristics may affect existing and future noise levels. FAA’s noise analysis 

primarily focuses on how proposed airport actions would change the cumulative 

noise exposure of individuals to aircraft noise in areas surrounding the airport. 

The introduction to this chapter of the EA explains that the alternatives under consideration 

would not increase Airport capacity or alter flight patterns at the Airport and, therefore, 

would have no material effect on off-airport noise. For these reasons, no quantitative 

analysis of noise impacts is required. The following discussion of potential noise impacts 

documents the assumptions supporting this conclusion. 

As described in Section 3.3, the Proposed Action would not increase the number of gates 

compared to the No Action Alternative or remove a constraint to increased aircraft 

operations. Both the No Action Alternative and the Proposed Action would accommodate 

the unconstrained forecast of aircraft activity presented in Appendix A, Technical 

Memorandum: Aviation Demand Forecasts. Both alternatives would experience the same 

level of aircraft activity through the forecast period. 

The proposed TRP would not alter the runway configuration at the Airport or otherwise 

affect the pattern of runway use. The “Existing” and “2010 Proposed Action” illustrations in 

Exhibit 3-2 show the location of the existing terminal complex and the proposed location of 

the terminal complex under the Proposed Action. In both illustrations, the terminal complex 

sits between Runways 16R/34L and 16L/34R, the Airport’s primary air carrier runways, 

and accesses the runway system using the same taxiways. In addition, consultation with 

FAA Airport Traffic Control Tower staff indicates that, as at most airports, the SLC runways 

are assigned on the basis of the direction from which aircraft arrive or to which they are 

departing, not according to their assigned terminal gates. In conclusion, the Proposed 

Action would not change Airport runway configurations, aircraft operations or movements, 

types of aircraft using the Airport, or aircraft flight characteristics that might affect existing 

and future noise levels and, therefore, would not cause noise impacts. 

5-42 RDD/102790005 (NLH4349.DOCX) 

TBG012712153950RDD


5.12 Compatible Land Use 

The FAA Desk Reference (FAA, 2007a) states the following: 

If the noise analysis described in Chapter 17 of this Desk Reference concludes 

that there is no significant noise impact, a similar conclusion usually may be 

made about compatible land uses. Also, if the action would cause noise impacts 

that affect land uses such as social or induced socioeconomic effects 

(e.g., community disruption, relocation impacts, etc.), analyze those effects in 

the context of the affected resource(s). 

This discussion of potential noise impacts documents the assumptions supporting the 

conclusion that no land use impacts would result from implementing the Proposed Action. 

Section 5.11, explains that the alternatives under consideration would not differ with respect 

to noise impacts; this supports the conclusion that the Proposed Action would not cause a 

significant compatible land use impact. Exhibit 2-1 shows that the Proposed Action would 

be constructed and operated entirely within the existing Airport boundaries and would not 

alter access to the Airport. The Proposed Action would not affect off-airport land use, 

require acquisition, or otherwise cause community disruption. In conclusion, the Proposed 

Action would not cause compatible land use impacts. 

5.13 Light Emissions and Visual Effects 

FAA Order 1050.1E does not provide explicit thresholds of significance regarding light 

emissions. For this EA, the following guidance from FAA Order 1050.1E was considered to 

determine impacts related to light emissions: 

The responsible FAA official considers the extent to which any lighting 

associated with an action could create an annoyance among people in the vicinity 

or interfere with their normal activities. 

Potential annoyance from light emissions, light glare, and the direction of new light 

emissions that may disrupt normal activities were considered to determine an impact. 

Neither the Proposed Action nor the No Action Alternative would create an annoyance to 

local communities near construction activities or operations. The proposed project would be 

located in the Airport’s terminal complex, which is completely within Airport property and 

surrounded by existing Airport development that includes a wide variety of aeronauticalrelated 

light sources. Operation of the Proposed Action would be similar to existing 

operations with respect to roadway lighting, parking garage lighting, and terminal facility 

lighting. No further analysis or mitigation is planned. 

5.14 U.S. Department of Transportation Section 4(f) 

Resources 

The federal statutory provisions governing impacts to public parks or recreational areas are 

commonly known as the DOT Act, Section 4(f) provisions. Section 4(f) of the DOT Act, 

which is codified and renumbered as 49 USC Section 303(c), provides that the Secretary of 

Transportation will not approve any program or project that requires the use of any publicly 

RDD/102790005 (NLH4349.DOCX) 5-43 

TBG012712153950RDD


owned land from a public park, recreation area, or wildlife and waterfowl refuge of 

national, state, or local significance or land from an historic site of national, state, or local 

significance as determined by the officials having jurisdiction thereof, unless there is no 

feasible and prudent alternative to the use of such land and such program, and the project 

includes all possible planning to minimize harm resulting from the use. 


affect land subject to Section 4(f). The proposed project would be completely within Airport 

property, which does not contain the resources listed under Section 4(f). The closest 

Section 4(f) resource to the project area is Wingpointe Golf Course, which is located south of 

the project area, at the entrance to the Airport from I-80. Wingpointe Golf Course is owned 

by the Airport. No further analysis or mitigation is planned. 

5.15 Social Impacts 

As defined in FAA Order 5050.1E and the FAA Desk Reference (FAA, 2007a), social impacts 

include moving homes or businesses; dividing or disrupting established communities; 

changing surface transportation patterns; disrupting orderly, planned development; or 

creating a notable change in employment. 

Neither the Proposed Action nor the No Action Alternative would pose health or safety 

risks to children, affect homes or off-airport business, divide or disrupt communities, or 

change local surface transportation patterns. The proposed project would remain on Airport 

property, mostly on previously developed land. The proposed TRP would occupy 

essentially the same area as the existing terminal complex. 

The Proposed Action could cause short-term impacts to Airport retail and concessions by 

necessitating temporary relocations and shifting of retail/concession locations during 

construction activities. In the longer term, the increased terminal and concourse space 

would provide an opportunity for more retail and concession space that could generate 

additional economic activity. No further analysis or mitigation is planned. 

5.16 Environmental Justice 

Executive Order 12898, Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations 

and Low-Income Populations, its accompanying Presidential Memorandum, and DOT 

Order 5610.2, Environmental Justice, require FAA to provide for meaningful public 

involvement by minority and low-income populations and analysis, including demographic 

analysis, that identifies and addresses potential impacts on these populations that may be 

disproportionately high and adverse. 


affect minority or low-income populations. The project would be located completely within 

Airport property and would not disrupt local communities or any population in the Salt 

Lake City area. As noted previously, the Proposed Action would not alter the number, 

types, or flight paths of aircraft flying into and out of the Airport and would not change 

noise levels, compared to the No Action Alternative. No further analysis or mitigation is 

planned. 

5-44 RDD/102790005 (NLH4349.DOCX) 

TBG012712153950RDD


5.17 Induced Socioeconomic Impacts 

The FAA Desk Reference (FAA, 2007a) provides the following guidance for assessing 

potential induced socioeconomic impacts: 

FAA must evaluate a proposed airport project to determine the project's potential 

to cause induced or secondary socioeconomic impacts on surrounding 

communities. When FAA determines a potential for such impacts exists, the 

environmental document should describe how the proposed project would affect 

communities by addressing the following factors, as needed. 

(1) shifts in patterns of population movement and growth; 

(2) public service demands; 

(3) changes in business and economic activities; or 

(4) other factors identified by the public. 

The No Action Alternative and the Proposed Action would accommodate the same level of 

passenger, aircraft, and vehicular activity, indicating that the Airport’s long-term economic 

impact on the community would be similar in either case. The proposed TRP would 

increase the area available for retail and concessions by about 10 percent. Assuming the 

same level of employment and revenue per square foot, the additional economic impact 

would be beneficial, but would have no material effect on the regional economy. The 

Proposed Action would not, therefore, generate growth in excess of that supported by the 

No Action Alternative. In addition, because both alternatives would continue to use the 

same entrance points, the Proposed Action would not cause shifts in population movement. 

The key drivers of public service demand at the Airport, passenger traffic and the associated 

economic activity, would be similar for both alternatives. As noted in Section 5.9, the 

Proposed Action would replace old, inefficient structures with new facilities that 

incorporate modern energy and water conservation concepts. These new facilities could 

reduce the demand for public services relative to the No Action Alternative. 

The Proposed Action could cause short-term, construction-related disruption to Airport 

retail and concessions because retailers and concessionaires would be relocated and shifted, 

depending on the location of construction activities. In the longer term, as noted previously, 

the increased terminal and concourse space could provide opportunities for more retail and 

concession space that could generate additional economic activity. No further analysis or 

mitigation is planned. 

5.18 Cumulative Effects 

NEPA requires that cumulative effects be evaluated along with the direct and indirect 

effects of proposed actions. Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) regulations for 

implementing NEPA define a cumulative effect as follows: 

…the impact on the environment which results from the incremental impact of 

the action when added to other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future 

actions regardless of what agency (Federal or non-Federal) or person undertakes 

such other actions (40 CFR §1508.7). 

RDD/102790005 (NLH4349.DOCX) 5-45 

TBG012712153950RDD


The following subsections review the applicable regulations and standards, identify 

relevant thresholds of significance, and describe the methodology used to assess cumulative 

effects; the past, present, and reasonably foreseeable projects that were considered for 

potential contributions to cumulative effects; and the potential for cumulative effects in 

specific environmental resource categories. 


Assessing cumulative effects may involve assumptions and uncertainties because data on 

the environmental effects of other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable actions are often 

incomplete or unavailable. As a result, impacts on resources often must be expressed in 

qualitative terms or as a relative change and describes the methodology used to assess 

potential cumulative effects. 

NEPA requires that potential cumulative effects of past, present, and reasonably foreseeable 

future actions be evaluated along with the direct and indirect impacts of the actions. FAA 

Order 5050.4B, Paragraph 1007.i., states the following: 

CEQ 1508.25 defines three types of actions one should consider when determining 

the scope of a NEPA process. One of the types involves cumulative actions 

(the others are connected actions and similar actions). CEQ 1508.7 states that a 

cumulative impact is the environmental effect resulting from the incremental 

effects of the proposed action when added to the effects of past, other present, and 

reasonably foreseeable future actions, regardless of the entity (i.e., Federal or non- 

Federal) or person that would carry out those actions. In some cases, individually 

minor but collectively significant actions occurring over a defined period of time 

can cause cumulative impacts. 

In addition, the CEQ provides the following guidance on assessing cumulative effects: 

 

 

Considering Cumulative Effects Under the National Environmental Policy Act 

(CEQ, 1997). This handbook provides CEQ guidance addressing cumulative effects and 

the regulations at 40 CFR 1500 et seq. 

“Guidance on the Consideration of Past Actions in Cumulative Effects Analysis” 

(CEQ, 2005). Depending on scoping, agencies have the discretion to determine whether 

and to what extent information about specific past actions is useful when conducting a 

cumulative effects analysis. The guidance discusses how to determine the past actions 

needed for agency decision making. Among other things, the guidance notes that 

agencies may focus on the current aggregate effects of past actions. Agencies need not 

delve into each individual past action’s historical details. 


As in the analysis of other environmental consequences, the No Action Alternative serves as 

the reference point against which cumulative effects are measured. This analysis uses the 

same thresholds of significance used to assess the environmental impacts of the project 

alternatives discussed in the previous sections. When numerical thresholds are not available 

or cannot be determined, effects are analyzed in terms of relative magnitude or assessed 

qualitatively. 

5-46 RDD/102790005 (NLH4349.DOCX) 

TBG012712153950RDD



This analysis addresses the cumulative effects resulting from the impacts of the project 

alternatives combined with the impacts of other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable 

projects in the affected environment that could affect the same environmental resources. 

There are two aspects of the cumulative effects analysis: identification of past, present, and 

reasonably foreseeable actions that could contribute to cumulative effects in specific 

environmental resource categories; and identification of project-related effects that could 

contribute to cumulative effects in the resource categories. The analysis focuses on impacts 

identified previously in assessing the combined effects of the project alternatives and other 

identified actions. 

5.18.4 Past, Present, and Reasonably Foreseeable Future Actions 

The previous discussions of environmental consequences show that the impacts of the 

proposed TRP would be limited to the Airport. Exhibit 5-3 shows that the project area is 

separated from the surrounding area by major airport and highway infrastructure. Because 

the project area is geographically isolated, the investigation of past, present and reasonably 

foreseeable future actions focuses on actions within the Airport boundaries. CEQ gives the 

following guidance on the consideration of past projects or actions (CEQ, 1997): 

…the availability of data often determines how far back past effects are 

determined. Although certain types of data (e.g., forest cover) may be available 

for extensive periods of the past (i.e., decades), other data (e.g., water quality 

data) may be available for much shorter periods. Because the data describing past 

conditions are usually scarce, the analysis of past effects is often qualitative. 

FAA Order 5050.4B, Paragraph 9.q., Chapter 1, defines reasonably foreseeable future actions 

as on- or off-airport projects that have been developed with enough specificity to provide 

useful information to a decision maker and the interested public. 

Section 4.4 reviews the Airport’s development as a commercial service airport since the 

1950s. During this time, the construction of new runways, terminals, roadways, and support 

facilities has increased the area of impervious surface on the Airport and, in some cases, 

required wetland fill. The Airport’s western parallel runway, 16R/34L, was completed in 

1995 and is the Airport’s newest runway. In addition to the proposed TRP, planned future 

projects include completion of the light rail station, ongoing construction of deicing pads at 

runway ends, the north cargo area apron expansion, construction of a new snow equipment 

storage building, and pavement rehabilitation. 

A review of the available NEPA documentation for the past and present projects shows that 

only a few projects would have the potential to contribute to cumulative effects when 

considered in combination with the Proposed Action. Section 4.4 identified past, present, 

and reasonably foreseeable future actions in this area that could adversely affect 

environmental resources that would also be adversely affected by the alternatives under 

consideration. Table 5-10 lists the past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future projects 

that could affect at least one environmental resource, by construction period and potentially 

affected resource. 

RDD/102790005 (NLH4349.DOCX) 5-47 

TBG012712153950RDD

2670 N 

2200 W 

3200 W 

2100 N 

16 R 

16 L 

CORRAL LN 

1700 N 

17 

MORTON DR 



WRIGHT 

BROTHERS DR 

34 L 

TERMINAL DR 

§¨¦ 215 

§¨¦ 80 35 

100 N 

14 

34 R 

32 

C ST 

700 N 


1950 W 

150 S 

5200 W 

2650 W 


Project Area 

0 750 1,500 3,000 Feet 

\\JAFAR\PROJ\SLC_405943\MAPFILES\AFFECTEDENVIRONMENT\PROJECTAREAMAP.MXD SSAVAGE1 04/16/2012 10:34:57 AM 

¹ 

Exhibit 5-3 Project Area 




TABLE 5-10 

Summary of Past, Present, and Reasonably Foreseeable Future Actions 

Project Name 

Construction 

Period 

Potentially Affected 

Environmental Resource 

Runway 16R/34L Storm Drainage Improvements 2007 Surface Water and Stormwater 

Reconstruction of Taxiway H (H4-H7) 2008 Surface Water and Stormwater, 

Air Quality (Construction) 

Runway-end Deicing Pads (six total) 2008–2020 Surface Water and Stormwater, 


Emergency Access Road to Runway 16R/34L 2011–2012 Surface Water and Stormwater 

North Cargo Apron Expansion 2012–2012 Surface Water and Stormwater, 


Snow Equipment Storage Building 2012–2012 Surface Water and Stormwater 

Pavement Overlay and Rehabilitation 2012–2014 Air Quality (Construction) 

Source: SLCDA, 2011 

5.18.5 Evaluation of Cumulative Effects 

The following subsections analyze the potential cumulative effects for each environmental 

resource category in which the Proposed Action might contribute to cumulative effects 

when considered with other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable actions. The 

thresholds of significance discussed in this section are based on the guidance provided in 

the applicable chapters of the FAA Desk Reference (FAA, 2007a). 

5.18.5.1 Air Quality 

When considering cumulative air quality impacts, conditions during construction were 

considered, as well as conditions after completion of construction. As noted in Section 5.1, 

construction of the proposed TRP would reduce operational emissions compared to the 

No Action Alternative, but would temporarily increase emissions during construction. 

Construction activity would occur between 2013 and 2024. As described in Section 5.1.4.2, 

emissions for any pollutant during the peak construction year, 2016, would be less than 

15 ton/year, well below the de minimis level of 100 ton/year. No combination of other 

reasonably foreseeable future actions would cause an exceedance of the de minimis levels; 

therefore, no cumulative effects are anticipated. 

5.18.5.2 Water Quality 

A significant cumulative effect on water quality could occur if the project, when considered 

in combination with other past, present, or reasonably foreseeable actions, would cause an 

exceedance of water quality standards, cause water quality problems that could not be 

avoided or satisfactorily mitigated, or result in difficulty in obtaining a permit or 

authorization. 

Section 5.2 concluded that the proposed TRP would require paving of about 60 acres of 

currently undeveloped area, an increase of about 4.7 percent in the Airport’s existing 

impervious surface. As noted in that section, the Airport operates within the parameters of 

UPDES Permit No. UT0024988. This permit regulates and establishes guidelines for 

stormwater quality monitoring and sampling, and effluent limitations for various 

RDD/102790005 (NLH4349.DOCX) 5-49 

TBG012712153950RDD


constituents. The Airport also operates under Salt Lake County Flood Control Permit 

No. 1547, which restricts outfalls to the Surplus Canal to a combined total 100 cfs or less. The 

water discharges from the Proposed Action, combined with the anticipated discharge from 

the other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable actions listed in Table 5-10, would 

remain within these parameters and, therefore, would not contribute to cumulative effects 

on receiving waters. 

5.18.5.3 Floodplains 

A significant floodplain impact could occur if the project, when considered in combination 

with other past, present, or reasonably foreseeable actions, adversely affected floodplain 

values. As noted in Section 5.3, construction and operation of the Proposed Action would 

not affect floodplains and, therefore, would not contribute to cumulative floodplain impacts. 

5.18.5.4 Wetlands 

A significant wetland impact could occur if the project, when considered in combination 

with other past, present, or reasonably foreseeable actions, affected the ability of wetlands to 

continue performing their functions. As noted in Section 5.4, construction and operation of 

the Proposed Project would not affect wetlands and, therefore, would not contribute to 

cumulative wetlands impacts. 

5.18.5.5 Biotic Resources 

A significant impact to biotic resources could occur under the following conditions 

(FAA, 2007a): 

 

 

The project, when considered in combination with other past, present, or reasonably 

foreseeable actions, would reduce the area available for species commonly found in the 

area to less than that required to sustain the species. 

The combined projects would reduce habitat supporting species not commonly 

occurring in the area if, in the opinion of relevant agencies, the affected habitat were 

needed for the survival or well being of the affected biotic resource. 

As noted in Section 4.3.3, the project site contains little or no natural vegetation and limited 

landscaped vegetation. Most of the project footprint is paved. The 60 acres of unpaved area 

have been graded and are routinely maintained to minimize wildlife hazard potential. As 

shown in Exhibit 5-1, these areas are surrounded by aircraft operating areas or roadways. 

On the basis of species distributions and habitat associations with these species, none of the 

six federally listed threatened, endangered, or candidate species found in Salt Lake County 

or any of the 25 species of state concern found in Salt Lake County are expected to be found 

in the project area. Because natural vegetation and biotic communities are not present in the 

project area, construction and operation of the Proposed Action would not contribute to 

cumulative effects to biotic resources. 

5.18.5.6 Endangered and Threatened Species 

A significant cumulative effect could occur if the combined effects of the project and other 

past, present, or reasonably foreseeable actions would likely jeopardize the continued 

existence of a listed species, or result in the destruction or adverse modification of federally 

designated critical habitat in the affected area. Lesser impacts, including impacts on nonlisted 

species, could also constitute a significant impact. As noted in the previous 

5-50 RDD/102790005 (NLH4349.DOCX) 

TBG012712153950RDD


subsection, the Proposed Action would not affect listed species or critical habitat for such 

species. Construction and operation of the Proposed Action would not contribute to 

cumulative effects on listed species or critical habitats. 

5.18.5.7 Hazardous Materials 

A significant cumulative effect would occur under the following conditions: 

 

 

 

The project would involve a property on or eligible for the National Priorities List. 

The Airport would have difficulty in meeting applicable state or federal hazardous 

materials laws and regulations. 

The project would affect a site known or suspected to be contaminated. 

As noted in Section 5.7, the proposed TRP would not affect areas of known contamination, 

with the possible exception of one site that may have pre-existing soil and possible 

groundwater contamination. If groundwater contamination is encountered, it could be 

effectively managed and mitigated during construction. In addition, the Proposed Action 

would not substantially change the use of hazardous materials at the Airport. For these 

reasons, construction and operation of the Proposed Action would not contribute to 

cumulative hazardous materials impacts. 

5.18.5.8 Solid Waste 

A significant cumulative effect could occur if solid waste generated by the project, combined 

with solid waste generated by other past, present, or reasonably foreseeable actions, would 

cause an exceedance of the allowable landfill or incineration capacities, or if local, state, or 

federal agencies determined that substantial unresolved waste disposal issues existed. As 

noted in Section 5.8, operation of the redeveloped terminal complex would not increase the 

level of aircraft or passenger activity and, therefore, would not increase solid waste 

generation. Construction debris would be minimized through reuse to the extent possible 

and would not exceed available capacity. Thus, the Proposed Action would not contribute 

to cumulative hazardous materials impacts. 

5.18.5.9 Energy Supply, Natural Resources, and Sustainable Development 

A significant cumulative effect could occur if construction or operation of the project, 

combined with the effects of other past, present, or reasonably foreseeable actions, 

generated demands for energy or natural resources that exceeded available supplies. As 

noted in Section 5.9, operation of the redeveloped terminal complex would reduce energy 

use, compared to the No Action Alternative. Also, no rare or unusual materials would be 

required for construction. For these reasons, construction and operation of the Proposed 

Action would not contribute to cumulative impacts to energy supply, natural resources, or 

sustainable development. 

5.18.5.10 Historic Properties 

Appendix A, Section 11, of FAA Order 1050.1E, Change 1, states that a significant impact 

could occur if consultation with the SHPO or a tribe resulted in a Finding of Adverse Effect, 

though this finding would not automatically result in a significant impact. A cumulative 

effect on historic, architectural, archeological, or cultural resources could occur if 

construction or operation of the project, when considered in combination with other past, 

RDD/102790005 (NLH4349.DOCX) 5-51 

TBG012712153950RDD


present, or reasonably foreseeable actions, collectively affected resources identified in 

consultation with the SHPO. 

As described in Section 5.10, consultation with the SHPO in accordance with Section 106 of 

the National Historic Preservation Act determined that the proposed TRP would not affect 

historic properties or archaeological resources. Also, none of the other past, present, and 

reasonably foreseeable actions listed in Table 5-10 would affect protected resources. Because 

there would be no effects on protected resources, there is no potential for significant adverse 

cumulative effects. 

5.18.5.11 Light Emissions and Visual Effects 

A significant cumulative effect could occur if construction or operation of the project, 

combined with the effects of other past, present, or reasonably foreseeable actions, caused 

the following result: 

 

 

An annoyance to or interference with normal activities 

An objectionable change to the existing visual environment, as determined through 

consultation with relevant federal, state, or local agencies, tribal governments, or the 

public 

Neither the Proposed action nor any of the past, present, or reasonably foreseeable future 

actions listed in Table 5-10 would entail the installation of lighting that would create glare in 

neighboring off-airport areas. In addition, as noted in Section 5.10, the proposed TRP would 

largely replace similar existing facilities. For these reasons, construction and operation of the 

Proposed Action would not contribute to cumulative light emissions or visual effects. 

5.18.5.12 Noise 

Cumulative noise impacts would be significant if the combined effects of the Proposed 

Action, combined with other anticipated projects or actions, resulted in a 1.5-dB DNL 

increase in noise levels, compared to the No Action Alternative, in a noise-sensitive land use 

area where the DNL is 65 dB or higher. Neither the Proposed Action nor any of the past, 

present, or reasonably foreseeable future actions listed in Table 5-10 would affect aircraft 

noise levels or contribute to cumulative effects. 

5.18.5.13 Compatible Land Use 

A significant cumulative effect on compatible land use would occur if multiple past, present, 

or reasonably foreseeable actions collectively changed the status of land uses to align with 

land use compatibility guidelines. As noted in the previous subsection, neither the Proposed 

Action nor any of the past, present, or reasonably foreseeable future actions listed in 

Table 5-10 would affect aircraft noise levels. Furthermore, none of these actions would alter 

existing patterns of land use or surface transportation, or otherwise disrupt surrounding 

development patterns. Therefore, these actions would not contribute to cumulative effects 

with respect to compatible land use. 

5.18.5.14 U.S. Department of Transportation Section 4(f) 

A cumulative effect on DOT Act Section 4(f) lands would occur if multiple past, present, or 

reasonably foreseeable actions collectively resulted in more than minimal physical use of a 

Section 4(f) property. In addition, a significant cumulative effect could occur if the Proposed 

5-52 RDD/102790005 (NLH4349.DOCX) 

TBG012712153950RDD


Action, when considered in combination with other past, present, and reasonably 

foreseeable actions, generated constructive use effects, such as noise or other impacts that 

would substantially impair the resource’s use. 

Section 5.14 notes that the Proposed Action would not entail impacts to Section 4(f) 

resources or cause constructive use of any such resource. Similarly, none of the other past, 

present, or reasonably foreseeable actions listed in Table 5-10 would affect protected 

resources; therefore, no cumulative Section 4(f) impacts are expected. 

5.18.5.15 Social Impacts, Environmental Justice, and Children’s Environmental Health and 

Safety Risks 

A cumulative effect on socioeconomic impacts, environmental justice, or children’s 

environmental health and safety risks would occur if multiple past, present, or reasonably 

foreseeable actions collectively caused an exceedance of a threshold of significance 

described in the following sections, either during construction or after the project is 

operational: 

 

 

Section 5.15 – Socioeconomic Impacts 

Section 5.16 – Environmental Justice 

As noted in these sections, construction and operation of the proposed TRP would not result 

in adverse noise, air quality, or water quality effects that could lead to disproportionately 

high and adverse impacts on minority and/or low-income populations. In addition, none of 

the other past, present, or reasonably foreseeable actions listed in Table 5-10 would result in 

these types of impacts. In the absence of project-related effects on these populations, this 

project would not contribute to cumulative effects. Similarly, the Proposed Action would 

not alter conditions affecting children’s health and safety, and no cumulative effects would 

arise. In the absence of socioeconomic impacts, impacts on minority and/or low-income 

populations, or increased risk to children’s environmental health or safety, neither of the 

project alternatives would contribute to cumulative adverse impacts. 

5.18.5.16 Induced Socioeconomic Impacts 

A cumulative effect with respect to secondary or induced impacts would occur if multiple 

past, present, or reasonably foreseeable actions collectively caused an exceedance of a 

threshold of significance for other disciplines, as noted by FAA Order 1050.1E, Change 1. 

Section 5.17 shows that neither the Proposed Action nor the No Action Alternative would 

generate induced socioeconomic impacts. In addition, the analyses documented in this 

chapter show that implementation of the two alternatives would not contribute to 

significant cumulative effects on other resource categories. Therefore, neither of the 

alternatives being considered would contribute to significant adverse cumulative effects 

with respect to secondary or induced impacts. 

RDD/102790005 (NLH4349.DOCX) 5-53 

TBG012712153950RDD

CHAPTER 6 


This chapter summarizes the agency and public involvement activities undertaken for this 

EA. The primary goal of the agency and public outreach task is to identify and address 

concerns of state and federal regulatory agencies, as well as those of the public, regarding 

the proposed TRP at SLC. 

6.1 Scoping 

FAA Order 5050.4B, Paragraph 704.a., states that, “EA preparers should coordinate with 

resource agencies, industry groups, and the affected community as practicable and 

necessary to ensure the EA addresses those issues of greatest public concern.” The Order, at 

Paragraph 706, goes on as follows: 

Although scoping is not required for EAs, scoping could enhance EA preparation 

and content. This is especially so when the proposed action is highly controversial 

or involves special purpose laws or other environmental concerns. Unlike scoping 

for an EIS, the airport sponsor or its consultant, not FAA, conduct EA scoping. 

During this scoping process, SLCDA presented materials explaining the need for the 

proposed project, the project study area, conceptual project alternatives, and potential 

environmental impacts and issues of concern relating to the conceptual project alternatives. 

These materials are provided in Appendix G, Agency and Public Involvement. 

6.1.1 Agency Scoping Meeting 

The following agencies were invited to the agency scoping meeting held in the Kibbie 

Executive Terminal at SLC on June 8, 2010: 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

USACE 

Federal Highway Administration 

UDEQ 

UDEQ Division of Air Quality 

UDEQ Division of Water Quality 

Utah Department of Natural Resources 

Utah SHPO 

Utah Division of Indian Affairs 

Utah Department of Transportation 

Salt Lake County Flood Control Government Center 

Salt Lake Valley Health Department 

Bureau of Air Pollution Control 

Bureau of Water Quality and Hazardous Waste 

Wasatch Front Regional Council 

FAA 

SLCDA 

RDD/102790005 (NLH4349.DOCX) 6-1 

TBG012712153950RDD

CHAPTER 6 AGENCY AND PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT 

 

 

UTA 

Federal Transit Authority 

Copies of the agency scoping letters are provided in Appendix G, Agency and Public 

Involvement. 

6.1.2 Public Information Meeting 

A public information meeting was held in the Kibbie Executive Terminal at SLC on June 8, 

2010, from 5:00 to 6:30 p.m. The meeting format was open house, in which stations were 

distributed throughout the room for the attendees to visit, gain information about the 

project, have questions answered, and provide feedback to the project team through one-onone 

conversations. Presentation materials and meeting notices are provided in Appendix G, 

Agency and Public Involvement. The public information meeting was advertised as follows: 

 

Announcement in The Salt Lake Tribune. An announcement of the public meeting was 

published in The Salt Lake Tribune on May 25 and June 7, 2010. 

 

Flyers sent by Mail. The SLCDA mailed flyers advertising the public meeting to Airport 

stakeholders. 

6.1.3 Results of Scoping 

Comments were received from agencies and the public before, during, and after the agency 

scoping meeting and the public information meeting. Copies of the scoping comments from 

these agencies and the public are presented in Appendix G, Agency and Public 

Involvement. 

6.1.3.1 Agency Comments 

Seven federal, state, or local agencies raised questions at the scoping meeting or submitted 

comments during or after the meeting. A summary of agency comments received follows. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Salt Lake County Flood Control, Dan Drumiler. Raised a question regarding increased 

stormwater controls and maintenance at the meeting; did not formally comment. 

USFWS, Nathan Darnall. Noted that the presentation indicated that there would be no 

wetland impacts, no runway expansion, and no utilities (pipeline or power lines) that 

might affect wildlife. If these assumptions change, USFWS requests time for additional 

comment. Encourages the use of green roofs and pervious surfaces to reduce stormwater 

runoff and would like to see plans include TRAX expansion. 

Federal Transit Authority, Charmaine Knighton. Noted that Region 8 of the Federal 

Transit Authority does not intend to comment. 

Rocky Mountain Power, Barbara Ishimatsu. Recommended that SLCDA consider costs 

to relocate facilities, schedule ample time for design of replacement facilities, and 

develop a plan for providing continuous power during construction. 

UDEQ Division of Water Quality, Bill Damery. Raised questions about water quality 

at the meeting; did not formally comment. 

UTA, Mary DeLoretto. Emphasized the importance of future transit connections, and 

convenient and visible TRAX Line station location. 

6-2 RDD/102790005 (NLH4349.DOCX) 

TBG012712153950RDD


 

Salt Lake City Public Utilities, Brad Stewart. Recommended replacing water and sewer 

infrastructure, sewage pretreatment devices, and constructing lift stations in non-secure 

areas. Supported greywater reuse, rainwater harvesting, and a minimum building 

elevation of 4,220 feet. Plans to offer input on preliminary drawings when they are 

available. 

6.1.3.2 Public Comments 

Seven members of the public submitted comments, either at the public information meeting 

or in subsequent correspondence. A summary of comments received from the public 

follows. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Jack Sederstrom. Concerned about possible tax increase. 

Cynthia Cook. Appreciated the open house to better understand the airport 

redevelopment project. 

Carl Stettler. Wanted to know if SLC would copy the Denver International Airport 

terminal layout. Went on to state how important art is for children. 

Allen Sanderson. Noted that the redevelopment plan is similar to the plan for Atlanta; 

people movers plus passenger walkway, safer passenger drop-off, midway concourse 

access, more easily accessible car rental facilities. Recommended no temporary 

structures, and continued light rail planning. 

Ann-Marie Lence. Asked where to find the redevelopment plans; no additional 

comment. 

Doug Fullmer. Encouraged consideration of upgrading existing facilities as an 

alternative to the redevelopment project, and current forecasting to support 

redevelopment. 

Jhan Jensen. Supports the project. 

6.2 Post-scoping Coordination 

The FAA initiated consultation with the Utah SHPO pursuant to Section 106 of the National 

Historic Preservation Act. Appendix F, Historic, Architectural, Archaeological, and Cultural 

Resources, includes the FAA letter initiating Section 106 consultation, a technical 

memorandum documenting the lack of adverse effects to historic properties, and the SHPO 

letter of concurrence with the findings of the technical memorandum. 

6.3 Public Hearing 

A combined public meeting and public hearing was held on June 26, 2012, in the Kibbie 

Executive Terminal at SLC, from 5:00 to 8:00 p.m. A presentation was given at 6:00 p.m. 

Similar to the first public meeting, the format was open house, in that stations were 

distributed throughout the room for the attendees to visit, gain information about the 

project, have questions answered, and provide feedback to the project team through one-onone 

conversations. The combined public meeting and public hearing was advertised in the 

Salt Lake Tribune from May 25 through 27, 2012. Presentation materials and meeting notices 

are provided in Appendix G, Agency and Public Involvement. 

RDD/102790005 (NLH4349.DOCX) 6-3 

TBG012712153950RDD


Twenty-five people attended the public meeting and public hearing, eight of which were 

SLCDA employees. A court recorder was present to record comments for those interested in 

making a verbal comment for the record. No comments were recorded by the court 

recorder. Comment forms were also available for those interested in leaving a written 

comment at the hearing, or taking a comment form and sending in a comment by the end of 

the comment period, which was July 13, 2012. No written comments were submitted at the 

public hearing, but one comment letter was submitted to the Airport before July 13. 

Responses to the comments in this letter are included in Appendix G. 

Two additional comments were submitted to the Airport via e-mail before July 13, one from 

the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and one from the Salt Lake County Engineering and 

Flood Control Division. Responses to these comments are also provided in Appendix G. 

6-4 RDD/102790005 (NLH4349.DOCX) 

TBG012712153950RDD

CHAPTER 7 

List of Preparers 

In accordance with FAA Order 1050.1E, Change 1, Paragraph 405.h. and Section 1502.6 of 

the CEQ regulations, the names, titles, and responsibilities of principal team members 

contributing information to this EA are identified in Table 7-1. 

TABLE 7-1 

List of Preparers 

Preparer 

Responsibility 

FAA 

Hans Anker 

FAA Project Manager 

SLCDA 

Allen McCandless 

Patty Nelis 

Kevin Robins 

Director, Planning and Environment 

Environmental Programs Manager 

Director, Engineering 

CH2M HILL 

Bill Willkie 

Suzanne Geckle 

Tom Klin 

Alisa Swank 

Pamela Vanderbilt 

Brad Hartman, Jeff DenBleyker 

Katie Reagan 

Aaron Fergusson 

Staci Hill 

Bill VanHercke 

Project Management, NEPA Documentation 

Environmental Analysis 

Final Quality/Technical Review 

Environmental Analysis 

Air Quality 

Water Resources, Grading and Drainage, Preliminary Benefit-Cost Analysis 

Natural Environment 

Historic, Cultural, Section 4(f) Analysis 

Social/Socioeconomic Analysis 

Construction, Technical Review 

LeighFisher 

Peter Mandle 

Josh Cohn 

Linda Perry 

Bill Dunlay 

Mark Nagle 

Airfield Assumptions 

Ground Access/Circulation 

Aviation Forecast Validation 

Taxi Times 

Facility Requirements 

V-I-A Consulting 

Kim Clark 

Public Outreach 

RDD/102790005 (NLH4349.DOCX) 7-1 

TBG012712153950RDD

CHAPTER 8 

References 

Allison, J.R., A. Colman, and A. Webb. 1997. Archaeology at the Salt Lake Airport: 1996-1997 

Test Excavations and Data Recovery Plan. Research Report No. U96-31. Orem, Utah: Baseline 

Data, Inc. 

CH2M HILL. 1997. Salt Lake City International Airport – Master Drainage Study. 

Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ). 2005. “Guidance on the Consideration of Past 

Actions in Cumulative Effects Analysis.” Memorandum. June 24. 

Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ). 1997. Considering Cumulative Effects Under the 

National Environmental Policy Act. January. 

de Neufville, R., and A. Odoni. 2003. Airport Systems: Planning, Design, and Management. 

McGraw-Hill. 

Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). 2011. Standards for Specifying Construction of 

Airports. FAA Advisory Circular 150/5370-10F. Office of Airport Safety & Standards, 

Airport Engineering Division. http://www.faa.gov/airports/resources/ 

advisory_circulars/index.cfm/go/document.current/documentNumber/150_5370-10. 

September 30. 

Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). 2010a. Report to Congress, National Plan of Integrated 

Airport Systems 2011-2015. September. 

Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). 2010b. Terminal Area Forecast Summary Fiscal 

Years 2010-2030. Forecast and Performance Analysis Division, Office of Aviation Policy 

and Plans. http://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/apl/ 

aviation_forecasts/taf_reports/. 

Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). 2007a. Environmental Desk Reference for Airport 

Actions. Office of Airports, Office of Airport Planning and Programming, and Airports 

Planning and Environmental Division APP-400. October. 

Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). 2007b. Buildings for Storage and Maintenance of 

Airport Snow and Ice Control Equipment and Materials. FAA Advisory Circular 150/5220-18A. 

September. 

Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). 2006. National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) 

Implementing Instructions for Airport Projects. FAA Order 5050.4B. April. 

Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). 2005a. Airport Master Plans. FAA Advisory 

Circular 150/5070-6B. Office of Airport Planning and Programming, Planning and 

Environmental Division. http://www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/advisory_circulars/ 

index.cfm/go/document.information/documentID/22329. July 29. 

RDD/102790005 (NLH4349.DOCX) 8-1 

TBG012712153950RDD

CHAPTER 8 REFERENCES 

Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). 2005b. Aviation & Emissions – A Primer. Office of 

Environment and Energy. January. 

Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). 1999. FAA Airport Benefit-Cost Analysis Guidance. 

Office of Aviation Policy and Plans. December 15. 

Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). 1997. Fuel Storage Tanks at FAA Facilities. FAA 

Advisory Circular 1050.15A. AEE-200. http://www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/ 

orders_notices/index.cfm/go/document.information/documentID/6406. April 30. 

Governor’s Office of Planning and Budget. 2010. 2010 Economic Report to the Governor. 

http://www.utahfoundation.org/reports/?p=589. January 7. 

Governor’s Office of Planning and Budget. 2009. 2009 Economic Report to the Governor. 

http://www.utahfoundation.org/reports/?p=107. January 9. 

Hellmuth, Obata + Kassabaum, Inc. (HOK). 2011. Phase I AutoCAD drawings. August 11. 

Hellmuth, Obata + Kassabaum, Inc. (HOK). 2010. Terminal Development Program, Salt Lake 

City International Airport, Task 2, Program Validation and Preliminary Planning. January. 

HNTB. 2003. Terminal Area Capacity Analysis, Final Report. Prepared for Salt Lake City 

International Airport. June. 

HNTB. 1997. Airport Master Plan Update and FAR Part 150 Study Update, Salt Lake City 

International Airport. 

International Air Transport Association (IATA). 2004. Airport Development Reference Manual. 

January. 

Jacobs Consultancy. 2010. Comprehensive Landside Plan, Phase B, Salt Lake City International 

Airport. January. 

Jacobs Engineering. 2009. Asset Preservation Study. Prepared for the Salt Lake City 

Department of Airports. February. 

JBR Environmental Consultants. 2009. Stationary-source information spreadsheets. Prepared 

for Salt Lake City Department of Airports. 

LeighFisher. 2012. Technical Memorandum: Emissions Modeling. Prepared for CH2M HILL and 

the Salt Lake City Department of Airports. March. 

LeighFisher. 2010. Technical Memorandum: Aviation Demand Forecasts. Prepared for FAA 

Northwest Mountain Region and the Salt Lake City Department of Airports. August. 

Luey, Kevin/Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Denver Airports District Office. 2011. 

Personal communication with Linda Perry/LeighFisher. September 30. 

Luey, Kevin/Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Denver Airports District Office. 2010. 

Personal communication with Patty Nelis/Salt Lake City Department of Airports. 

October 15. 

PB Aviation. 2005. Salt Lake City Environmental Baseline Conditions Report. 

8-2 RDD/102790005 (NLH4349.DOCX) 

TBG012712153950RDD


Salt Lake City Department of Airports (SLCDA). No date. Salt Lake City Department of 

Airports Capital Improvement FY 2011/2012 Budget. Schedule and list of project descriptions. 

Salt Lake City Department of Airports (SLCDA). 2010a. Personal communication with 

SLCDA staff members. November. 

Salt Lake City Department of Airports (SLCDA). 2010b. Salt Lake City Department of 

Airports Five-Year Capital Improvement Program. Revised June 30, 2010. 

Salt Lake City Department of Airports (SLCDA). 2010c. Emissions information from Salt 

Lake City International Airport Environmental Categorical Exclusion Reports. October. 

Salt Lake City Department of Airports (SLCDA). 2008. Reconstruction of Taxiway H 

Environmental Categorical Exclusion Report. 

Salt Lake City Department of Airports (SLCDA). 2007a. Wildlife Hazard Management Plan. 

Revised. April 2. 

Salt Lake City Department of Airports (SLCDA). 2007b. Runway 16R-34L Storm Drainage 

Improvements Environmental Categorical Exclusion Report. 

Salt Lake City Department of Airports (SLCDA). 2004. Project No. 2.4 Airfield Improvement 

Project: Apron Deicing Modifications Environmental Categorical Exclusion Report. April 1. 

Salt Lake City International Airport (SLC). 2011. “SLC Fast Facts.” 

http://www.slcairport.com/airport-overview.asp. Accessed March 2011. 

Spader, Daniel/Salt Lake City Department of Airports (SLCDA) Staff Architect. 2009. 

Interview by Aaron Fergusson/CH2M HILL. May 11. 

TRA Airport Consultants. 1986. Special Terminal Area Study. November. 

TRA Airport Consultants. 1981. Salt Lake City International Airport Master Plan Update. June. 

TRA Airport Consulting; Aviation Consulting, Inc.; Lea + Elliot; Environmental Science 

Associates; The Parry Company; Business Smith, Inc.; and Pavement Consultants, Inc. 1988. 

Airport Master Plan Update, Salt Lake City International Airport. 

TRA Airport Consultants, The Richardson Associates, The Boeing Company/HNTB, and 

Battelle. 1975. Salt Lake City International Airport Master Plan Study. August. 

Transportation Resource Board. 2008. Ground Access to Major Airports by Public 

Transportation. Airport Cooperative Research Program Report 4. Research sponsored by the 

Federal Aviation Administration. 

Transportation Security Administration (TSA). 2010. Checkpoint Evolution. 

http://www.tsa.gov/evolution. Accessed November 2010. 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2010a. National Wetlands Inventory, Wetlands 

Mapper. http://www.fws.gov/wetlands/. Updated June 22, 2010. Accessed July 13, 2010. 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2010b. Species Reports: Species by County. 

http://ecos.fws.gov/tess_public/countySearch!speciesByCountyReport.action?fips=49035. 

Updated July 13, 2010. Accessed July 13, 2010. 

RDD/102790005 (NLH4349.DOCX) 8-3 

TBG012712153950RDD


Utah Department of Environmental Quality (UDEQ). 2010a. Online air quality information. 

Division of Air Quality. www.airquality.utah.gov. Accessed June 20, 2010. 

Utah Department of Environmental Quality (UDEQ). 2010b. Online landfill information. 

http://www.hazardouswaste.utah.gov/Solid_Waste_Section/Salt_Lake_Valley_Solid_Was 

te.htm. Accessed June 2010. 

Utah Department of Transportation. 2007. Utah Continuous Airport System Plan. Division of 

Aeronautics. 

Utah Department of Transportation. 2004. Economic Impact of Utah’s Airports. Division of 

Aeronautics. Prepared for Utah Airport Systems. 

Utah Division of Wildlife Resources. 2010a. Utah Natural Heritage Program Biodiversity 

Tracking and Conservation System (BIOTICS). Accessed July 13, 2010. 

Utah Division of Wildlife Resources. 2010b. Bald Eagle. Utah Conservation Data Center. 

http://dwrcdc.nr.utah.gov/rsgis2/Search/Display.asp?FlNm=halileuc. Accessed July 13, 

2010. 

Utah State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO). 2012. “RE: Salt Lake City International 

Airport Terminal Redevelopment Program, Section 106 Consultation.” Letter. February 22. 

Utah Transit Authority (UTA). 2012. Airport TRAX Line Web site. 

http://www.rideuta.com/mc/?page=Projects-FrontLines2015-AirportTRAXLine. Accessed 

March 6, 2012. 

8-4 RDD/102790005 (NLH4349.DOCX) 

TBG012712153950RDD

Appendix A 

Technical Memorandum: 

Aviation Demand Forecasts

Technical Memorandum 

Aviation Demand Forecasts 



Prepared for 

FAA Northwest Mountain Region 


November 2010 

Prepared by

Contents 

Page 

1.0 Introduction and Summary .................................................................................................. 1 

1.1 Forecast Approach ..................................................................................................... 1 

1.2 Enplaned Passengers ................................................................................................. 2 

1.3 Air Cargo ..................................................................................................................... 3 

1.4 Aircraft Operations .................................................................................................... 4 

1.5 Airport Service Region .............................................................................................. 5 

1.6 Airport Role ................................................................................................................. 5 

2.0 Economic Basis for Aviation Demand .............................................................................. 10 

2.1 Socioeconomic Trends ............................................................................................. 10 

2.2 Economic Outook ..................................................................................................... 17 

3.0 Historical Airline Activity .................................................................................................. 24 

3.1 Airline Service and Passenger Market Shares ...................................................... 24 

3.2 Enplaned Passengers ............................................................................................... 24 

3.3 Originating Passengers ............................................................................................ 29 

3.4 Connecting Passengers ............................................................................................ 32 

3.5 Monthly Airline Traffic ............................................................................................ 33 

3.6 Air Cargo ................................................................................................................... 37 

4.0 Historical Aircraft Operations ........................................................................................... 41 

4.1 Air Carrier ................................................................................................................. 41 

4.2 Air Taxi and Commuter .......................................................................................... 41 

4.3 General Aviation ...................................................................................................... 43 

4.4 Military ...................................................................................................................... 43 

4.5 Monthly Aircraft Operations .................................................................................. 43 

5.0 Aviation Demand Forecasts ................................................................................................ 45 

5.1 Enplaned Passengers ............................................................................................... 45 

5.2 Air Cargo ................................................................................................................... 52 

5.3 Aircraft Operations .................................................................................................. 58 

6.0 Comparison with the FAA 2009 TAF ................................................................................ 66 

Attachment A Regression Analysis 

Attachment B Forecasts of Aircraft Fleet and Average Annual Day 

Aircraft Operations 


Salt Lake City International Airport Environmental Assessment 


i

Figures 

Page 

1 Comparison of Enplaned Passengers Forecasts ................................................................. 2 

2 Total Air Cargo Forecasts ...................................................................................................... 3 

3 Comparison of Total Aircraft Operations Forecasts .......................................................... 4 

4 Salt Lake City Airport Service Region ................................................................................. 6 

5 Passengers Connecting Through Salt Lake City by Region ............................................. 8 

6 Delta Air Lines Top Airports ................................................................................................ 9 

7 Comparative Distribution of Nonagricultural Employment ......................................... 13 

8 Monthly Unemployment Rates .......................................................................................... 15 

9 Historical Trends in Enplaned Passengers ....................................................................... 28 

10 SLC and U.S. Enplaned Passenger Trends ........................................................................ 29 

11 Shares of Originating Passengers ....................................................................................... 30 

12 Domestic Originating Passengers and Airfares ............................................................... 32 

13 Connecting Passengers ........................................................................................................ 33 

14 Enplaned Passengers Load Factors .................................................................................... 37 

15 Historical Trends in Air Cargo ........................................................................................... 40 

16 Historical and Prediced Originating Passengers ............................................................. 46 

17 Historical and Predicted Connecting Passengers ............................................................ 47 

18 Historical and Forecast Enplaned Passengers .................................................................. 52 

19 All-Cargo Airline Landings ................................................................................................ 53 

20 Monthly Air Cargo Trends .................................................................................................. 53 

21 Selected Air Cargo Industry Forecasts .............................................................................. 56 

22 Historical and Forecast Air Cargo ...................................................................................... 58 

23 Historical and Forecast Aircraft Operations ..................................................................... 65 




ii

Tables 

Page 

1 Salt Lake City CMSA Population ............................................................................ 7 

2 Utah Commercial Service Airports in 2009 ........................................................... 8 

3 Historical Socioeconomic Data .............................................................................. 11 

4 Historical Unemployment Rates ........................................................................... 14 

5 Major Utah Companies in 2009 ............................................................................. 16 

6 U.S. Economic Projections ...................................................................................... 19 

7 Socioeconomic Projections for Salt Lake City Primary Area and 

State of Utah ............................................................................................................. 22 

8 Airlines Serving Salt Lake City International Airport ....................................... 25 

9 Historical Enplaned Passengers by Airline ......................................................... 26 

10 Historical Enplaned Passengers ............................................................................ 27 

11 Top 20 Domestic Origin-Destination Passenger Markets and 

Airline Service in 2009 ............................................................................................ 31 

12 Historical Enplaned Passengers by Month .......................................................... 34 

13 Historical Scheduled Departing Seats by Month ................................................ 36 

14 Historical Passenger Airline Aircraft Landings by Month ................................ 38 

15 Historical Air Cargo ................................................................................................ 39 

16 Historical Aircraft Operations ............................................................................... 42 

17 Historical Total Aircraft Operations by Month ................................................... 44 

18 Forecasts of Enplaned Passengers ......................................................................... 50 

19 Forecasts of Total Air Cargo .................................................................................. 57 

20 Assumptions for Passenger Airline Aircraft Departure Forecasts ................... 60 

21 Forecasts of Total Aircraft Operations by Type .................................................. 61 

22 Forecasts of General Aviation Activity ................................................................ 64 

23 FAA TAF Forecast Comparison ............................................................................ 67 

24 Summary of SLC EA Forecasts Using FAA Template ....................................... 68 

A-1 Regression Models ................................................................................................ A-2 




iii

AVIATION DEMAND FORECASTS 

1.0 Introduction and Summary 

This technical memorandum presents forecasts of aviation activity in support of an 

Environmental Assessment (EA) for Salt Lake City International Airport (SLC or the 

Airport). The forecasts presented in this memorandum are “unconstrained” and, therefore, 

do not include specific assumptions about the future capacity of the Airport. The forecasts 

are prepared for five future demand years, including an estimate for 2010 (based on year to 

date activity—January through March 2009—available when this report was prepared), a 

near-term forecast for 2011, and long-term forecasts for 2014, 2019, 2024, and 2030. The base 

year for the forecasts is 2009. 

1.1 Forecast Approach 

The approach used in developing forecasts for SLC included consideration of the role of the 

Airport in providing commercial passenger service for the State of Utah and surrounding 

area and recent trends in airline service development at the Airport. In particular: 

 

 

 

The enplaned passenger forecasts were developed using a variety of analytical 

tools, including trend analysis, regression models, and market share analysis, to 

address the key components of aviation activity (i.e., domestic and international, 

originating and connecting passengers). In addition, recent trends in airline 

service, particularly for Delta Air Lines, were considered in the preparation of the 

passenger forecasts. 

The air cargo forecasts are based on a review of the recent trends and key 

components of air cargo activity (i.e., domestic and international, enplaned and 

deplaned cargo (freight and mail) for passenger airlines (as belly-cargo) and allcargo 

airlines). 

The aircraft operations forecasts are based on the forecasts of passenger and cargo 

activity for the Airport and translated into aircraft operations by (1) disaggregating 

the total demand into the components (i.e., domestic and international, mainline 

(air carrier) and regional affiliate) and (2) making future assumptions about 

average aircraft size in terms of seats per departure and average enplaned 

passenger load factors (percentage of seats occupied, on average). In addition, the 




1


future fleet plans of the airlines serving SLC were also considered based on 

available information. 

1.2 Enplaned Passengers 

Figure 1 presents historical enplaned passengers for 1990 through 2009 and forecasts for 

2010 through 2030, compared with the FAA 2009 Terminal Area Forecast (TAF) for the 

Airport. The enplaned passenger forecasts are based on 2009 data and are within 4.9% of 

the FAA 2009 TAF in 2014 and 3.0% in 2019. The enplaned passenger growth rate (an 

average increase of 2.2% per year between 2009 and 2030) is lower than the rate forecast by 

the FAA in its 2009 TAF for the Airport—an average of 2.5% per year from Federal Fiscal 

Year (FFY) 2009 to FFY 2030. A detailed comparison of the enplaned passenger forecasts 

and the FAA 2009 TAF is presented in Chapter 6. 

1 Comparison of Enplaned 

Passengers Forecasts 




2


1.3 Air Cargo 

Figure 2 presents historical air cargo tonnage for 1990 through 2009 and forecasts for 2010 

through 2030. (The FAA does not prepare cargo forecasts for individual airports as part of 

the TAF.) Since 2000, the cargo industry nationwide and at SLC has experienced significant 

changes related to the events of September 11, 2001, consolidation in the air cargo industry, 

an increasing trend in the volume of cargo transported by truck, and the current national 

and global economic recessions which began in December 2007 and continued through 2009. 

All-cargo airlines are forecast to account for approximately 85% of total air cargo through 

2030, consistent with historical trends at the Airport. The cargo transported on all-cargo 

airlines is forecast to increase an average of 1.8% per year between 2008 and 2030, compared 

with an average forecast increase of 1.1% per year for passenger airlines during the same 

period. 

2 Total Air Cargo Forecasts 




3


1.4 Aircraft Operations 

Figure 3 presents historical total aircraft operations for 1990 through 2009 and forecasts for 

2010 through 2030, compared with the FAA 2009 Terminal Area Forecast (TAF) for the 

Airport. (Total aircraft operations include air carrier, air taxi and commuter, general 

aviation, and military operations.) The aircraft operations forecasts are based on 2009 data 

and are within 0.3% of the FAA 2009 TAF in 2014 and 2.0% in 2019. The forecast growth 

rate in total aircraft operations (an average increase of 1.4% per year between 2009 and 2030) 

is lower than the rate forecast by the FAA in its 2009 TAF for the Airport—an average of 

1.8% per year from Federal Fiscal Year (FFY) 2009 to FFY 2030. A detailed comparison of 

the aircraft operations forecasts and the FAA 2009 TAF is presented in Chapter 6. 

3 Comparison of Total Aircraft 

Operations Forecasts 




4


1.5 Airport Service Region 

The primary area of the Airport service region, both in terms of population and geography, 

is defined as the Salt Lake City and Ogden-Clearfield Metropolitan Statistical Areas (MSA), 

hereafter referred to as the Salt Lake City CMSA. * The population densities of the Salt Lake 

City CMSA are shown in Figure 4 and reflect the importance of the six counties in the region 

(Davis, Morgan, Salt Lake, Summit, Tooele, and Weber counties). In 2009, the population of 

the Salt Lake City CMSA was 1.67 million as shown in Table 1, with Salt Lake County 

accounting for 62% of the total. 

The secondary region served by the Airport, which includes many of the counties 

surrounding the Salt Lake City CMSA, is defined by the location of (and the airline service 

offered at) other “nearby” air carrier airports. SLC is the primary passenger air carrier 

commercial service airport for the State of Utah and the only large hub airport with 

comparable service within 400 miles of the primary area. Other airports near Salt Lake 

City, such as those in Pocatello and Twin Falls, Idaho; Ely, Nevada; Vernal, Utah; and Rock 

Springs, Wyoming offer limited passenger commuter service. 

1.6 Airport Role 

Salt Lake City International Airport plays an important role in the national, state, and local 

air transportation systems. SLC is the primary commercial service airport for the State of 

Utah, supports a large origin-destination passenger base, and serves as a hub for Delta Air 

Lines. 

1.6.1 Primary Commercial Service Airport in Utah 

Of the 11 commercial service airports in Utah, the Airport accounted for 99% of the 

passengers enplaned in the State and is the primary commercial service airport in Utah, as 

shown in Table 2. Wendover Airport, a non-hub airport 122 miles west of the Airport, is the 

second largest commercial service airport in Utah, with 50,354 enplaned passengers in 2009, 

compared to 10.2 million enplaned passengers at Salt Lake City International Airport. 

* In 2003, the Office of Management and Budget redefined the Salt Lake City-Ogden Metropolitan Statistical Area (Davis, 

Salt Lake, and Weber counties) and created two MSAs—the Salt Lake City and Ogden-Clearfield Metropolitan Statistical 

Areas. 




5





6


Table 1 

Salt Lake City CMSA Population 


Metropolitan Statistical Area / county 

2009 

Population 

Percent of 

total 

Salt Lake City CMSA 

Salt Lake City MSA 

Salt Lake 1,034,989 61.9% 

Summit 36,969 2.2% 

Tooele 58,335 3.5% 

Subtotal 1,130,293 67.6% 

Ogden-Clearfield MSA 

Davis 300,827 18.0% 

Morgan 8,908 0.5% 

Weber 231,834 13.9% 

Subtotal 541,569 32.4% 

Total 1,671,862 100.0% 

CMSA = Metropolitan Statistical Area 

In 2003, the Office of Management and Budget redefined the Salt Lake 

City-Ogden Metropolitan Statistical Area (Davis, Salt Lake, and Weber 

counties) and created two MSAs--the Salt Lake City and Ogden-Clearfield 

Metropolitan Statistical Areas which together make up the CMSA. 

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Population Division, Table 1. Annual 

Estimates of the Resident Population for Counties of Utah: April 1, 2000 

to July 1, 2009 (CO-EST2009-01-49), Release Date: March 2010. 

1.6.2 Large Origin-Destination Passenger Base 

The Airport’s large origin-destination passenger base reflects the strength of the Salt Lake 

City regional economy. A total of 5.7 million passengers originated from the Salt Lake City 

CMSA in 2009, (i.e., these originating passengers did not connect with another flight at the 

Airport). This large base of local passengers allows Delta to (1) improve load factors and 

profitability and (2) maintain high frequencies for scheduling passenger connections and 

provides Southwest with a large market of both leisure and business travelers. According to 

SLCDA records, about 56% of total Airport passengers in 2009 were originating, with the 

remaining 44% of Airport passengers connecting between flights. 




7


Table 2 

Utah Commercial Service Airports in 2009 


Aircraft type providing service to Enplaned 

Utah airport 


passengers 

Salt Lake City International -- 10,203,289 

Wendover Narrowbody 50,354 

St. George Turboprop 38,785 

Monument Valley Turboprop 6,896 

Cedar City Regional jet/turboprop 5,400 

Vernal Turboprop 3,780 

Moab Turboprop 1,900 

Provo Table 2 Utah Commercial Narrowbody/regional Service Airports jet in 2009 1,503 

Logan Narrowbody/turboprop 785 

Ogden Regional jet 33 

Bryce Canyon Turboprop 4 

Total 10,312,729 

Sources: Salt Lake City Department of Airports records and U.S. Department of 

Transportation, T100 online database, accessed April 2010. 

1.6.3 Hub for Delta Air Lines 

The Airport serves as an important connecting hub in the route system of Delta Air Lines. 

As shown on Figure 5, the shares of passengers connecting through the Airport in 2009 

5 Passengers Connecting Through Salt 

Lake City by Region 




8


reflect the Airport’s central geographic location, with the western United States (states in the 

Rocky Mountain and Pacific regions) accounting for 64% of connecting passengers and the 

eastern United States (states in the Northeast, Midwest, and South regions) accounting for 

31% of connecting passengers. 

Delta Air Lines, which includes Delta mainline and the regional/commuter airline affiliates 

operating as Delta Connection, accounted for 74.2% of the passengers enplaned at the 

Airport in 2009. (Northwest Airlines merged with Delta in 2008. The FAA approved a 

single operating certificate in December 2009.) Figure 6 presents scheduled departing seats 

in 2010 for Delta Air Lines at its top 10 airports. SLC ranks fourth among Delta’s top 

10 airports in 2010. 

6 Delta Air Lines Top Airports 

1.6.4 Southwest Airlines Service at the Airport 

Southwest Airlines started service at the Airport in 1993. The Airport is the 27 th busiest 

airport in Southwest’s system based on a total of 1.9 million scheduled departing seats in 

2010. Southwest serves 13 cities from SLC in 2010, including 6 cities in the Rocky Mountain 

region (Albuquerque, Boise, Denver, Las Vegas, Phoenix, Reno), 5 cities in the Pacific region 

(Los Angles, Oakland, Portland, Seattle, and Spokane), Chicago in the Midwest region, and 

Baltimore in the South region. 




9


2.0 Economic Basis for Aviation Demand 

The economy of the Salt Lake City CMSA is an important determinant of long-term 

passenger demand at the Airport. The development and diversity of the economic base of 

an airport service region are both important to passenger traffic growth at the airport 

serving that region. This is particularly true where the industries in the region rely on the 

airport for passenger and cargo service. The Salt Lake City CMSA has a diverse economic 

base and is a business, trade, manufacturing, and government center. In addition, the Salt 

Lake Primary Area serves as a transportation hub for the State of Utah and the 8-state Rocky 

Mountain region. * In 2009, the Salt Lake City CMSA accounted for approximately 60% of 

Utah population and employment. 

The following sections present a discussion of the economic basis for airline traffic at the 

Airport—the historical population, employment, and per capita income of the Salt Lake City 

CMSA, and tourism—and a summary of the economic outlook for the United States, the 

State of Utah, and the Salt Lake City CMSA. 

2.1 Socioeconomic Trends 

Table 3 presents comparative trends in population, nonagricultural employment, and per 

capita personal income in the Salt Lake City CMSA, the State of Utah, and the United States 

from 1990 through 2009. 

2.1.1 Population 

As shown in Table 3, the population of the Salt Lake City CMSA increased at higher average 

annual growth rates than those for the nation and slightly lower growth rates than the State. 

Population in the Salt Lake City CMSA increased an average of 2.3% per year between 1990 

and 2000, and 1.9% per year between 2000 and 2009. Population growth in the Salt Lake 

City CMSA slowed between 2000 and 2005 and increased at above average annual growth 

rates from 2005 through 2008, reflecting increased in-migration in response to economic 

growth. According to the U.S. Census Bureau, the State of Utah ranked second in the nation 

in terms of population growth in 2009 (Wyoming ranked first). 

* As defined by the U.S. Census Bureau, the Rocky Mountain region includes the states of Arizona, Colorado, Idaho, 

New Mexico, Montana, Nevada, Utah, and Wyoming. 




10


TABLE 3 

Historical Socioeconomic Data 


Nonagricultural employment Per capita personal income, 

Population (thousands) (thousands) in 2009 dollars 

Salt Lake 

City CMSA 

State of 

Utah 

United 

States 



State of 

Utah 

United 

States 



State of 

Utah 

United 

States 

1990 1,125.7 1,729.7 249,464 502.2 723.6 109,487 $ 26,548 $ 24,392 $ 31,789 

1991 1,157.0 1,771.9 252,153 512.8 745.3 108,375 26,490 24,490 31,318 

1992 1,192.1 1,821.5 255,030 529.7 768.6 108,726 26,812 24,879 31,990 

1993 1,228.9 1,876.0 257,783 558.3 809.8 110,844 27,144 25,308 32,013 

1994 1,263.1 1,930.4 260,327 590.7 859.7 114,291 28,053 26,132 32,624 

1995 1,291.9 1,976.8 262,803 623.9 907.5 117,298 28,973 26,915 33,180 

1996 1,320.7 2,022.3 265,229 656.9 954.4 119,708 29,982 27,824 33,945 

1997 1,351.2 2,065.4 267,784 682.4 993.5 122,776 31,075 28,811 34,913 

1998 1,373.8 2,100.6 270,248 701.5 1,023.2 125,930 32,349 30,112 36,621 

1999 1,394.8 2,129.8 272,691 721.6 1,048.5 128,993 32,815 30,566 37,335 

2000 1,417.5 2,244.3 282,172 740.0 1,075.4 131,785 34,164 30,545 37,772 

2001 1,441.7 2,291.3 285,082 750.3 1,081.3 131,826 34,626 30,932 37,729 

2002 1,463.7 2,334.5 287,804 741.3 1,073.4 130,341 34,297 30,586 37,519 

2003 1,487.5 2,379.9 290,326 735.9 1,074.1 129,999 33,645 30,123 37,627 

2004 1,511.5 2,438.9 293,046 749.4 1,104.3 131,435 34,240 30,479 38,480 

2005 1,536.0 2,499.6 295,753 775.8 1,148.0 133,703 35,437 31,436 38,913 

2006 1,576.0 2,583.7 298,593 809.9 1,203.7 136,086 36,690 32,284 40,118 

2007 1,610.0 2,663.8 301,580 839.9 1,253.3 137,598 37,547 32,904 40,759 

2008 1,642.6 2,727.3 304,375 842.2 1,252.5 136,790 36,349 31,936 40,023 

2009 1,671.9 2,784.6 307,007 804.2 1,191.8 130,920 n.a 30,875 39,172 

Percent increase (decrease) 

2000-2001 1.7 2.1 1.0 1.4 0.5 0.0 1.4 1.3 (0.1) 

2001-2002 1.5 1.9 1.0 (1.2) (0.7) (1.1) (1.0) (1.1) (0.6) 

2002-2003 1.6 1.9 0.9 (0.7) 0.1 (0.3) (1.9) (1.5) 0.3 

2003-2004 1.6 2.5 0.9 1.8 2.8 1.1 1.8 1.2 2.3 

2004-2005 1.6 2.5 0.9 3.5 4.0 1.7 3.5 3.1 1.1 

2005-2006 2.6 3.4 1.0 4.4 4.9 1.8 3.5 2.7 3.1 

2006-2007 2.2 3.1 1.0 3.7 4.1 1.1 2.3 1.9 1.6 

2007-2008 2.0 2.4 0.9 0.3 (0.1) (0.6) (3.2) (2.9) (1.8) 

2008-2009 1.8 2.1 0.9 (4.5) (4.8) (4.3) n.a. (3.3) (2.1) 

Average annual percent increase (decrease) 

1990-2000 2.3 2.6 1.2 4.0 4.0 1.9 2.6% 2.3 1.7 

2000-2009 1.9 2.4 0.9 0.9 1.1 (0.1) 0.7(a) 0.1 0.4 

1990-2009 2.1 2.5 1.1 2.5 2.7 0.9 1.7(b) 1.2 1.1 

Notes: Salt Lake City CMSA consists of the Salt Lake City and the Ogden-Clearfield Metropolitan Statistical 

Areas (MSA), including the counties of Davis, Morgan, Salt Lake, Summit, Tooele, and Weber. 

n.a. = Not available. 

(a) Represents the average annual percent change from 2000 through 2008. 

(b) Represents the average annual percent change from 1990 through 2008. 

Sources: U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census, Population Estimates Program, Population Division, 

on-line database, accessed April 2010. 

U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, www.bls.gov, accessed April 2010. 

U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of Economic Analysis, www.bea.gov, accessed April 2010. 




11


2.1.2 Employment 

Since 1990, nonagricultural employment in the Salt Lake City CMSA increased at average 

annual growth rates similar to those for the State, but higher than national rates, as shown in 

Table 3. Following the trends in population, nonagricultural employment in the Salt Lake 

City CMSA and the State expanded during the 1990s, increasing an average of 4.0% per year 

between 1990 and 2000, compared with slower growth between 2000 and 2009 (an average 

of 0.9% per year). 

2.1.3 Income 

Per capita income growth (in 2009 constant dollars) in the Salt Lake City CMSA has 

increased since 1990, as shown in Table 3. From 2000 to 2008 (the most recent year 

available), the Salt Lake City CMSA’s per capita income increased an average of 0.7% per 

year, compared to 0.5% per year in the State and 0.6% per year in the United States. In 2008, 

the average per capita income in the Salt Lake City CMSA was less than that for the nation 

but higher than the State average. 

2.1.4 Nonagricultural Employment by Industry Sector 

Figure 7 presents a comparison of historical nonagricultural employment by industry sector 

for the Salt Lake City CMSA in 2000 and 2009, and for Utah and the United States in 2009. 

Employment in business and financial services (23.9%), trade (20.2%), and government 

(17.2%) accounted for 61.3% of total nonagricultural employment in the Salt Lake City 

CMSA. 

2.1.5 Unemployment Rates 

In addition to the employment trends cited above, unemployment rates are also indicative 

of the general economic climate. Table 4 shows comparative annual unemployment rates in 

the Salt Lake City CMSA, the State, and the nation as a whole for 2000 through 2009. The 

unemployment rate in the Salt Lake City CMSA has followed the trends in the State and 

remained equal or lower than that in the nation during this period. 

Since the beginning of the current recession in December 2007, monthly unemployment 

rates in the Salt Lake City CMSA, the State, and the United States have increased, as shown 

on Figure 8. In April 2010, the Salt Lake City CMSA unemployment rate was 6.9%, similar 

to that for the State (7.0%), but lower than that for the nation (9.5%). 




12


2.1.6 Major Utah Companies 

Fourteen of Utah’s top 20 private companies are located in the Salt Lake City CMSA, with 

the remaining six companies located in the secondary area of the Airport service region, as 

shown in Table 5. Of the top 20 private companies in Utah, sixteen are located in the 

Salt Lake City CMSA and three are in the secondary area of the Airport service region. 




13


Table 4 

Historical Unemployment Rates 


Year Salt Lake City CMSA State of Utah United States 

2000 3.3% 3.4% 4.0% 

2001 4.4% 4.4% 4.7% 

2002 5.8% 5.8% 5.8% 

2003 5.8% 5.7% 6.0% 

2004 5.1% 5.1% 5.5% 

2005 4.2% 4.1% 5.1% 

2006 3.0% 3.0% 4.6% 

2007 2.8% 2.8% 4.6% 

2008 3.7% 3.7% 5.8% 

2009 6.5% 6.6% 9.3% 

Notes: Unemployment rates represent annual averages for calendar years and 

are not seasonally adjusted. 

Salt Lake City CMSA consists of the Salt Lake City and the 

Ogden-Clearfield Metropolitan Statistical Areas (MSA), including 

the counties of Davis, Morgan, Salt Lake, Summit, Tooele, and Weber. 

Source: U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, www.bls.gov, 

accessed April 2010. 




14


2.1.7 Tourism 

Tourism represents an important source of economic activity in the Salt Lake City CMSA 

and the State of Utah. Utah is home to five national parks—Arches, Bryce Canyon, 

Canyonlands, Capitol Reef, and Zion--43 State parks, and 13 ski resorts. According to the 

Utah Office of Tourism, estimated spending by visitors to Utah was $6.2 billion in 2009. 

Visitor spending in Utah supported 110,000 jobs in travel and tourism-related industries 

(approximately 9% of the State’s nonagricultural employment) in 2009. Approximately 75% 

of Utah’s visitors come from the western United States, primarily from the states of Arizona, 

California, Colorado, Idaho, Nevada, and Texas. International travelers accounted for 

nearly 4% of Utah visitors with the top markets including Canada, France, Germany, Japan, 

Mexico, the Netherlands, South Korea, and the United Kingdom. 




15


TABLE 5 

Major Utah Companies in 2009 


Top 20 Private Companies 

Rank Company County Principal industry 

Number of 

employees 

1 Intermountain Healthcare Salt Lake Health care 26,000 

2 Flying J Inc. Utah Energy - Fuel distributor 15,000 

3 Management Training Corp. Davis Correctional facilities/job centers 10,000 

4 Boart Longyear Company Salt Lake Nonmetallic mineral services 9,464 

5 Regence BlueCross BlueShield of Utah Salt Lake Health care 7,500 

6 Sinclair Oil Salt Lake Hotel, ski resort and gas stations 5,000 

7 Sportsman's Warehouse Salt Lake Outdoor retailer 4,650 

8 C.R. England Inc. Salt Lake Refrigerated trucking 4,500 

9 Brigham Young University Utah Education 4,085 

10 Larry H. Miller Salt Lake Auto dealerships 3,800 

11 Focus Communications Weber Telemarketing 2,600 

12 Western Wats Utah Market research firm 2,550 

13 Clyde Companies Utah Mineral manufacturing 2,445 

14 ARUP Salt Lake Medical Laboratory testing 2,300 

15 Garff Enterprises Inc. Salt Lake Auto dealerships 2,200 

16 Harmon City Inc. Salt Lake Grocery Store 2,000 

17 ICON Health and Fitness Inc. Cache Fitness equipment manufacturer 2,000 

18 Deer Valley Resort Summit Ski resort 1,975 

19 Brush Resources Inc. Millard Metal Production 1,862 

20 Young Electric Sign Company Salt Lake Custom Signs 1,608 

Top 20 Public Companies 

Rank Company County Principal industry 

2008 Revenue 

(millions) 

1 Huntsman Corporation (a) Salt Lake Synthetics $10,215 

2 Zions Bancorp. (b) Salt Lake Regional pacific banks 3,530 

3 SkyWest Airlines (b) Washington Regional Airlines 3,496 

4 Questar (b) Salt Lake Independent oil and gas 3,465 

5 NuSkin Enterprises Utah Direct sales, skin care, and wellness 1,248 

6 Headwaters Inc. Salt Lake General building materials 886 

7 Overstock.com Salt Lake Catalog and mail order home delivery 834 

8 USANA Health Services Salt Lake Drug related products 429 

9 Myriad Genetics Salt Lake Diagnostic substances 334 

10 Omniture Utah Business software and services 296 

11 Extra Space Storage Salt Lake REIT-Industry 273 

12 Franklin Covey Salt Lake Office supplies 260 

13 Merit Medical Systems Salt Lake Medical instruments and supplies 227 

14 Security National Financial Corporation Salt Lake Mortgage investment 220 

15 Schiff Nutrition Int’l Salt Lake Drug Related 177 

16 Nutraceutical Int’l Summit Drug Related 167 

17 Imergent Inc. Utah Internet development and services 128 

18 Sonic Innovations Inc. Salt Lake Medical appliances and equipment 125 

19 inContact Salt Lake Call center software 79 

20 ClearOne Communications Inc. Salt Lake Audio conferencing 40 

Notes: Employees are full-time equivalents. 

Three of the five largest employers in Utah--Hill Air Force Base, State Of Utah, and the University of Utah--are from the 

public sector and are not listed. 

(a) Fortune 500 company. 

(b) Fortune 1,000 company. 

Source: Utah Business Book of Lists (2009 Data), as reported by the Economic Development Corporation of Utah, 

Utah Business and Economic Profile, 2010. 




16


2.2 Economic Outlook 

Economic activity in the Salt Lake City CMSA and the State is directly linked to the 

production of goods and services in the rest of the United States. Both airline travel and the 

movement of cargo through the Airport depend on the economic linkages between the 

regional, State, and national economies. 

2.2.1 U.S. Economy 

The U.S. economy, after expanding from November 2001 to December 2007, entered into a 

recession, which was triggered by a contraction in the real estate markets combined with a 

surge in energy and other commodity prices in 2006. As the economy weakened, a number 

of factors contributed to the intensity and duration of the recession, including: 

 

 

 

 

 

A financial system crisis in the United States triggered by a decrease in real estate 

prices and the value of real estate backed investment securities and other financial 

assets during the summer of 2007. This was followed by sub-prime mortgagerelated 

problems with some large investment and commercial banks during the 

first half of 2008 and the collapse of Lehman Brothers and the near collapse of AIG 

in the second half of 2008. 

National unemployment rates (seasonally adjusted) increased from 5.8% in 

July 2008 to 10.0% in December 2009, reflecting the loss of 7 million jobs during 

this period. 

Consumer spending, which historically accounts for about 70% of U.S. Gross 

Domestic Product (GDP), became constrained by the loss of home equity, tight 

credit, modest income growth, and high unemployment in a weak labor market. 

Consumer borrowing began declining in the fourth quarter of 2008 and accelerated 

to an 8.5% annual rate of decline by November 2009. 

A significant decline in U.S. economic performance, measured by decreases in 

U.S. GDP during four consecutive quarters beginning with the third quarter of 

2008 through the second quarter of 2009. 

A global economic recession, the fourth since World War II, declared by the 

International Monetary Fund (IMF) in April 2009, related to the spillover effects 

from the U.S. recession and financial crisis. 




17


During the fourth quarter of 2008, Congress passed the Emergency Economic Stabilization 

Act of 2008, which provided for a government bailout of troubled banks, and approved 

$17.4 billion in loan guarantees for the U.S. auto industry. 

Although the National Bureau of Economic Research * has not officially announced the end 

of the current recession, there is general agreement among economists that the recession 

ended in the second quarter of 2009. Recent trends in U.S. GDP (in 2005 dollars) suggest 

that economic growth is strengthening, with increases in each of the last three quarters— 

2.2% in the third quarter of 2009, 5.6% in the fourth quarter of 2009, and 3.2% in the first 

quarter of 2010. Unemployment rates, however, remain at historically high levels (9.9% in 

April 2010) and continue to dampen the prospects for an economic recovery. 

At its April 2010 meeting, the Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) expected the 

economic recovery to continue but at a slower rate of growth in output and employment 

than past recoveries from deep recessions. The FOMC’s April 2010 outlook included the 

following observations. 

 

 

 

Consumer spending and business outlays for equipment and software were seen 

as broadly consistent with a moderate pace of economic recovery. 

The labor market appeared to be starting to improve, but job growth was expected 

to be modest. 

The continued expansion of economic activity would be supported by a number of 

factors, including accommodative monetary policy and the improved condition of 

financial markets and institutions. 

Table 6 presents a comparison of U.S. economic projections prepared by the Congressional 

Budget Office (CBO), the Blue Chip Consensus, and the FOMC. Consistent with the CBO 

projections, both the Blue Chip Consensus and the FOMC projections reflect the effects of 

fiscal stimulus and Federal Reserve measures to provide support to credit markets. The 

long-term growth rates for each of three projections (through 2020) do not include 

assumptions regarding further economic and other shocks, and all three projections show 

GDP growth of ranging from 2.0% to 3.0%. This rate of growth is significantly less than 

world-wide growth projections, especially in emerging economies like India and China. 

* The National Bureau of Economic Research is a nonprofit economic research organization which determines the start and end 

dates of U.S. economic cycles. 




18


Table 6 

U.S. Economic Projections 


Average annual percent increase (decrease) (a) 

Historical 

1980-2009 2009-2010 

Projected 

2010-2011 2009-2020 

Real GDP 

CBO 2.8% 2.1% 2.4% 2.9% 

Blue Chip Consensus 2.9 3.1 (b) 

FOMC 2.7 – 4.0 3.0 – 4.6 2.4 – 3.0 

CPI-U 

CBO 3.4% 1.6% 1.1% 1.7% 


Calendar year average rates 

Unemployment rate (percent) 

CBO 6.2% (c) 10.1% 9.5% 5.0% (d) 


FOMC 8.6 – 9.7 7.2 – 8.7 5.0 – 6.3 

3-Month Treasury Bill rate 

CBO 5.5% (c) 0.2% 0.7% 4.8% (d) 


10-Year Treasury Note rate 

CBO 7.2% (c) 3.6% 3.9% 5.6% (d) 


CBO= Congressional Budget Office 

CPI-U = Consumer price index for all urban consumers 

FOMC = Federal Reserve Board, Federal Open Market Committee 

GDP = Gross Domestic Product 

Note: The Blue Chip Consensus is the average of about 50 forecasts by private-sector economists. 

(a) Represents the percent change between the fourth quarters of the years indicated, except for 1980 through 

2009. 

(b) The January 2010 Blue Chip Consensus extends only through 2011. 

(c) Represents the average from 1980 through 2009 (estimated). 

(d) Level in 2020. 

Sources: Congressional Budget Office, The Budget and Economic Outlook, Fiscal Years 2010 to 2020, January 

2010 (including data for the Blue Chip Consensus). Federal Reserve Board, Federal Open Market Committee, 

Summary of Economic Projections , April 27-28, 2010, published May 19, 2010. 




19


2.2.2 Utah Economy 

Similar to the nation, Utah’s economy contracted during 2009. Employment, which 

increased slightly during 2008, decreased 4.8% in 2009. Further, the unemployment rate 

almost doubled, from 3.7% in 2008 to 6.6% in 2009. The housing collapse combined with 

business caution about building new plants, resulted in construction employment 

decreasing 22.6%, after a decrease of 12.5% in 2008. 

According to the Utah Governor’s Office of Planning and Budget, Demographics and 

Economic Analysis (DEA), Utah’s economy is expected to gradually strengthen during 2010 

and Utah’s recovery will parallel that of the nation. * The DEA’s key expectations for 2010 

include: 

 

 

Employment is forecast to decline 0.7% in 2010, but subdued job increases should 

begin by the second quarter. 

Construction employment is forecast to decline 13.6%, a third year of contraction. 

Housing permits are forecast to remain near historic lows throughout 2010. 

 

 

Strengthening consumer confidence, the end of the housing downturn, increasing 

credit, and higher stock prices will support the economy during 2010. 

Though economic activity will improve, reduced hiring will drive a slight increase in 

the unemployment rate from 6.5% in 2009 to 6.8% in 2010. 

The DEA expects strong long-term population and economic growth over the next half 

century. Utah's population is expected to more than triple from 2.2 million in 2000 to 6.8 

million in 2060. The growth rate, which will exceed that of the nation, will be sustained by a 

rapid rate of natural increase and a well diversified economy. As the state grows, new 

population centers off the Wasatch Front will emerge. 

2.2.3 Salt Lake City CMSA Economy 

The Salt Lake City CMSA accounts for a large share of population and economic activity in 

Utah, with 60% of the State’s population and 67% of the State’s total nonagricultural 

employment in 2009. Similar to Utah, the economy of the Salt Lake City CMSA contracted 

during 2009, with a 4.5% decrease in employment between 2008 and 2009. The 

* Utah Governor’s Office of Planning and Budget, Department of Economic Analysis, 2010 Economic Report to the Governor, 

www.governor.utah.gov/dea. The Demographic and Economic Analysis (DEA) section of the Governor's Office of Planning 

and Budget manages, analyzes and disseminates economic, demographic and fiscal data in order to contribute to improved 

planning, budgeting and policy-making in Utah State Government. 




20


unemployment rate for the Salt Lake City CMSA increased from 3.7% in 2008 to 6.5% in 

2009—a similar increase to that for the State. 

Employment weakness is expected in 2010 across industry sectors. Projections of economic 

activity through 2030 (the last year of the forecast period) are summarized below and 

presented in Table 7. 

 

 

 

Population—DEA projects that the population of the Salt Lake City CMSA will 

increase an average of 1.8% per year between 2009 and 2030, similar to the rate for 

the State (2.2% growth per year). 

Nonagricultural employment—Nonagricultural employment in the Salt Lake City 

CMSA is projected to increase an average of 1.4% per year between 2009 and 2030, 

somewhat lower than the projection for Utah (1.9%). Short-term projections of 

nonagricultural employment in the Salt Lake City CMSA are not available, but are 

expected to be similar to the projections for the State—a decrease of 0.7% in 2010 

and an increase of 1.6% in 2011. 

Total personal income— Projections of total personal income (in 2009 dollars) in 

the Salt Lake City CMSA are not available, but are expected to be similar to the 

short-term projections for the State—increases of 1.3% in 2010 and 2011. 




21


Table 7 

Socioeconomic Projections for the Salt Lake City Primary Area and State of Utah 


Average annual percent change 

Historical 

Projected 

1990-2009 2009-2010 2010-2011 2011-2015 2015-2020 2020-2030 

Population 

Salt Lake City primary area 2.1% n.a. n.a. 1.8% 1.8% 1.4% 

State of Utah 2.5% 1.7% 1.7% 2.2% 2.2% 1.9% 

Nonagricultural employment 

Salt Lake City primary area 2.5% n.a. n.a. 1.7% 1.2% 1.1% 

State of Utah 2.7% -0.7% 1.6% 2.2% 1.7% 1.6% 

7 Socioeconomic 

Projections for Salt Lake City 

CMSA and State of Utah 

Personal income (in 2009 dollars) 

State of Utah 1.2% 1.3% 1.3% n.a. n.a. n.a. 

Note: The Salt Lake City CMSA consists of the Salt Lake City and the Ogden-Clearfield 

Metropolitan Statistical Areas (MSA), including the counties of Davis, Morgan, Salt Lake, 

Summit, Tooele, and Weber. 

n.a. = Not available. 

Source: State of Utah, Governor's Office of Planning and Budget, 2008 Baseline Projections, and 

Economic Indicators for Utah and the United States (short-term forecasts), May 2010, 

www.governor.utah.gov/dea, accessed June 2010. 




22


2.2.4 Risks to the Economic Outlook 

While the projections presented in this section represent a range of the most likely economic 

scenarios, there are some risks to the economic outlook. In the near term, the principal risk 

is that the federal government’s policy response to the current financial crisis and recession 

in the United States may not be effective in providing the foundation for a recovery in the 

near-term. Inflation risks still persist due to the sizable amount of liquidity that the Federal 

Reserve Bank has injected into the banking system, which could eventually trigger upward 

pressures on prices. A prolonged global slowdown extending beyond 2009 could result in a 

lower average annual growth rate in the economies of the United States, Utah, and the Salt 

Lake City CMSA in the near-term. In the longer term, the principal risks to U.S. economic 

performance are the sizable external and fiscal deficits. The continuing deficits in the U.S. 

balance of payments could result in greater volatility in the currency markets, which would 

then translate into higher interest rates and, therefore, slower economic growth. These risks 

could be compounded if the fiscal deficit does not shrink within the next 5 years, thereby 

leading to much larger financing requirements and subsequent increases in interest rates, 

which could lead to slower investment and, consequently, slower productivity growth. 




23


3.0 Historical Airline Activity 

A review of airline activity at the Airport provided the foundation for the enplaned 

passenger forecasts and included an analysis of (1) airline passenger service and market 

shares, (2) overall trends in enplaned passengers, (3) originating passengers, including 

overall trends, top origin-destination markets, and airfares, (4) connecting passengers, and 

(5) monthly airline traffic for enplaned passengers, scheduled departing seats, and 

passenger airline landings. In addition, a review of air cargo activity is included in this 

section as a basis for the air cargo forecasts. 

3.1 Airline Service and Passenger Market Shares 

Table 8 lists the passenger airlines scheduled to provide service at the Airport as of June 

2010. In addition, several charter passenger airlines and all-cargo airlines provide service at 

the Airport. 

The market shares for the passenger airlines serving the Airport are shown in Table 9. In 

2009, Delta Air Lines (mainline and regional affiliates) had the largest market share of 

enplaned passengers (74.2%) at the Airport, followed by Southwest (12.8%), and United 

Airlines (mainline and regional affiliates, with 3.6%). The share of Airport passengers 

enplaned by Delta Air Lines (mainline and regional affiliates) decreased from 76.9% in 2005 

to 74.2% in 2009, with regional affiliates accounting for a somewhat larger share of Delta 

passengers in 2009. 


The number of enplaned passengers at the Airport increased an average of 2.9% per year 

between 1990 and 2009, exceeding growth in the nation as a whole during this period (an 

average of 2.2% per year), as shown in Table 10 and on Figure 9. Much of the growth in 

passenger traffic at the Airport during this period was driven by regional affiliates and low 

cost carriers, with mainline activity decreasing an average of 1.0% per year between 1990 

and 2009. 




24


TABLE 8 

Airlines Serving Salt Lake International Airport 


Scheduled passenger service 

Charter passenger service 

U.S.-flag Airlines 

Casino Express 

Mainline service 

Champion Air 

Am erican Airlines 

D&D Aviation 

Continental Airlines 

Keystone 

Delta Air Lines (a) 

Kitty Hawk Charters 

United Airlines 

Miami Air International 

US Airways 8 Airlines Serving Piedmont Lake Airlines 

Ryan International 

Low cost carriers City International Sports Airport Jet 

Frontier 

Sun Country 

JetBlue 

Southwest 

All-cargo service 

ABX Air (DHL) 

Regional affiliates 

Aero Charter and Transport 

Express Jet (Continental Express) Airnet Systems 

Mesa (US Airways Express) 

Ameriflight 

Mesaba (Delta) 

Capitol Cargo (DHL) 

Republic Airways (Frontier) 

Corporate Air 

Shuttle America (United Express 

Empire Airlines 

Skywest (Delta Connection) 

Federal Express 

Skywest (United Express) 

United Parcel Service 

Western Air Express 

Foreign-flag airlines 

Aerom exico 

Air Canada Jazz 

(a) Northwest merged with Delta in October 2008. The FAA approved a single 

operating certificate in December 2009. 

Source: Salt Lake City Department of Airports records. 




25


TABLE 9 

Historical Enplaned Passengers By Airline 


Enplaned passengers Airline shares of enplaned passengers 

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 

Domestic 

Mainline service 

Delta (combined airline) (a) 

Delta 4,825,597 4,256,221 4,263,310 3,934,953 3,777,742 43.5% 39.5% 38.7% 37.9% 37.0% 

Northwest 184,837 130,621 129,641 129,635 211,786 1.7% 1.2% 1.2% 1.2% 2.1% 

5,010,434 4,386,842 4,392,951 4,064,588 3,989,528 45.1% 40.8% 39.9% 39.1% 39.1% 

American 259,137 293,271 304,568 277,961 276,794 2.3% 2.7% 2.8% 2.7% 2.7% 

US Airways (b) 138,735 171,113 198,054 197,038 161,776 1.2% 1.6% 1.8% 1.9% 1.6% 

United 293,051 288,732 239,421 212,870 108,224 2.6% 2.7% 2.2% 2.0% 1.1% 

Continental 121,940 107,779 108,007 98,770 88,708 1.1% 1.0% 1.0% 1.0% 0.9% 

5,823,297 5,247,737 5,243,001 4,851,227 4,625,030 52.5% 48.8% 47.6% 46.7% 45.3% 

Low cost carriers 

Southwest 1,171,161 1,414,685 1,483,336 1,400,044 1,306,076 10.5% 13.1% 13.5% 13.5% 12.8% 

Frontier 122,101 199,752 228,942 234,944 210,273 1.1% 1.9% 2.1% 2.3% 2.1% 

JetBlue 104,461 132,659 180,998 248,189 183,300 0.9% 1.2% 1.6% 2.4% 1.8% 

Other (c) 1,051 197 633 215 74 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 

1,398,774 1,747,293 1,893,909 1,883,392 1,699,723 12.6% 16.2% 17.2% 18.1% 16.7% 

Regional affiliate 


Delta Connection (d) 3,385,154 3,308,435 3,399,732 3,181,698 3,148,194 30.5% 30.7% 30.9% 30.6% 30.9% 

Northwest Airlink (e) 13,129 10,911 4,343 20,773 222,433 0.1% 0.1% 0.0% 0.2% 2.2% 

3,398,283 3,319,346 3,404,075 3,202,471 3,370,627 30.6% 30.8% 30.9% 30.8% 33.0% 

United Express (Skywest and Shuttle America) 169,372 181,039 191,023 183,459 259,328 1.5% 1.7% 1.7% 1.8% 2.5% 

US Airways (Air Midwest and Mesa) 102,249 37,164 37,183 23,873 15,286 0.9% 0.3% 0.3% 0.2% 0.1% 

Continental Express (Express Jet) 31,924 42,919 36,033 27,302 15,417 0.3% 0.4% 0.3% 0.3% 0.2% 

Frontier Express (Republic Airways) -- -- -- -- 1,322 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 

9 Historical Enplaned 

Passengers By Airline 

3,701,828 3,580,468 3,668,314 3,437,105 3,661,980 33.3% 33.3% 33.3% 33.1% 35.9% 

Charters 8,690 5,104 3,159 2,337 1,166 0.1% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 

Subtotal--Domestic 10,932,589 10,580,602 10,808,383 10,174,061 9,987,899 98.5% 98.3% 98.2% 97.9% 97.9% 



Delta 44,385 77,487 94,841 106,236 98,301 0.4% 0.7% 0.9% 1.0% 1.0% 

Northwest -- -- -- -- 11,294 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.1% 

SkyWest (Delta Connection) 93,201 81,840 96,462 106,998 102,366 0.8% 0.8% 0.9% 1.0% 1.0% 

137,586 159,327 191,303 213,234 211,961 1.2% 1.5% 1.7% 2.1% 2.1% 

Other 31,288 22,274 9,015 5,524 3,429 0.3% 0.2% 0.1% 0.1% 0.0% 

Subtotal--International 168,874 181,601 200,318 218,758 215,390 1.5% 1.7% 1.8% 2.1% 2.1% 

Total Airport 11,101,463 10,762,203 11,008,701 10,392,819 10,203,289 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 

(a) Northwest merged with Delta in 2008. The FAA approved a single operating certificate in December 2009. 

(b) Includes activity of America West Airlines, which merged with US Airways in September 2005. 

(c) Includes Allegiant and American Trans Air (which ceased operations in 2006). 

(d) Includes Atlantic Southeast Airlines, Comair, Express Jet, Shuttle America, and Skywest Airlines. 

(e) Includes Compass Airlines, Mesaba Airlines, and Pinnacle Airlines. 





26


TABLE 10 

Historical Enplaned Passengers 


United States 


SLC percent of 

United States 

Annual 

percent 

change 

Originating 

passenger trips 

per person Total 

Percent 

connecting 

Annual 

percent 

change 

Originating Connecting Total 

1990 3,027,248 2,940,482 5,967,730 --% 49% 2.7 457,126,741 --% 1.31% 

1991 3,173,507 3,039,511 6,213,018 4.1 49% 2.7 445,582,404 (2.5) 1.39% 

1992 3,607,407 3,312,969 6,920,376 11.4 48% 3.0 467,683,985 5.0 1.48% 

1993 4,356,701 3,555,270 7,911,971 14.3 45% 3.5 480,254,905 2.7 1.65% 

1994 5,082,551 3,686,481 8,769,032 10.8 42% 4.0 521,516,928 8.6 1.68% 

1995 5,626,771 3,547,151 9,173,922 4.6 39% 4.4 544,232,232 4.4 1.69% 

1996 5,994,334 4,499,401 10,493,735 14.4 43% 4.5 578,144,887 6.2 1.82% 

1997 5,925,099 4,540,867 10,465,966 (0.3) 43% 4.4 597,653,608 3.4 1.75% 

1998 5,851,766 4,245,270 10,097,036 (3.5) 42% 4.3 619,478,030 3.7 1.63% 

1999 5,311,470 4,623,822 9,935,292 (1.6) 47% 3.8 638,596,504 3.1 1.56% 

2000 5,441,522 4,465,015 9,906,537 (0.3) 45% 3.8 670,112,980 4.9 1.48% 

2001 5,272,300 4,080,841 9,353,141 (5.6) 44% 3.7 624,449,965 (6.8) 1.50% 

2002 5,042,699 4,285,506 9,328,205 (0.3) 46% 3.4 614,742,482 (1.6) 1.52% 

2003 5,040,830 4,191,505 9,232,335 (1.0) 45% 3.4 649,546,281 5.7 1.42% 

2004 5,444,345 3,752,299 9,196,644 (0.4) 41% 3.6 703,706,603 8.3 1.31% 

2005 6,046,561 5,054,902 11,101,463 20.7 46% 3.9 734,955,348 4.4 1.51% 

2006 6,169,484 4,592,719 10,762,203 (3.1) 43% 3.9 736,933,510 0.3 1.46% 

2007 6,157,129 4,851,572 11,008,701 2.3 44% 3.8 761,133,338 3.3 1.45% 

2008 5,760,644 4,632,175 10,392,819 (5.6) 45% 3.5 732,297,287 (3.8) 1.42% 

2009 5,678,841 4,524,448 10,203,289 (1.8) 44% 3.4 693,485,531 (5.3) 1.47% 

10 Historical Enplaned 

Passengers 

Table 10 Historical 

Enplaned Passengers 


2000-2001 (3.1) (8.6) (5.6) (3.2) (4.7) (6.8) 1.3 

2001-2002 (4.4) 5.0 (0.3) 5.3 (5.8) (1.6) 1.3 

2002-2003 (0.0) (2.2) (1.0) (1.2) (1.6) 5.7 (6.3) 

2003-2004 8.0 (10.5) (0.4) (10.1) 6.3 8.3 (8.1) 

2004-2005 11.1 34.7 20.7 11.6 9.3 4.4 15.6 

2005-2006 2.0 (9.1) (3.1) (6.3) (0.6) 0.3 (3.3) 

2006-2007 (0.2) 5.6 2.3 3.3 (2.3) 3.3 (1.0) 

2007-2008 (6.4) (4.5) (5.6) 1.1 (8.3) (3.8) (1.9) 

2008-2009 (1.4) (2.3) (1.8) (0.5) (3.1) (5.3) 3.7 


1990-1996 12.1 7.3 9.9 (2.3) 9.1 4.0 

1996-2004 (1.2) (2.2) (1.6) (0.6) (2.8) 2.5 

2004-2005 11.1 34.7 20.7 11.6 9.3 4.4 

2005-2006 2.0 (9.1) (3.1) (6.3) (0.6) 0.3 

2006-2009 (2.7) (0.5) (1.8) 1.3 (4.6) (2.0) 

1990-2009 3.4 2.3 2.9 (0.6) 1.2 2.2 

Sources: Salt Lake City Department of Airports records and U.S. Department of Transportation, T100 online database, accessed April 2010. 




27


9 Historical Trends in 


From 1996 (the peak traffic year in the 1990s) to 2004, the number of enplaned passengers at 

the Airport decreased an average of 1.6% per year, reflecting reductions in service by 

mainline and low cost carriers and increased airfares (discussed in the following sections). 

Since 2004, changes in airline service at the Airport have affected passenger traffic trends, 

including: 

 

 

 

In 2005, the number of enplaned passengers at the Airport increased 20.7% as a 

result of an expansion of service by Delta Air Lines and its regional affiliate, Skywest 

Airlines. 

In 2006, SLC passenger traffic decreased 3.1% in response to reductions in service 

(which approximated 2004 levels) by Delta Air Lines and its regional affiliate. An 

expansion in service by Southwest Airlines in 2006 offset Delta’s service reductions. 

From 2006 to 2009, the number of passengers enplaned at the Airport decreased an 

average of 1.3% per year, while enplaned passengers on regional affiliates increased 

1.6% during this period. 




28


As noted earlier and shown on Figure 10, average annual growth in the number of enplaned 

passengers at SLC exceeded that for the nation as a whole from 1990 through 2009. SLC 

passenger traffic has generally followed enplaned passenger trends in the nation, 

particularly during times of national economic recession, but varied during times of service 

changes at SLC. 

10 SLC and U.S. Enplaned 

Passenger Trends 

3.3 Originating Passengers 

The key factors affecting O&D passenger demand are the demographics and economy of the 

region served by an airport as well as airline service and airfares. As shown in Table 10, the 

number of originating (O&D) passengers at the Airport increased an average of 3.4% 

between 1990 through 2009, faster than the overall growth in enplaned passengers. 

From 1990 through 1996 (the period of low cost carrier service introduction and 

development), the number of originating passengers at the Airport increased an average of 

12.1% per year. From 1996 to 2004, the number of SLC originating passengers decreased an 

average of 1.2% per year, reflecting an average increase in domestic airfares of 4.2% per year 

(faster than the average increase in the Consumer Price Index of 2.3% per year) and an 

average decrease of 1.3% per year in low cost carrier departures at SLC during this period. 




29


Since 2004, the number of originating passengers at SLC increased an average of 0.9% per 

year, increasing at higher rates between 2005 and 2006 when Delta expanded service. 

As shown on Figure 11, low cost carriers and regional affiliates accounted for approximately 

55% of originating passengers in 2009, while mainline airlines accounted for the remaining 

45%. From 2002 to 2009, regional affiliates more than doubled their share of originating 

passengers, increasing from 12% in 2002 to 28% in 2009. 

11 Shares of Originating 

Passengers 

3.3.1 Origin-Destination Markets 

Table 11 presents the Airport’s top 20 domestic O&D passenger markets in 2009. Table 10 

also shows the average number of scheduled domestic seats on daily nonstop departures 

from the Airport to each of the top markets in 2009. Of the 12.6 million scheduled daily 

nonstop seats from the Airport, 69.5% are to the top 20 markets listed in the table. The 

Los Angeles Metropolitan Area (including Los Angeles International, Bob Hope, Ontario 

International, John Wayne and Long Beach airports) was SLC’s largest originating 

passenger market in 2009 with 11.3% of total originating passengers, followed by 

San Francisco market, with 6.0% of total originating passengers. 




30


Table 11 

Top 20 Domestic Origin-Destination Passenger Markets and Airline Service in 2009 


Scheduled domestic departing seats 

Percent of 

total 

Total 

Regional 

affiliates 

Low cost 

carriers 

Mainline 

Percent of 

originating airline 

passengers 

Air miles 

from Salt 

Lake City 

Rank Origin-destination market 

1 Los Angeles (a) 590 11.3% 543,627 297,873 391,446 1,232,946 9.8% 

2 San Francisco (b) 598 6.0% 203,939 179,350 336,366 719,655 5.7% 

3 Denver 389 5.5% 166,274 544,999 305,174 1,016,447 8.0% 

4 Phoenix 507 5.2% 365,577 327,382 138,226 831,185 6.6% 

5 Las Vegas 368 4.5% 341,712 355,770 49,340 746,822 5.9% 

6 New York (c) 1,982 4.2% 365,644 52,350 -- 417,994 3.3% 

7 Washington D.C. (d) 1,845 3.8% 225,331 49,210 -- 274,541 2.2% 

8 Seattle 688 3.7% 247,045 148,007 87,574 482,626 3.8% 

9 San Diego 626 3.5% 166,329 45,600 95,812 307,741 2.4% 

10 Chicago (e) 1,254 3.0% 184,570 106,954 144,600 436,124 3.5% 

11 Portland 629 2.8% 147,434 124,203 82,336 353,973 2.8% 

12 Dallas-Fort Worth (f) 1,003 2.5% 276,540 -- 97,184 373,724 3.0% 

13 Atlanta 1,584 2.0% 529,568 -- -- 529,568 4.2% 

14 Orlando 1,924 1.9% 121,506 1,233 -- 122,739 1.0% 

15 Houston (g) 1,193 1.9% 95,792 -- 122,516 218,308 1.7% 

16 Sacramento 532 1.4% 115,251 -- 54,678 169,929 1.3% 

17 Philadelphia 1,920 1.4% 100,775 -- -- 100,775 0.8% 

18 Miami (h) 2,079 1.4% 34,605 -- -- 34,605 0.3% 

19 Minneapolis- St. Paul 988 1.3% 213,719 -- 71,030 284,749 2.3% 

20 Boston 573 1.3% 115,199 -- -- 115,199 0.9% 

Table 11 Top 20 Domestic 

Origin-Destination Passenger 

Markets and Airline Service in 

2009 

Cities listed 68.6% 4,560,437 2,232,931 1,976,282 8,769,650 69.5% 

Other cities 31.4% 1,032,332 351,261 2,473,850 3,857,443 30.5% 

All U.S. cities 100.0% 5,592,769 2,584,192 4,450,132 12,627,093 100.0% 

(a) Los Angeles International, Bob Hope, Ontario International, John Wayne (Orange County), and Long Beach airports. 

(b) San Francisco, Oakland, and Mineta San Jose international airports. 

(c) Newark Liberty International, LaGuardia, and John F. Kennedy International airports. 

(d) Reagan Washington National, Baltimore/Washington International Thurgood Marshall, and Washington Dulles International airports. 

(e) Chicago O'Hare and Midway international airports. 

(f) Dallas/Fort Worth International Airport and Love Field. 

(g) Bush Intercontinental Airport/Houston and William P. Hobby Airport. 

(h) Fort Lauderdale-Hollywood International, Miami International Airport. 

Sources: U.S. Department of Transportation, Origin-Destination Survey of Airline Passenger Traffic, Domestic , 2009. 

Official Airline Guides, Inc. online database, accessed May 2010, for domestic destinations. An additional 

277,749 scheduled seats were provided to international destinations in 2009. 




31


3.3.2 Originating Passengers and Airfares 

Figure 12 provides a comparison of changes in the number of originating passengers and 

average domestic airfares at the Airport in 1990 through 2009. SLC airfares, in nominal 

dollars, decreased an average of 9.2% per year between 1990 and 1996 with the initiation of 

service low cost carrier service, including Morris Air in 1992, Southwest Airlines in 1993, 

and Frontier Airlines in 1995. From 1996 to 2004, domestic airfares increased an average of 

4.2% per year (faster than the average increase in the Consumer Price Index of 2.3% per 

year). Since 2004, domestic airfares have increased an average of 1.6% per year, slower than 

the increase in consumer prices. 

12 Domestic Originating 

Passengers and Airfares 

3.4 Connecting Passengers 

As shown in Table 10, the number of connecting passengers at the Airport increased an 

average of 2.3% per year from 1990 through 2009, slower than the overall growth in 

enplaned passengers. Connecting passenger traffic is determined by the route network 

decisions of the hubbing airlines. (See earlier discussion under Section 1.6, “Airport Role” 

for a description of the Airport role as an important connecting hub in the route system of 

Delta Air Lines). As shown on Figure 13, Delta Connection has accounted for an increasing 

share of Delta’s connecting passengers since 1996—from 8% in 1996 to 48% in 2009. 




32


13 Connecting Passengers 

3.5 Monthly Airline Traffic 

Trends in monthly airline traffic, including enplaned passengers, passenger airline landings, 

and scheduled departing seats are presented in the following sections. 

3.5.1 Monthly Enplaned Passengers 

Table 12 presents monthly enplaned passenger data for the Airport for January 2000 

through March 2010. The monthly data show the seasonal variation in enplaned passenger 

traffic, with peak levels occurring from June through August and the lowest monthly 

activity occurring from November through February. Since June 2009, monthly passenger 

traffic increased year-over-year in each month, except for a slight decrease in February 2010 

(0.3%), reflecting a recovery in traffic from the current economic recession and financial 

crisis. 




33


Table 12 

Historical Enplaned Passengers by Month 


Month 

Year January February March April May June July August September October November December Total 

2000 739,183 757,903 903,871 795,261 800,565 909,267 967,926 965,184 775,980 782,018 747,231 762,148 9,906,537 

2001 749,435 715,435 877,387 773,477 780,411 881,616 953,021 955,381 565,634 676,861 684,988 739,495 9,353,141 

2002 720,657 681,759 853,649 733,421 757,553 842,722 876,840 865,771 718,408 758,952 698,234 820,239 9,328,205 

2003 757,370 710,525 844,121 692,408 719,654 835,862 893,264 885,484 708,335 754,502 677,569 753,241 9,232,335 

2004 699,276 703,114 793,797 714,830 715,882 837,965 881,565 856,660 735,398 749,662 719,578 788,917 9,196,644 

2005 798,559 837,898 1,019,280 898,809 917,030 1,008,231 1,084,481 1,037,311 872,732 881,104 819,143 835,062 11,009,640 

2006 852,195 791,672 967,369 860,831 853,871 961,625 1,022,435 1,008,813 854,108 883,210 824,161 881,366 10,761,656 

2007 885,928 808,571 969,232 888,157 898,548 1,003,059 1,053,773 1,064,684 871,279 887,754 827,366 850,350 11,008,701 

2008 881,800 859,903 986,477 861,562 863,121 942,789 992,409 975,006 758,283 787,611 699,016 784,842 10,392,819 

2009 781,310 736,432 874,665 824,094 827,546 953,215 1,047,961 1,008,678 815,105 809,911 739,336 785,036 10,203,289 

2010 794,198 734,178 877,633 

2000-2001 1.4 (5.6) (2.9) (2.7) (2.5) (3.0) (1.5) (1.0) (27.1) (13.4) (8.3) (3.0) (5.6) 

2001-2002 (3.8) (4.7) (2.7) (5.2) (2.9) (4.4) (8.0) (9.4) 27.0 12.1 1.9 10.9 (0.3) 

2002-2003 5.1 4.2 (1.1) (5.6) (5.0) (0.8) 1.9 2.3 (1.4) (0.6) (3.0) (8.2) (1.0) 

2003-2004 (7.7) (1.0) (6.0) 3.2 (0.5) 0.3 (1.3) (3.3) 3.8 (0.6) 6.2 4.7 (0.4) 

2004-2005 14.2 19.2 28.4 25.7 28.1 20.3 23.0 21.1 18.7 17.5 13.8 5.8 19.7 

2005-2006 6.7 (5.5) (5.1) (4.2) (6.9) (4.6) (5.7) (2.7) (2.1) 0.2 0.6 5.5 (2.3) 

2006-2007 4.0 2.1 0.2 3.2 5.2 4.3 3.1 5.5 2.0 0.5 0.4 (3.5) 2.3 

2007-2008 (0.5) 6.3 1.8 (3.0) (3.9) (6.0) (5.8) (8.4) (13.0) (11.3) (15.5) (7.7) (5.6) 

2008-2009 (11.4) (14.4) (11.3) (4.3) (4.1) 1.1 5.6 3.5 7.5 2.8 5.8 0.0 (1.8) 

2009-2010 1.6 (0.3) 0.3 

Table 12 Historical 

Enplaned Passengers by Month 


Percent of total 

2000 7.5% 7.7% 9.1% 8.0% 8.1% 9.2% 9.8% 9.7% 7.8% 7.9% 7.5% 7.7% 100.0% 

2001 8.0% 7.6% 9.4% 8.3% 8.3% 9.4% 10.2% 10.2% 6.0% 7.2% 7.3% 7.9% 100.0% 

2002 7.7% 7.3% 9.2% 7.9% 8.1% 9.0% 9.4% 9.3% 7.7% 8.1% 7.5% 8.8% 100.0% 

2003 8.2% 7.7% 9.1% 7.5% 7.8% 9.1% 9.7% 9.6% 7.7% 8.2% 7.3% 8.2% 100.0% 

2004 7.6% 7.6% 8.6% 7.8% 7.8% 9.1% 9.6% 9.3% 8.0% 8.2% 7.8% 8.6% 100.0% 

2005 7.3% 7.6% 9.3% 8.2% 8.3% 9.2% 9.9% 9.4% 7.9% 8.0% 7.4% 7.6% 100.0% 

2006 7.9% 7.4% 9.0% 8.0% 7.9% 8.9% 9.5% 9.4% 7.9% 8.2% 7.7% 8.2% 100.0% 

2007 8.0% 7.3% 8.8% 8.1% 8.2% 9.1% 9.6% 9.7% 7.9% 8.1% 7.5% 7.7% 100.0% 

2008 8.5% 8.3% 9.5% 8.3% 8.3% 9.1% 9.5% 9.4% 7.3% 7.6% 6.7% 7.6% 100.0% 

2009 7.7% 7.2% 8.6% 8.1% 8.1% 9.3% 10.3% 9.9% 8.0% 7.9% 7.2% 7.7% 100.0% 

Note: Data include domestic and international passengers enplaned on mainline and regional passenger airlines. 





34


3.5.2 Monthly Scheduled Departing Seats 

Table 13 presents monthly scheduled departing seats data for the Airport for January 2000 

through March 2010. The trends in the number of scheduled departing seats follow the 

seasonal variation in enplaned passengers. The peak month shares of annual seats are less 

than the peak month shares of enplaned passengers, largely because of differences in 

monthly load factors (the percentage of occupied seats on an aircraft). From July 2009 

through June 2010, the number of monthly scheduled departing seats decreased year-overyear 

in each month, except from July through September 2009, reflecting the 

implementation of announced airline capacity reductions. Advance schedule data for last 6 

months of 2010 (July through December 2010) show a decrease of approximately 2% in 

seating capacity in 2010 compared with 2009 (based on schedule data accessed in May 2010). 

From September through December 2010, seating capacity at the Airport is expected to 

exceed capacity in the same period of 2009. 

3.5.3 Enplaned Passenger Load Factor 

As shown on Figure 14, enplaned passenger load factors at SLC ranged from a low of 72% in 

November 2008 to a high of 85% during the peak summer months of 2007. Load factors in 

recent years decreased as a result of reduced passenger demand related to the national 

economic recession and financial credit crisis. At the same time, reductions in airline 

seating capacity have resulted in increased load factors. 

3.5.4 Monthly Passenger Airline Landings 

Table 14 presents monthly passenger airline landings data for the Airport for January 2000 

through March 2010. Similar to the trend in scheduled departing seats, the number of 

monthly passenger airline landings decreased year-over-year in each month from December 

2007 through May 2009, except for February 2008, reflecting the implementation of 

announced airline capacity reductions. From June through November 2009, monthly 

passenger airline landings increased year-over-year in each month. Since December 2009, 

passenger airline landings have decreased in each month, following the trend in scheduled 

departing seats. 




35


Table 13 

Historical Scheduled Departing Seats by Month 


Month 


2000 1,178,148 1,096,730 1,168,496 1,123,335 1,160,351 1,159,389 1,190,887 1,201,149 1,155,348 1,182,585 1,119,551 1,193,150 13,929,119 

2001 1,194,511 1,056,640 1,180,657 1,126,327 1,156,174 1,166,677 1,215,225 1,207,665 1,157,581 1,120,689 1,091,640 1,144,782 13,818,568 

2002 1,148,992 1,043,243 1,152,474 1,106,197 1,135,500 1,123,104 1,164,414 1,183,909 1,111,498 1,141,780 1,088,684 1,137,019 13,536,814 

2003 1,136,813 1,042,315 1,152,855 1,062,246 1,032,059 1,109,632 1,139,065 1,145,491 1,093,263 1,115,407 1,059,885 1,109,968 13,198,999 

2004 1,058,562 993,887 1,066,473 1,014,640 1,058,483 1,081,007 1,109,405 1,113,091 1,052,294 1,073,134 1,034,509 1,107,992 12,763,477 

2005 1,127,289 1,143,729 1,286,199 1,211,968 1,256,171 1,255,584 1,308,053 1,315,077 1,239,467 1,266,994 1,185,368 1,096,041 14,691,940 

2006 1,095,268 992,832 1,159,077 1,093,891 1,117,828 1,163,637 1,221,017 1,232,313 1,108,520 1,119,885 1,073,122 1,147,792 13,525,182 

2007 1,151,789 1,029,504 1,180,292 1,107,758 1,109,584 1,184,860 1,240,332 1,247,773 1,122,817 1,138,505 1,111,226 1,158,396 13,782,836 

2008 1,178,448 1,106,744 1,187,874 1,099,172 1,118,425 1,193,204 1,232,125 1,191,125 994,595 1,014,756 964,069 1,045,196 13,325,733 

2009 1,063,934 984,571 1,113,661 1,066,636 1,084,085 1,176,500 1,248,347 1,204,957 997,451 1,006,207 947,603 1,010,890 12,904,842 

2010 1,005,827 923,712 1,042,001 981,818 1,021,664 1,093,349 1,163,990 1,155,850 1,062,295 1,068,183 1,034,182 1,078,442 12,631,313 


2000-2001 1.4 (3.7) 1.0 0.3 (0.4) 0.6 2.0 0.5 0.2 (5.2) (2.5) (4.1) (0.8) 

2001-2002 (3.8) (1.3) (2.4) (1.8) (1.8) (3.7) (4.2) (2.0) (4.0) 1.9 (0.3) (0.7) (2.0) 

2002-2003 (1.1) (0.1) 0.0 (4.0) (9.1) (1.2) (2.2) (3.2) (1.6) (2.3) (2.6) (2.4) (2.5) 

2003-2004 (6.9) (4.6) (7.5) (4.5) 2.6 (2.6) (2.6) (2.8) (3.7) (3.8) (2.4) (0.2) (3.3) 

2004-2005 6.5 15.1 20.6 19.4 18.7 16.1 17.9 18.1 17.8 18.1 14.6 (1.1) 15.1 

2005-2006 (2.8) (13.2) (9.9) (9.7) (11.0) (7.3) (6.7) (6.3) (10.6) (11.6) (9.5) 4.7 (7.9) 

2006-2007 5.2 3.7 1.8 1.3 (0.7) 1.8 1.6 1.3 1.3 1.7 3.6 0.9 1.9 

2007-2008 2.3 7.5 0.6 (0.8) 0.8 0.7 (0.7) (4.5) (11.4) (10.9) (13.2) (9.8) (3.3) 

2008-2009 (9.7) (11.0) (6.2) (3.0) (3.1) (1.4) 1.3 1.2 0.3 (0.8) (1.7) (3.3) (3.2) 

2009-2010 (5.5) (6.2) (6.4) (8.0) (5.8) (7.1) (6.8) (4.1) 6.5 6.2 9.1 6.7 (2.1) 


2000 8.5% 7.9% 8.4% 8.1% 8.3% 8.3% 8.5% 8.6% 8.3% 8.5% 8.0% 8.6% 100.0% 

2001 8.6% 7.6% 8.5% 8.2% 8.4% 8.4% 8.8% 8.7% 8.4% 8.1% 7.9% 8.3% 100.0% 

2002 8.5% 7.7% 8.5% 8.2% 8.4% 8.3% 8.6% 8.7% 8.2% 8.4% 8.0% 8.4% 100.0% 

2003 8.6% 7.9% 8.7% 8.0% 7.8% 8.4% 8.6% 8.7% 8.3% 8.5% 8.0% 8.4% 100.0% 

2004 8.3% 7.8% 8.4% 7.9% 8.3% 8.5% 8.7% 8.7% 8.2% 8.4% 8.1% 8.7% 100.0% 

2005 7.7% 7.8% 8.8% 8.2% 8.6% 8.5% 8.9% 9.0% 8.4% 8.6% 8.1% 7.5% 100.0% 

2006 8.1% 7.3% 8.6% 8.1% 8.3% 8.6% 9.0% 9.1% 8.2% 8.3% 7.9% 8.5% 100.0% 

2007 8.4% 7.5% 8.6% 8.0% 8.1% 8.6% 9.0% 9.1% 8.1% 8.3% 8.1% 8.4% 100.0% 

2008 8.8% 8.3% 8.9% 8.2% 8.4% 9.0% 9.2% 8.9% 7.5% 7.6% 7.2% 7.8% 100.0% 

2009 8.2% 7.6% 8.6% 8.3% 8.4% 9.1% 9.7% 9.3% 7.7% 7.8% 7.3% 7.8% 100.0% 

2010 8.0% 7.3% 8.2% 7.8% 8.1% 8.7% 9.2% 9.2% 8.4% 8.5% 8.2% 8.5% 100.0% 

Notes: Data include seats on domestic and international flights on mainline and regional passenger airlines. 

Source: Official Airline Guides, Inc., online database, accessed May 2010. 




36


14 Enplaned Passengers Load Factors 

3.6 Air Cargo 

Table 15 presents data on total air cargo (enplaned and deplaned) at the Airport in 1990 

through 2009. Enplaned air cargo at the Airport accounted for about 50% of total cargo 

tonnage (enplaned plus deplaned) in 2009. Total air cargo tonnage increased an average of 

0.9% per year between 1990 and 2009, but has decreased each year since 1999 (except for 

2003), reflecting: 

 

 

 

The economic recession in 2001 and the current recession that began in December 

2007 

A reduction in available belly-cargo capacity on passenger airlines as a result of 

increases in the use of regional jet aircraft and low-cost carrier operations which 

have less cargo capacity that larger air carrier aircraft 

The availability of reduced-cost belly-cargo capacity, particularly on widebody 

aircraft designed for containerized cargo, and direct international freighter service at 

other gateway airports, such as Chicago O’Hare, Los Angeles, and 

Dallas/Fort Worth international airports 




37


Table 14 

Historical Passenger Airline Aircraft Landings by Month 


Month 


2000 9,861 9,234 10,013 9,566 9,865 9,978 10,269 10,368 9,938 9,894 9,316 9,460 117,762 

2001 9,667 8,932 10,020 9,626 9,893 10,300 10,918 11,045 9,233 10,544 10,337 10,704 121,219 

2002 10,893 10,031 11,201 10,736 11,042 10,944 11,545 11,722 11,048 11,178 10,685 11,010 132,035 

2003 11,048 10,183 11,433 10,812 10,430 11,330 11,703 11,756 11,306 11,460 11,004 11,354 133,819 

2004 11,614 11,240 12,148 11,628 12,139 12,341 12,732 12,696 12,057 12,275 11,772 12,246 144,888 

2005 12,344 12,956 14,767 13,977 14,391 14,357 15,029 15,223 14,355 14,669 13,860 12,314 168,242 

2006 12,142 11,059 12,893 12,137 12,475 13,021 13,792 13,913 12,475 12,592 12,015 12,752 151,266 

2007 12,800 11,557 13,268 12,318 12,220 13,514 14,098 14,095 12,408 12,718 12,343 12,708 154,047 

2008 12,669 12,039 13,114 11,957 11,836 12,403 13,089 12,549 10,815 10,977 10,435 11,214 143,097 

2009 11,386 10,520 11,818 11,352 11,581 12,518 13,481 12,951 10,893 11,122 10,453 11,009 139,084 

2010 11,117 10,110 11,429 

Percent change 

2000-2001 (2.0) (3.3) 0.1 0.6 0.3 3.2 6.3 6.5 (7.1) 6.6 11.0 13.2 2.9 

2001-2002 12.7 12.3 11.8 11.5 11.6 6.3 5.7 6.1 19.7 6.0 3.4 2.9 8.9 

2002-2003 1.4 1.5 2.1 0.7 (5.5) 3.5 1.4 0.3 2.3 2.5 3.0 3.1 1.4 

2003-2004 5.1 10.4 6.3 7.5 16.4 8.9 8.8 8.0 6.6 7.1 7.0 7.9 8.3 

2004-2005 6.3 15.3 21.6 20.2 18.6 16.3 18.0 19.9 19.1 19.5 17.7 0.6 16.1 

2005-2006 (1.6) (14.6) (12.7) (13.2) (13.3) (9.3) (8.2) (8.6) (13.1) (14.2) (13.3) 3.6 (10.1) 

2006-2007 5.4 4.5 2.9 1.5 (2.0) 3.8 2.2 1.3 (0.5) 1.0 2.7 (0.3) 1.8 

2007-2008 (1.0) 4.2 (1.2) (2.9) (3.1) (8.2) (7.2) (11.0) (12.8) (13.7) (15.5) (11.8) (7.1) 

2008-2009 (10.1) (12.6) (9.9) (5.1) (2.2) 0.9 3.0 3.2 0.7 1.3 0.2 (1.8) (2.8) 

2009-2010 (2.4) (3.9) (3.3) 


2000 8.4% 7.8% 8.5% 8.1% 8.4% 8.5% 8.7% 8.8% 8.4% 8.4% 7.9% 8.0% 100.0% 

2001 8.0% 7.4% 8.3% 7.9% 8.2% 8.5% 9.0% 9.1% 7.6% 8.7% 8.5% 8.8% 100.0% 

2002 8.3% 7.6% 8.5% 8.1% 8.4% 8.3% 8.7% 8.9% 8.4% 8.5% 8.1% 8.3% 100.0% 

2003 8.3% 7.6% 8.5% 8.1% 7.8% 8.5% 8.7% 8.8% 8.4% 8.6% 8.2% 8.5% 100.0% 

2004 8.0% 7.8% 8.4% 8.0% 8.4% 8.5% 8.8% 8.8% 8.3% 8.5% 8.1% 8.5% 100.0% 

2005 7.3% 7.7% 8.8% 8.3% 8.6% 8.5% 8.9% 9.0% 8.5% 8.7% 8.2% 7.3% 100.0% 

2006 8.0% 7.3% 8.5% 8.0% 8.2% 8.6% 9.1% 9.2% 8.2% 8.3% 7.9% 8.4% 100.0% 

2007 8.3% 7.5% 8.6% 8.0% 7.9% 8.8% 9.2% 9.1% 8.1% 8.3% 8.0% 8.2% 100.0% 

2008 8.9% 8.4% 9.2% 8.4% 8.3% 8.7% 9.1% 8.8% 7.6% 7.7% 7.3% 7.8% 100.0% 

2009 8.2% 7.6% 8.5% 8.2% 8.3% 9.0% 9.7% 9.3% 7.8% 8.0% 7.5% 7.9% 100.0% 

Note: Data include domestic and international aircraft landings for mainline and regional passenger airlines. 





38


TABLE 15 

Historical Air Cargo 



Freight Express Mail Total 

Annual percent 

change 

1990 82,069 1,418 41,989 125,475 --% 

1991 90,094 289 54,346 144,728 15.3 

1992 116,420 253 58,318 174,991 20.9 

1993 137,555 - 60,225 197,781 13.0 

1994 148,748 - 63,450 212,198 7.3 

1995 155,076 - 61,954 217,030 2.3 

1996 183,071 - 68,204 251,275 15.8 

1997 205,090 - 73,689 278,780 10.9 

1998 201,236 - 74,328 275,564 (1.2) 

1999 202,735 - 84,268 287,003 4.2 

2000 171,188 33,481 78,245 282,913 (1.4) 

2001 151,761 31,719 55,347 238,828 (15.6) 

2002 170,825 40,600 26,863 238,288 (0.2) 

2003 175,675 37,254 26,179 239,108 0.3 

2004 178,465 35,846 18,965 233,276 (2.4) 

2005 160,147 36,588 14,627 211,362 (9.4) 

2006 154,869 37,402 7,701 199,972 (5.4) 

2007 167,053 23,445 5,433 195,931 (2.0) 

2008 142,017 30,296 4,708 177,020 (9.7) 

2009 116,012 28,687 4,777 149,476 (15.6) 


1990-2000 7.6 37.2 6.4 8.5 

2000-2009 (4.2) (1.7) (26.7) (6.8) 

1990-2009 1.8 17.2 (10.8) 0.9 

Note: Includes enplaned and deplaned cargo, measured in short tons. (A short ton 

is equal to 2,000 pounds.) 





39


 

 

An increasing trend among freight forwarders to bypass airports and truck cargo to 

gateways that have available reduced-cost belly-cargo capacity 

The reorganization and consolidation in the cargo industry in response to the 

increase in fuel prices in 2008 and the national economic recession 

As shown on Figure 15, in 2009, about 85% of total air cargo at SLC was transported by allcargo 

airlines (integrated carriers and regional feeders), with the remaining 15% handled by 

the passenger airlines serving the Airport as belly cargo. From 1990 to 2009, air cargo 

tonnage on all-cargo airlines increased an average of 4.8% per year, compared with an 

average decrease of 6.0% in air cargo handled by passenger airlines during the same period. 

Air cargo tonnage on all-cargo airlines decreased in 5 of the past 19 years—except for a 

decrease in 2005, four of the past annual decreases corresponded to national economic 

recessions. 




40


4.0 Historical Aircraft Operations 

This chapter summarizes historical total aircraft operations at the Airport in 1990 through 

2009. Aircraft operations include the total number of departures and arrivals by air carrier, 

air taxi and commuter, general aviation, and military aircraft. An aircraft operation is 

defined as either a takeoff or a landing at the Airport. 

4.1 Air Carrier 

Air carrier operations are those performed in revenue service by the passenger and all-cargo 

airlines serving the Airport. Included are scheduled flights, charter flights, diverted flights, 

and ferry operations (empty flights). The FAA defines an air carrier aircraft, for traffic count 

purposes, as capable of carrying more than 60 passengers and provides a list of model types 

that are counted as air carrier operations (Appendix 3 in Order JO 7210.3V), even though the 

aircraft is conducting air freight operations. * As shown in Table 16, air carrier aircraft 

operations increased an average of 0.8% per year between 1990 and 2009, including an 

average decrease of 0.3% per year between 2000 and 2009. 

4.2 Air Taxi and Commuter 

Air taxi and commuter operations consist of unscheduled operations of “for hire” air taxis 

and the scheduled operations of commuter airlines. The FAA defines air taxi and commuter 

operations as those performed by aircraft other than those listed in Appendix 3 noted above 

and which use three-letter company designators. Fractional ownership and management 

companies and corporate flight departments that use a three-letter company designator are 

included in air taxi operations. As shown in Table 16, air taxi and commuter aircraft 

operations increased an average of 4.4% per year between 1990 and 2009, the fastest 

growing category of aircraft operations. 

* U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Order JO 7210.3V, February 14, 2008, revised 7/31/08, 

3/12/09, and 8/27/09. 




41


Table 16 

Historical Aircraft Operations 


Air carrier 

Air taxi/ 

commuter 

General aviation Military Total 

1990 150,758 60,367 87,097 5,123 303,345 

1991 155,485 62,167 79,363 4,649 301,664 

1992 162,095 68,410 84,684 5,229 320,418 

1993 173,942 69,481 82,076 4,568 330,067 

1994 179,277 75,160 83,877 4,307 342,621 

1995 186,315 83,554 85,004 4,567 359,440 

1996 197,583 93,310 78,956 4,360 374,209 

1997 192,968 99,460 75,033 4,382 371,843 

1998 185,504 99,550 76,041 4,238 365,333 

1999 182,060 104,088 79,059 4,224 369,431 

2000 173,671 108,581 80,716 3,965 366,933 

2001 158,872 127,627 80,616 3,167 370,282 

2002 151,888 162,370 79,259 13,477 406,994 

2003 144,312 169,083 80,779 6,278 400,452 

2004 129,223 203,103 77,932 2,988 413,246 

2005 168,433 210,858 73,170 2,753 455,214 

2006 165,035 186,202 66,324 1,927 419,488 

2007 166,816 186,311 65,794 2,075 420,996 

2008 169,154 159,051 59,634 2,076 389,915 

2009 175,142 136,849 58,611 2,078 372,680 


2000-2001 (8.5) 17.5 (0.1) (20.1) 0.9 

2001-2002 (4.4) 27.2 (1.7) 325.5 9.9 

2002-2003 (5.0) 4.1 1.9 (53.4) (1.6) 

2003-2004 (10.5) 20.1 (3.5) (52.4) 3.2 

2004-2005 30.3 3.8 (6.1) (7.9) 10.2 

2005-2006 (2.0) (11.7) (9.4) (30.0) (7.8) 

2006-2007 1.1 0.1 (0.8) 7.7 0.4 

2007-2008 1.4 (14.6) (9.4) 0.0 (7.4) 

2008-2009 3.5 (14.0) (1.7) 0.1 (4.4) 


1990-2000 1.4 6.0 (0.8) (2.5) 1.9 

2000-2009 0.1 2.6 (3.5) (6.9) 0.2 

1990-2009 0.8 4.4 (2.1) (4.6) 1.1 

Sources: U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Air Traffic 

Activity System (ATADS), online database. 




42


4.3 General Aviation 

General aviation operations include all civil aircraft operations not classified as air carrier or 

air taxi and commuter operations. As shown in Table 16, general aviation aircraft 

operations at SLC decreased an average of 2.1% per year between 1990 and 2009, similar to 

the average decrease of 2.0% per year for the nation as a whole during this period. 

According to SLCDA, a total of 301 aircraft were based at the Airport in 2009, including 204 

single engine, 46 multi-engine, 36 jet engine, and 15 helicopters. 

4.4 Military 

Military aircraft operations at the Airport have generally been in the range of approximately 

2,000 to 3,000 operations per year during the last five years, as shown in Table 16. 

Historically, military operations have varied with geopolitical trends. 

4.5 Monthly Aircraft Operations 

Table 17 presents monthly total aircraft operations data for the Airport for January 2000 

through March 2010. The monthly data show the seasonal variation in total aircraft 

operations, with July and August accounting for 9.6% and 9.3%, respectively, of annual 

operations in 2009. From 2000 through 2009, July and August accounted for the peak share 

of annual aircraft operations at the Airport, with an average of 9.0% and 8.9%, respectively, 

of annual operations. 




43


Table 17 

Historical Total Aircraft Operations by Month 


Month 


2000 29,187 28,007 31,095 30,064 31,036 32,307 32,714 32,950 31,418 30,609 28,381 29,165 366,933 

2001 29,025 27,460 31,845 29,173 31,515 32,190 33,415 33,415 27,489 33,586 31,477 29,692 370,282 

2002 32,768 29,880 34,764 32,790 34,604 34,812 36,189 36,328 34,601 35,412 32,741 32,105 406,994 

2003 33,176 30,301 34,441 30,738 32,053 33,307 35,793 35,281 35,352 35,102 31,737 33,171 400,452 

2004 31,900 32,305 38,342 33,391 35,338 35,026 36,171 35,183 34,119 33,440 34,145 33,886 413,246 

2005 32,586 35,934 40,247 37,596 38,427 39,317 41,070 41,009 39,269 38,151 37,333 34,275 455,214 

2006 34,535 31,999 36,081 32,977 35,170 36,076 37,528 37,914 34,311 35,368 32,875 34,654 419,488 

2007 35,083 32,949 37,822 34,081 34,181 36,502 37,796 38,334 32,652 34,856 33,423 33,317 420,996 

2008 34,008 33,420 36,040 32,530 32,300 33,871 34,845 33,960 29,854 30,475 28,179 30,433 389,915 

2009 30,596 28,249 31,623 29,939 31,201 32,735 35,621 34,667 30,286 29,610 28,710 29,443 372,680 

2010 29,854 28,434 31,510 


2000-2001 (0.6) (2.0) 2.4 (3.0) 1.5 (0.4) 2.1 1.4 (12.5) 9.7 10.9 1.8 0.9 

2001-2002 12.9 8.8 9.2 12.4 9.8 8.1 8.3 8.7 25.9 5.4 4.0 8.1 9.9 

2002-2003 1.2 1.4 (0.9) (6.3) (7.4) (4.3) (1.1) (2.9) 2.2 (0.9) (3.1) 3.3 (1.6) 

2003-2004 (3.8) 6.6 11.3 8.6 10.2 5.2 1.1 (0.3) (3.5) (4.7) 7.6 2.2 3.2 

2004-2005 2.2 11.2 5.0 12.6 8.7 12.3 13.5 16.6 15.1 14.1 9.3 1.1 10.2 

2005-2006 6.0 (11.0) (10.4) (12.3) (8.5) (8.2) (8.6) (7.5) (12.6) (7.3) (11.9) 1.1 (7.8) 

2006-2007 1.6 3.0 4.8 3.3 (2.8) 1.2 0.7 1.1 (4.8) (1.4) 1.7 (3.9) 0.4 

2007-2008 (3.1) 1.4 (4.7) (4.6) (5.5) (7.2) (7.8) (11.4) (8.6) (12.6) (15.7) (8.7) (7.4) 

2008-2009 (10.0) (15.5) (12.3) (8.0) (3.4) (3.4) 2.2 2.1 1.4 (2.8) 1.9 (3.3) (4.4) 

2009-2010 (2.4) 0.7 (0.4) 


2000 8.0% 7.6% 8.5% 8.2% 8.5% 8.8% 8.9% 9.0% 8.6% 8.3% 7.7% 7.9% 100.0% 

2001 7.8% 7.4% 8.6% 7.9% 8.5% 8.7% 9.0% 9.0% 7.4% 9.1% 8.5% 8.0% 100.0% 

2002 8.1% 7.3% 8.5% 8.1% 8.5% 8.6% 8.9% 8.9% 8.5% 8.7% 8.0% 7.9% 100.0% 

2003 8.3% 7.6% 8.6% 7.7% 8.0% 8.3% 8.9% 8.8% 8.8% 8.8% 7.9% 8.3% 100.0% 

2004 7.7% 7.8% 9.3% 8.1% 8.6% 8.5% 8.8% 8.5% 8.3% 8.1% 8.3% 8.2% 100.0% 

2005 7.2% 7.9% 8.8% 8.3% 8.4% 8.6% 9.0% 9.0% 8.6% 8.4% 8.2% 7.5% 100.0% 

2006 8.2% 7.6% 8.6% 7.9% 8.4% 8.6% 8.9% 9.0% 8.2% 8.4% 7.8% 8.3% 100.0% 

2007 8.3% 7.8% 9.0% 8.1% 8.1% 8.7% 9.0% 9.1% 7.8% 8.3% 7.9% 7.9% 100.0% 

2008 8.7% 8.6% 9.2% 8.3% 8.3% 8.7% 8.9% 8.7% 7.7% 7.8% 7.2% 7.8% 100.0% 

2009 8.2% 7.6% 8.5% 8.0% 8.4% 8.8% 9.6% 9.3% 8.1% 7.9% 7.7% 7.9% 100.0% 

Note: Data include passenger and cargo airline, general aviation, military, and air taxi operations. 

Source: Federal Aviation Administration, Air Traffic Activity System (ATADS), online database, accessed May 2010. 




44


5.0 Aviation Demand Forecasts 

This chapter summarizes the forecasts of enplaned passengers, air cargo, and total aircraft 

operations for SLC, including the forecast approach, methodology, and assumptions. The 

forecasts are prepared for five future demand years, including an estimate for 2010 (based 

on year to date activity—January through March 2010—available when this report was 

prepared), a near-term forecast for 2011, and long-term forecasts for 2014, 2019, 2024, and 

2030. The base year for the forecasts is 2009. 


This section summarizes the key elements considered in the preparation of enplaned 

passenger forecasts for SLC. 

5.1.1 Forecast Approach and Methodology 

The forecast methodology incorporated a multi-tiered approach to evaluate passenger 

traffic in the Salt Lake City CMSA, including: (1) a historical trend analysis of enplaned 

passengers, (2) a regression analysis of historical originating passengers in the Salt Lake City 

CMSA, (3) an analysis of the role of the Airport as a connecting hub, and (5) an analysis of 

low-cost carrier and other airline service at SLC. It was recognized that a single approach 

would not provide input on all of the key factors that affect passenger demand. 

5.1.1.1 Enplaned Passenger Trends 

As discussed earlier in Section 3.2 “Enplaned Passengers”, the number of enplaned 

passengers at the Airport increased an average of 2.9% per year between 1990 and 2009, 

exceeding growth in the nation as a whole during this period (an average of 2.2% per year). 

However, much of the growth during this period was driven by the introduction and 

development of low cost carrier service in the 1990s. Since 2000, the average annual growth 

in enplaned passengers at the Airport slowed to 0.3% per year, including variations related 

to the adjustments in Delta service and the two national economic recessions. Growth in the 

number of enplaned passengers at the Airport is expected to exceed that of the 2000 to 2009 

period in the long-term. 

5.1.1.2 Originating Passengers 

The trend in SLC originating passengers can be explained by a regression analysis relating 

passenger trends to economic and airline industry metrics. As shown in Figure 16, the 




45


historical trend in originating passengers relates strongly to the predicted values from a 

regression model which includes Salt Lake City CMSA nonagricultural employment and 

SLC airline yields (cents per passenger-mile, in 2009 dollars). The relationship is strongest, 

however, when a variable for September 11 is included to reflect the structural changes that 

occurred in the airline industry since 2001. In addition, variables for the buildup of low cost 

carrier service in 1993 and 1994 as well as a variable for Delta’s service adjustment in 2005 

and 2006 also strengthened the model. Attachment A presents a summary of the regression 

model and statistics. 

16 Historical and Prediced 

Originating Passengers 

5.1.1.3 Connecting Passengers 

As noted earlier in Section 1.6, “Airport Role”, the large base of originating passengers 

allows Delta to (1) improve load factors and profitability and (2) maintain high frequencies 

for scheduling passenger connections. As shown on Figure 17, the historical trend in 

connecting passengers relates to the predicted values from a regression model which 

includes SLC originating passengers. Although this model explains 75% of the variation in 

connecting passengers (compared with 93% in the originating passenger model), the results 

are strong enough to confirm that a large originating passenger base is important to the 

development and growth of SLC as a connecting hub. 




46


17 Historical and Predicted 

Connecting Passengers 

5.1.1.4 Airline Service 

As discussed earlier in Section 3.2 “Enplaned Passengers”, enplaned passenger trends at the 

Airport have been affected by changes in airline service, including the introduction and 

development of low cost carrier service and adjustments to Delta’s service as the hub 

carrier. Historical and projected economic activity in the Salt Lake City CMSA suggests that 

organic growth in airline service will continue to support a growing O&D passenger base. 

The development of airline service to supporting the connecting hub will largely depend on 

the route decisions of Delta Air Lines. 

5.1.2 Forecast Assumptions 

Forecasts of enplaned passengers were developed taking into account analyses of the 

economic basis for airline traffic, analyses of historical airline traffic, and an assessment of 

the key factors that may affect future airline traffic, as discussed in earlier sections. In 

general, it was assumed that, in the long term, changes in airline traffic at the Airport will 

occur largely as a function of growth in the population and economy of the Airport service 

region and changes in airline service. It was also assumed that continued development of 

airline service at the Airport will not be constrained by the availability of aviation fuel, longterm 

limitations in airline fleet capacity, limitations in the capacity of the air traffic control 




47


system or the Airport, or government policies or actions that restrict growth. Also 

considered were recent and potential developments in the national economy and in the air 

transportation industry as they have affected or may affect airline traffic at the Airport. 

In the near term, it was assumed that: 

 

 

 

Slow recovery from the economic recession, weak growth in the U.S. and Salt Lake 

City CMSA economies, and reduced disposable income will depress the demand 

for airline travel through 2010. 

Aviation fuel prices will stabilize at levels that are historically high, but lower than 

the record prices reached in mid-2008. 

Delta and other airlines will reduce domestic and international seat capacity 

consistent with airline schedules published in June 2010. 

From 2011 through 2030, passenger numbers at the Airport are forecast to increase 

gradually on the basis of the assumptions that: 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The U.S. economy will recover from the recession and experience sustained GDP 

growth averaging between 2.0% and 2.5% per year, consistent with the historical 

trends and long-term growth in GDP projected by the Congressional Budget Office 

(see Table 6 in Chapter 2.0). 

The economy of the Salt Lake City CMSA will increase at a rate comparable to that 

of the United States as a whole as projected by the Utah Governor’s Office of 

Planning and Budget (see Table 7 in Chapter 2.0). 

A generally stable international political environment and safety and security 

precautions will ensure airline traveler confidence in aviation without imposing 

unreasonable inconveniences. 

There will be no major disruption of airline service or airline travel behavior as a 

result of international hostilities or terrorist acts or threats. 

The Airport will continue to be a principal connecting hub for Delta Air Lines and 

be served by low cost carriers. 

The airlines serving the Airport will be financially viable and able to add the 

seating capacity required to accommodate additional demand. 




48


 

Competition among the airlines serving the Airport will ensure the continued 

availability of competitive airfares. 

5.1.3 Estimated Enplaned Passengers in 2010 

In 2010, the number of enplaned passengers at the Airport is estimated to total 10.4 million, 

a 1.5% increase from the 2009 number, reflecting actual data for the first 3 months of 2010 

(January through March), published flight schedules for the Airport, announced airline 

service additions at the Airport, and airline industry guidance regarding reductions in 

seating capacity for 2010. 

5.1.4 Originating Passenger Forecasts 

The number of originating passengers at SLC is forecast to increase an average of 2.3% per 

year between 2009 and 2030, from 5.7 million in 2009 to 9.1 million in 2030, as shown in 

Table 18. The forecasts of originating passengers at SLC were based on: 

 

 

 

 

 

 

A review of historical trends in domestic originating passengers at SLC as 

summarized in Section 3.3 “Originating Passengers” and shown in Table 10 in 

Chapter 3.0 

A regression analysis of historical originating passengers at SLC that relates the 

changes in passenger demand to changes in the key explanatory variables, as 

discussed earlier in the Section 5.1.1.2 “Originating Passengers” and shown on 

Figure 15 in Chapter 5.0 

Regional projections of Salt Lake City CMSA nonagricultural employment by the 

Utah Governor’s Office of Planning and Budget (see Table 7 in Chapter 2.0) 

An average decrease of 0.4% per year in real airline yield (in 2000 dollars) reflecting 

continued improvement in technology and aircraft efficiencies (excluding taxes and 

ancillary fees), but less than the FAA Aerospace Forecasts of domestic yield (an 

average decrease of 0.8% per year between 2009 and 2030) * 

An evaluation of low cost carrier service trends at SLC and the effect of that service 

on domestic originating passenger demand 

Professional judgment in evaluating the reasonableness of the forecast results 

* U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, FAA Aerospace Forecasts: FFY 2009 – 2030, March 2010. 




49


Table 18 

Forecasts of Enplaned Passengers 


The forecasts presented in this table were prepared using the information and assumptions given in the accompanying text. Inevitably, some of the assumptions 

used to develop the forecasts will not be realized and unanticipated events and circumstances may occur. Therefore, there are likely to be differences between 

the forecast and actual results, and those differences may be material. 

Historical Estimated 

Forecast 

2009 2010 2011 2014 2019 2024 2030 

ENPLANED PASSENGERS 

Domestic 

Mainline (a) 4,638,816 4,586,000 4,676,000 5,060,000 5,660,000 6,288,000 7,127,000 

Regional affiliate 3,653,216 3,898,000 3,938,000 4,262,000 4,768,000 5,298,000 6,008,000 

Low cost carriers 1,695,867 1,626,000 1,638,000 1,770,000 1,975,000 2,187,000 2,469,000 

9,987,899 10,110,000 10,252,000 11,092,000 12,403,000 13,773,000 15,604,000 

International 215,390 245,000 252,000 290,000 366,000 462,000 612,000 

10,203,289 10,355,000 10,504,000 11,382,000 12,769,000 14,235,000 16,216,000 

Average annual percent 

change -- 1.5% 1.4% 2.7% 2.3% 2.2% 2.2% 

Originating 

Domestic 5,532,444 5,576,000 5,657,000 6,113,000 6,816,000 7,546,000 8,509,000 


5,678,841 5,786,000 5,883,000 6,375,000 7,150,000 7,972,000 9,080,000 

Connecting 4,524,448 4,569,000 4,621,000 5,007,000 5,619,000 6,263,000 7,136,000 

10,203,289 10,355,000 10,504,000 11,382,000 12,769,000 14,235,000 16,216,000 

Percent connecting 44% 44% 44% 44% 44% 44% 44% 

Percent originating 56% 56% 56% 56% 56% 56% 56% 

PASSENGER AIRLINE 

AIRCRAFT 

DEPARTURES 

Domestic 

Mainline (a) 35,003 34,100 34,800 37,500 41,600 45,700 51,200 

Regional affiliate 81,848 83,300 84,100 89,400 95,200 100,200 106,300 

Low cost carriers 19,092 16,400 16,500 17,700 19,600 21,500 24,000 

135,943 133,800 135,400 144,600 156,400 167,400 181,500 


139,084 136,500 138,200 147,700 160,100 171,800 186,900 

Average annual percent 

change -1.9% 1.2% 2.2% 1.6% 1.4% 1.4% 

Note: The base year for the forecasts is 2009. 

(a) Includes charters. 

Sources: Historical: Salt Lake City Aviation Department records. Forecast: Leigh Fisher, June 2010. 




50


5.1.5 Connecting Passenger Forecasts 

The number of connecting passengers at SLC is forecast to increase an average of 2.2% per 

year between 2009 and 2030, from 4.5 million in 2008 to 7.1 million in 2030, as shown in 

Table 18. The forecasts of connecting passengers at SLC were based on: 

 

 

A review of historical trends in connecting passengers at SLC as summarized in 

Section 1.6 “Airport Role” and Section 3.4 “Connecting Passengers” and shown in 

Table 10 in Chapter 3.0. 

A forecast percent of connecting passengers averaging 44% during the forecast 

period consistent with historical trends and the assumption that SLC will continue to 

be a principal connecting hub for Delta Air Lines. 

5.1.6 Total Enplaned Passenger Forecasts 

Total enplaned passengers at SLC are forecast to increase an average of 2.2% per year 

between 2009 and 2030, equal to the annual growth rate forecast in the FAA 2009 TAF for 

the Airport—2.2% from FFY 2008 to FFY 2030. International enplaned passengers are 

forecast to account for a larger share of total enplaned passengers, increasing from 1.4% in 

2009 to 3.5% in 2028. The number of international passengers enplaned at the Airport is 

forecast to increase an average of 5.1% per year between 2009 and 2030, compared with an 

average increase of 2.1% per year for domestic enplaned passengers. Figure 18 presents the 

enplaned passenger forecasts for SLC from 2009 through 2030. 




51


18 Historical and Forecast 


5.2 Air Cargo 

This section summarizes the key elements considered in the preparation of air cargo 

forecasts for SLC. 


The forecasts of air cargo were based on a combination of inputs, including (1) an evaluation 

of the passenger airlines and cargo carriers providing cargo service at SLC in relation to 

trends in the nation, (2) an analysis of historical air cargo at SLC by major component 

(enplaned and deplaned cargo, freight and mail), (3) monthly trends in air cargo at SLC in 

recent years, and (4) a review of cargo forecasts prepared by Boeing and Airbus. Although 

econometric analyses of SLC air cargo trends were tested, a reliable regression model could 

not be developed using available data. 

5.2.1.1 Air Cargo Service 

As discussed earlier in Section 3.6 “Air Cargo”, about 85% of total air cargo at SLC was 

transported by all-cargo airlines (integrated carriers and regional feeders), with the 




52


remaining 15% handled by the passenger airlines serving the Airport as belly cargo. As 

shown in Figure 19, integrated carriers such as FedEx and UPS operate air carrier aircraft 

(e.g., Boeing 727, 757 and 767) and accounted for about 33% of all-cargo airline landings in 

2009, with regional feeders operating commuter aircraft (e.g., Beechcraft 99 and 1900) 

accounting for the remaining 67%. 

19 All-Cargo Airline 

Landings 

5.2.1.2 Air Cargo Trends 

As discussed earlier in Section 3.6 “Air Cargo”, air cargo tonnage on all-cargo airlines 

increased an average of 4.8% per year between 1990 and 2009, compared with an average 

decrease of 6.0% in air cargo handled by passenger airlines during the same period. Given 

the dedicated capacity of all-cargo airlines at the Airport and the large share of regional 

affiliates and low cost carriers providing passenger service, it is expected that all-cargo 

airlines will continue to account for about 85% of air cargo tonnage at SLC during the 

forecast period. 

5.2.1.3 Monthly Trends in Air Cargo 

The air cargo industry, both nationally and globally, recorded double-digit decreases in 

cargo activity in 2008 and 2009 as a result of increased fuel prices and the national and 

global economic recessions. Cargo tonnage at SLC showed similar declines. As shown on 




53


Figure 20, monthly data for cargo tonnage at SLC through March 2010 suggest that cargo 

volumes have stabilized in recent months. 

5.2.1.4 Air Cargo Industry Forecasts 

A review of independent industry cargo forecasts of world cargo traffic by region prepared 

by Boeing and Airbus provided an indication of the range of growth expected in air cargo, 

as shown on Figure 21. In addition, the FAA prepares forecasts of cargo revenue ton miles 

as part of the national aerospace forecasts, as noted previously, it does not prepare air cargo 

forecasts for individual airports as part of the TAF. 


Forecasts of air cargo were developed taking into account analyses of the economic basis for 

airline traffic, analyses of historical air cargo, and an assessment of the key factors that may 

affect future airline traffic, as discussed in earlier sections. In general, it was assumed that, 

in the long term, changes in air cargo at the Airport will occur largely as a function of 

growth in the population and economy of the Airport service region and changes in allcargo 

airline service. 




54


5.2.3 Estimated Air Cargo in 2010 

In 2010, air cargo at the Airport is estimated to total 155,500 tons, a 4.1% increase from 

the 2009 number, reflecting actual data for the first 3 months of 2010 (January through 

March) and a review of historical trends in air cargo. 




55


5.2.4 All-Cargo Airline Air Cargo Forecasts 

All-cargo airlines accounted for 85% of total air cargo tonnage at SLC in 2009. Air cargo 

handled by all-cargo airlines at SLC is forecast to increase an average of 1.8% per year 

between 2009 and 2030, from 126,823 tons in 2009 to 200,800 tons in 2030, as shown in 

Table 19. The forecasts of all-cargo airline air cargo at SLC were based on: 

 

 

 

A review of historical trends in all-cargo airline air cargo (integrated carriers and 

regional feeders) at SLC. 

A review of independent industry forecasts of world cargo traffic by region prepared 

by the FAA, Boeing, and Airbus. 

Forecast assumptions for air cargo growth at SLC, based on a review of historical 

trends, recent data for air cargo, particularly in the context of a national and global 

economic recession, independent industry forecasts, and professional judgment in 

evaluating the reasonableness of the forecast results. 

5.2.5 Passenger Airline Air Cargo Forecasts 

Passenger airlines accounted for 15% of total air cargo tonnage at SLC in 2009. Air cargo 

handled by passenger airlines at SLC is forecast to increase an average of 1.0% per year 

between 2009 and 2030, from 22,541 tons in 2009 to 35,200 tons in 2030, as shown in Table 18. 

The forecasts of air cargo transported by passenger airlines at SLC are related to the growth 

in passenger airline aircraft operations and the available belly cargo space. 

5.2.6 Total Air Cargo Forecasts 

Total cargo tonnage at SLC is forecast to increase an average of 1.8% per year between 2009 

and 2030, from 149,364 tons in 2009 to 236,000 tons in 2030, as shown in Table 19 and on 

Figure 22. All-cargo airline cargo tonnage is forecast to account for 85% of total cargo 

tonnage during the forecast period. 




56


Table 19 

Forecasts of Total Air Cargo 


The forecasts presented in this table were prepared using the information and assumptions given in the accompanying text. Inevitably, 

some of the assumptions used to develop the forecasts will not be realized and unanticipated events and circumstances may occur. 

Therefore, there are likely to be differences between the forecast and actual results, and those differences may be material. 


Forecast 

2009 2010 2011 2014 2019 2024 2030 

TOTAL AIR CARGO (tons) 

All-Cargo airlines 

Air carrier 119,759 124,200 127,900 136,200 152,600 166,800 179,700 

Regional feeder 7,064 7,200 7,500 7,900 8,700 9,700 10,900 

126,823 131,400 135,400 144,100 161,300 176,500 190,600 

Passenger airlines 22,541 23,600 23,600 24,300 25,500 26,800 28,500 

Total air cargo 149,364 155,000 159,000 168,400 186,800 203,300 219,100 

Average annual percent change -- 3.8% 2.6% 1.9% 2.1% 1.7% 1.3% 

ALL-CARGO AIRLINE AIRCRAFT 

DEPARTURES (d) 


Air carrier 2,540 2,570 2,570 2,730 3,060 3,340 3,600 

Regional feeder 6,329 6,350 6,350 6,670 7,370 8,130 9,160 

Total all-cargo departures 8,869 8,920 8,920 9,400 10,430 11,470 12,760 


CARGO PER OPERATION (in tons) 


Air carrier 23.6 24.2 24.9 24.9 24.9 25.0 25.0 

Regional feeder 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6 

Note: Includes enplaned and deplaned cargo in tons. 





57



Air Cargo 

5.3 Aircraft Operations 

This section summarizes the forecasts of total aircraft operations, including passenger 

airline, all-cargo airline, general aviation, and military operations. 


The forecasts of total aircraft operations are derived from the forecasts of passenger and 

cargo demand described earlier and an evaluation of general aviation and military 

operations. In particular: 

 

 

The forecasts of passenger airline aircraft departures are based on the enplaned 

passenger forecasts and assumptions regarding average aircraft size and enplaned 

passenger load factor. 

The forecasts of all-cargo airline aircraft departures are based on the air cargo 

forecasts and assumptions regarding average cargo tonnage per operation and type 

of all-cargo service (integrated carrier or regional feeder). 




58


 

 

The forecasts of general aviation aircraft operations are based on the number of 

aircraft based at an airport, the average daily utilization of those aircraft, and 

assumptions regarding aircraft utilization in the future. 

The forecasts of military aircraft operations are based on data for the base year of the 

forecasts and carried forward through the forecast period. Military operations 

typically increase and decrease with geopolitical trends and therefore this activity 

may vary in a given year. 


Table 20 presents the forecast assumptions for passenger airline aircraft operations, 

including assumptions for the average number of per departure, the average number of 

seats per departure, and the average enplaned passenger load factor. The assumptions for 

the average cargo tonnage per operation are presented in Table 19. 

5.3.3 Estimated Aircraft Operations in 2010 

In 2010, the number of aircraft operations at the Airport is estimated to total 369,040, a 1.0% 

decrease from the 2009 number, reflecting actual data for the first 3 months of 2010 (January 

through March). 

5.3.4 Passenger Airline Aircraft Operations Forecasts 

Passenger aircraft operations include total departures and arrivals performed by mainline 

and regional affiliate aircraft in the service of transporting passengers, as shown in Table 21. 

Passenger airline aircraft operations were calculated by dividing the enplaned passenger 

forecasts by category (e.g., domestic and international, mainline and regional affiliate) by 

the estimated number of passengers enplaned per departure. In 2009, the average number 

of passengers enplaned per departure for the Airport as a whole was approximately 73, as 

shown in Table 20. This number is expected to increase slowly over the forecast period 

based on an estimated increase in the average number of seats per aircraft and an estimated 

load factor, or percent of available seats filled with passengers. The average number of 

passengers enplaned per departure is expected to reach approximately 87 in 2030. Dividing 

the enplaned passenger forecasts by the forecast number of passengers enplaned per 

departure yields passenger airline aircraft departures. The forecast departures were then 

multiplied by two to yield passenger airline aircraft operations for each category of activity. 




59


Table 20 

Assumptions for Passenger Airline Aircraft Departure Forecasts 


The forecasts presented in this table were prepared using the information and assumptions given in the accompanying text. Inevitably, some of the assumptions 

used to develop the forecasts will not be realized and unanticipated events and circumstances may occur. Therefore, there are likely to be differences between the 

forecast and actual results, and those differences may be material. 


Forecast 

2009 2010 2011 2014 2019 2024 2030 

ENPLANED PASSENGERS PER DEPARTURE 

Domestic 

Mainline (a) 133.4 134.0 134.0 134.4 135.8 137.1 138.8 

Regional affiliate 44.6 46.8 46.8 47.7 50.1 52.9 56.5 

Low cost carriers 88.8 99.3 99.4 99.7 100.7 101.8 103.0 

Domestic subtotal 73.5 75.5 75.7 76.6 79.3 82.3 86.0 

International 68.6 91.8 91.1 93.3 99.1 105.8 114.3 

Airport total 73.4 75.9 76.0 77.0 79.8 82.9 86.8 

SEATS PER DEPARTURE 

Domestic 

Mainline (a) 159.5 157.6 157.6 157.6 158.4 159.2 160.2 

Regional affiliate 54.0 55.8 55.8 56.1 58.6 61.6 65.5 

Low cost carriers 137.2 137.0 137.0 137.0 137.7 138.4 139.2 

Domestic subtotal 92.6 91.2 91.2 92.3 95.1 98.1 101.9 

International 86.7 104.1 104.1 106.2 112.2 119.0 127.7 

Airport total 92.5 91.5 91.5 92.6 95.5 98.7 102.7 

ENPLANED PASSENGER LOAD FACTOR 

Domestic 

Mainline (a) 83.6% 85.0% 85.0% 85.3% 85.7% 86.2% 86.7% 

Regional affiliate 82.7% 83.9% 83.9% 85.0% 85.4% 85.8% 86.3% 

Low cost carriers 64.7% 72.5% 72.6% 72.8% 73.2% 73.5% 74.0% 

Domestic subtotal 79.3% 82.8% 83.0% 83.0% 83.4% 83.9% 84.4% 

International 79.1% 88.2% 87.5% 87.8% 88.4% 88.9% 89.5% 

Airport total 79.3% 82.9% 83.1% 83.1% 83.6% 84.0% 84.5% 

Note: The base year for the forecasts is 2009. 

(a) Includes charter airlines. 





60


Table 21 

Forecasts of Total Aircraft Operations by Type 


The forecasts presented in this table were prepared using the information and assumptions given in the accompanying text. Inevitably, some of 

the assumptions used to develop the forecasts will not be realized and unanticipated events and circumstances may occur. Therefore, there 

are likely to be differences between the forecast and actual results, and those differences may be material. 


Forecast 

2009 2010 2011 2014 2019 2024 2030 

PASSENGER AIRLINE AIRCRAFT 

OPERATIONS 

Domestic 

Mainline (a) 70,006 68,200 69,600 75,000 83,200 91,400 102,400 

Regional affiliate 163,696 166,600 168,200 178,800 190,400 200,400 212,600 

Low cost carriers 38,184 32,800 33,000 35,400 39,200 43,000 48,000 

271,886 267,600 270,800 289,200 312,800 334,800 363,000 


Total passenger operations 278,168 273,000 276,400 295,400 320,200 343,600 373,800 

Average annual percent change -- -1.9% 1.2% 2.2% 1.6% 1.4% 1.4% 

ALL-CARGO AIRLINE AIRCRAFT 

OPERATIONS 

Air carrier 5,080 5,140 5,140 5,460 6,120 6,680 7,200 

Air taxi 12,658 12,700 12,700 13,340 14,740 16,260 18,320 

Total all-cargo operations 17,738 17,840 17,840 18,800 20,860 22,940 25,520 


GENERAL AVIATION OPERATIONS 

Itinerant 58,167 59,400 60,000 62,270 66,450 70,960 76,840 

Local 444 700 700 730 780 830 900 

Total general aviation operations 58,611 60,100 60,700 63,000 67,230 71,790 77,740 


MILITARY OPERATIONS 

Itinerant 2,078 2,000 2,000 2,000 2,000 2,000 2,000 

Local - 100 100 100 100 100 100 

Total military operations 2,078 2,100 2,100 2,100 2,100 2,100 2,100 

OTHER ACTIVITY (b) 16,085 16,000 16,000 17,000 19,000 20,000 22,000 

TOTAL AIRPORT--AIRCRAFT 

OPERATIONS 372,680 369,040 373,040 396,300 429,390 460,430 501,160 

Average annual percent change -- -1.0% 1.1% 2.0% 1.6% 1.4% 1.4% 

Note: Aircraft operations include departures and arrivals. 


(b) Includes nonscheduled and empty flights. Other operations accounted for 5.2% of commercial airline (passenger and all-cargo) 

operations in 2009 and are assumed to account for this share in future years. 

Sources: Historical: Salt Lake City Aviation Department records and U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation 

Administration, ATADS online database. Forecast: LeighFisher, June 2010. 




61


Passenger airline aircraft operations at SLC are forecast to increase from 278,168 in 2009 to 

366,400 operations in 2030, an average increase of 1.4% per year, as shown in Table 21. 

International passenger airline aircraft operations at the Airport are forecast to increase an 

average of 2.6% per year between 2009 and 2030, compared with an average increase of 1.4% 

per year for domestic passenger airline aircraft operations. 

5.3.5 All-Cargo Airline Aircraft Operation Forecasts 

Cargo airline operations at SLC include the flight activity by airlines dedicated exclusively 

to the transportation of freight such as FedEx and UPS and by commuter/regional size 

aircraft. Air carrier size aircraft that perform all-cargo operations at the airport include 

aircraft models such as the Boeing 727, 757 and 767, in addition to other narrowbody and 

widebody jet aircraft. Commuter or regional aircraft that perform all-cargo operations at 

the airport include small turboprop aircraft such as the Beechcraft 99 and 1900. In 2009, 

there were 8,889 cargo airline operations performed at the Airport. 

The forecast of all-cargo operations was developed by first estimating the share of future 

cargo tonnage expected to be carried by air carrier and commuter aircraft. The cargo 

tonnage expected to be carried by all-cargo carriers was then divided by an estimated cargo 

tons per departure ratio to yield total air carrier cargo operations. For example, air carrier 

all-cargo aircraft carried approximately 23.6 tons (47,100 pounds) per departure in 2009. 

The ratio of tons per departure is expected to increase gradually over the forecast period to 

account for larger aircraft entering the fleet of all-cargo carriers. 

Cargo airline aircraft operations at SLC are forecast to increase from 17,738 in 2009 to 

26,120 operations in 2030, an average increase of 1.7% per year, as shown in Table 21. 

5.3.6 General Aviation Aircraft Operation Forecasts 

General aviation (GA) activity includes all flight operations by aircraft other than scheduled 

or charter passenger aircraft and military aircraft. GA includes not only pilot training and 

recreational flights on small single engine or multi-engine propeller driven aircraft, but also 

operations on large business jet aircraft. 

On a nationwide basis, the number of general aviation aircraft operations has been in slow 

decline due to factors such as increases in aircraft, fuel, and insurance costs, as well as 

increased avionic instrument requirements. The current economic recession and the 

financial credit crisis reduced general aviation activity nationwide. For the future, the FAA 

expects general aviation traffic to recover slowly. 




62


The flight operations of GA aircraft are categorized as local or itinerant operations. Local 

operations are flights that operate within visual range or close proximity of the airport. 

Itinerant operations typically include those flights that leave the airport destined for another 

airport and require the filing of flight plans with the local air traffic control authorities. 

Historically, itinerant operations have represented the majority of GA operations at the 

Airport and in 2009 accounted for nearly all of GA operations, as shown in Tables 21 and 22. 

The current distribution of GA operations between itinerant and local operations is 

anticipated to remain constant over the 2009 through 2030 forecast horizon. The total 

number of general aviation operations is forecast to increase an average of 1.4% per year 

from 2009 through 2030, which includes an estimated increase of 2.5% in 2010 based on 

actual data for January through March 2010. The GA aircraft operations forecast growth 

rate is higher than the annual growth rate forecast in the FAA 2009 TAF for the Airport—an 

average increase of 0.7% per year from FFY 2008 to FFY 2030—but equal to the FAA 

Aerospace forecast growth rate for national general aviation operations. 

In 2009, a total of 301 aircraft were based at the Airport, including 204 single-engine, 46 

multi-engine, 36 jet, and 15 helicopters, as shown in Table 22. The total number of based 

aircraft at the Airport is forecast to increase an average of 1.3% per year between 2009 and 

2030. 

5.3.7 Military Aircraft Operation Forecasts 

Military operations at the Airport varied considerably from 1990 through 2009, but in the 

last five years, averaged approximately 2,200 operations per year. In 2009, military 

operations totaled 2,078. Military operations are expected remain at a level of about 

2,100 operations from 2009 through 2028, as shown in Table 21. 

5.3.8 Total Aircraft Operations Forecasts 

Total aircraft operations at SLC are forecast to increase from 372,680 in 2009 to 493,360 

operations in 2030, an average increase of 1.4% per year, as shown in Table 22 and on 

Figure 23. 




63


Table 22 

Forecasts of General Aviation Activity 






Baseline 

2009 2010 2011 2014 2019 2024 2030 


Itinerant 58,167 59,400 60,000 62,270 66,450 70,960 76,840 

Local 444 700 700 730 780 830 900 

GENERAL AVIATION OPERATIONS 58,611 60,100 60,700 63,000 67,230 71,790 77,740 


BASED AIRCRAFT 

Single Engine (Nonjet) 204 203 202 200 200 207 216 

Multi Engine (Nonjet) 46 46 46 46 46 46 47 

Jet Engine 36 37 38 44 54 82 105 

Helicopter 15 15 16 18 21 26 30 

Other - - - - - - - 

TOTAL BASED AIRCRAFT 301 302 303 308 321 362 398 



PER BASED AIRCRAFT 195 199 201 205 210 198 195 

Average annual percent change -- 2.3% 0.7% 0.7% 0.5% -0.6% -0.2% 


Sources: Historical: Salt Lake City Department of Aviation records and U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation 

Administration, ATADS online database. Forecast: LeighFisher, June 2010. 




64







65


6.0 Comparison with the FAA 2009 TAF 

Table 23 presents a comparison of the aviation demand forecasts prepared for SLC and the 

Federal Aviation Administration’s 2009 Terminal Area Forecast (FAA 2009 TAF) for the 

Airport. The forecasts are compared for the components of total enplaned passengers, 

commercial aircraft operations and total aircraft operations. The format of Table 23 is based 

on the template provided by the FAA for the comparison of airport planning forecasts and 

the FAA TAF. * As required in the FAA guidance, the results are presented for the base year 

of 2009 and forecast horizons years which are equal to the base year, plus 1, 5, 10 and 

15 years (2010, 2014, 2019, and 2024). The SLC aviation demand forecasts have been 

compared graphically with the FAA 2009 TAF in the figures presented throughout this 

report, including Figures 1 and 3 in Chapter 1. 

The key findings of the comparison of the SLC aviation demand forecasts with the FAA 

2009 TAF are: 

 

 

 

 

The forecast of enplaned passengers for SLC is higher than the TAF. The variance 

between the SLC enplaned passenger forecast and the FAA 2009 TAF is less than 

10.0%--4.9% in 2014 and 3.0% in 2019, as shown in Table 23. 

The forecast of commercial operations for SLC varies from the FAA 2009 TAF by 

10.0% or less (-0.3% in 2014 and -2.8% in 2019). 

The variance between the forecasts of total aircraft operations is similar to the 

variance for commercial operations (-0.3% in 2014 and 2.0% in 2019). 

Overall, the SLC aviation demand forecasts are similar to the FAA 2009 TAF for 

the Airport and “differ by less than 10 percent in the 5-year forecast period, and 

15 percent in the 10-year forecast period”, as stipulated in the FAA forecast 

guidance. 

Table 24 presents a summary of the SLC aviation demand forecasts using a second template 

provided by the FAA. 

* U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Forecasting Aviation Activity by Airport, July 2001, and 

Review and Approval of Aviation Forecasts, June 2008, http://www.faa.gov. 




66


Table 23 

FAA TAF Forecast Comparison 


Year (a) 



Airport EA 

FAA 2009 TAF 

SLC EA vs. 2009 TAF 

(percent variance) 

Passenger Enplanements 

Base yr. 2009 10,203,289 9,724,778 4.9% 

Base yr. + 5yrs. 2014 11,382,000 10,848,369 4.9% 

Base yr. + 10yrs. 2019 12,769,000 12,397,085 3.0% 

Base yr. + 15yrs. 2024 14,235,000 14,097,537 1.0% 

Commercial Operations 

Base yr. 2009 311,991 312,951 -0.3% 

Base yr. + 5yrs. 2014 331,200 332,156 -0.3% 

Base yr. + 10yrs. 2019 360,060 370,394 -2.8% 

Base yr. + 15yrs. 2024 386,540 411,250 -6.0% 

Total Operations 

Base yr. 2009 372,680 374,004 -0.4% 

Base yr. + 5yrs. 2014 396,300 397,637 -0.3% 

Base yr. + 10yrs. 2019 429,390 438,047 -2.0% 

Base yr. + 15yrs. 2024 460,430 481,177 -4.3% 

(a) The Salt Lake City International Airport EA was prepared on a calendar year basis and the 

FAA 2009 TAF was prepared on a U.S. government fiscal year basis (October through September). 

(b) Commercial operations include operations by passenger airlines, all-cargo airlines, and air taxi operators. 

(c) Total operations include commercial operations plus operations by general aviation and military. 

Sources: Base year 2009 (actual)--Salt Lake City Aviation Department records. 

SLC EA Forecasts--LeighFisher, June 2010. 

FAA 2009 TAF for SLC--U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation 

Administration, online database, accessed January 2010. 




67


Table 24 

Summary of SLC EA Forecasts Using FAA Template 


Base year + 1 

year 

Base year + 5 

years 

Forecast Average annual compound growth rates 

Base year + 10 

years 

Base year + 15 

years 

Base year to +1 

year 

Base year to +5 

years 

Base year to 

+10 years 

Base year to 

+15 years 

Base year 

2009 2010 2014 2019 2024 2009 - 2010 2009 - 2014 2009 - 2019 2009 - 2024 

Passenger enplanements 

Air carrier (a) 6,550,073 6,457,000 7,120,000 8,001,000 8,937,000 -1.4% 1.7% 2.0% 2.1% 

Commuter (b) 3,653,216 3,898,000 4,262,000 4,768,000 5,298,000 6.7% 3.1% 2.7% 2.5% 

Total 10,203,289 10,355,000 11,382,000 12,769,000 14,235,000 1.5% 2.2% 2.3% 2.2% 

Aircraft operations 

Itinerant 

Air carrier 175,142 166,386 170,364 184,464 204,456 -5.0% -0.6% 0.5% 1.0% 

Commuter/air taxi 136,849 140,454 139,876 146,736 155,604 2.6% 0.4% 0.7% 0.9% 

Total commercial operations 311,991 306,840 310,240 331,200 360,060 -1.7% -0.1% 0.6% 1.0% 

General aviation 58,167 59,400 62,270 66,450 70,960 2.1% 1.4% 1.3% 1.3% 

Military 2,078 2,000 2,000 2,000 2,000 -3.8% -0.8% -0.4% -0.3% 

Local 

General aviation 444 700 730 780 830 57.7% 10.5% 5.8% 4.3% 

Military -- 100 100 100 100 -- -- -- -- 

Total operations 372,680 369,040 375,340 400,530 433,950 -1.0% 0.1% 0.7% 1.0% 

Cargo/mail (enplaned + deplaned tons) 149,364 155,000 168,400 186,800 203,300 3.8% 2.4% 2.3% 2.1% 

Based Aircraft 

Single engine (nonjet) 204 203 200 200 207 -0.4% -0.3% -0.2% 0.1% 

Multi-engine (nonjet) 46 46 46 46 46 -0.3% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 

Jet engine 36 37 44 54 82 3.2% 3.9% 4.2% 5.7% 

Helicopter 15 15 18 21 26 3.3% 3.5% 3.3% 3.9% 

Other -- -- -- -- -- 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 

Total 301 302 308 321 362 0.2% 0.4% 0.6% 1.2% 

Operational factors 

Average aircraft size (seats) 

Air Carrier (a) 147.7 148.7 148.6 149.5 150.5 

Commuter (b) 54.0 55.8 56.1 58.6 61.6 

Average enplaning load factor 

Air Carrier (a) 77.5% 81.6% 82.1% 82.5% 83.0% 

Commuter (b) 82.7% 83.9% 85.0% 85.4% 85.8% 

GA operations per based aircraft 195 199 205 210 198 

Note: The Salt Lake City International Airport EA Update was prepared on a calendar year basis and the FAA 2009 TAF was prepared on a 

U.S. government fiscal year basis (October through September). 

charter airline activity as summarized in the 

which includes flights using regional aircraft with 

Sources: Base year 2009 (actual)--Salt Lake City Aviation Department records. SLC EA Forecasts--LeighFisher, June 2010. 

FAA 2009 TAF for SLC--U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, online database, accessed January 2010. 




68


Attachment A Regression Analysis 

Regression analysis compares the historical relationship between a dependent variable, in 

this case, enplaned passengers, and an independent or “predictor” variable. The predictor 

variable is eventually used to project future levels of the dependent variable. In aviation 

demand forecasts, the predictor variable is typically represented by an economic or 

demographic metric such as population, employment, or personal income. Regression 

analyses produce a mathematical equation that identifies the strength or reliability of the 

historical correlation between the dependent variable (enplaned passengers) and predictor 

variables. The statistical reliability of this equation is typically measured by a regression 

statistic known as “R-squared.” An R-squared of 1.0 would represent a perfect historical 

correlation between the dependent and predictor variable and suggest that the 

measurement of this historical relationship will be a reliable predictor of future results. 

Dummy variables * were used in this analysis to reflect the effect of one-time events that 

occurred over a short period of time but shifted demand above or below the historical trend 

line. The use of dummy variables increases the model fit as measured by the R-squared 

statistic. For example, the September 11, 2001 terrorist events resulted in a decrease of 5.6% 

in enplaned passengers at SLC in 2001. Similarly, the development of low cost carrier 

service during the 1990s resulted in an average increase in the number of enplaned 

passengers at SLC of 9.9% per year between 1990 and 1996, compared with an average 

increase of 2.9% per year between 1990 and 2009. In addition, the service adjustments by 

Delta Air Lines in the 2000s resulted in an increase of 20.5% in 2005 and a decrease of 3.1% 

in 2006. A regression model of SLC passenger traffic from 1990 through 2009 without 

dummy variables for these events would produce an R-squared statistic of 77%, compared 

with an R-squared statistic of 93% for a model with these dummy variables. Generally, 

regression models with R-squared statistics of more than 90% are considered more reliable 

as a basis for forecasting because most of the historical variation has been adequately 

explained (assuming that other statistical tests are met). 

Two regression models were defined during the forecast process to represent passenger 

demand and are presented in Table A-1. 

* In regression analysis, a dummy variable takes the values 0 or 1 to indicate the absence or presence of some effect that may be 

expected to shift the outcome. 




A-1


Table A-1 

Regression Models 


Regression model Coefficient t-statistic 

ORIGINATING PASSENGER MODEL 

Dependent variable = ln(SLC originating passengers) 

Independent variables 

ln(SLC CMSA nonagricultural employment) 0.85 4.80 

ln(SLC domestic airline yield, 2009 dollars) -0.75 -5.40 

Dummy variable for post 2001 period -0.24 -5.81 

Dummy variable for buildup of low cost carrier service 

(1993 and 1994) 0.11 2.47 

Dummy variable for Delta Air Lines service 

adjustments (2005 and 2006) 0.09 1.95 

Constant 12.03 -1.75 

Observations 20 

Adjusted R-squared 0.93 

CONNECTING PASSENGER MODEL 

Dependent variable = ln(SLC connecting passengers) 

Independent variables 

ln(SLC originating passengers) 0.65 3.84 

Constant 5.15 7.51 

Observations 20 

Adjusted R-squared 0.74 

Source: LeighFisher, June 2010. 




A-2


Attachment B Forecasts of Aircraft Fleet and 

Average Annual Day Aircraft Operations 

This attachment summarizes the forecasts of aircraft fleet and average annual day (AAD) 

aircraft operations for the Airport for 2020 and 2025, including passenger airline, all-cargo 

airline, general aviation, and military operations. 

Forecast Approach and Methodology 

The forecasts of AAD aircraft operations and aircraft fleet were based on a 2009 base year 

distribution of operations by equipment type. The 2009 distribution was developed using a 

combination of source data, including: published passenger airline schedules and the FAA’s 

databases including the Enhanced Traffic Management System Counts (ETMSC), 

Operations Network (OPSNET), Air Traffic Activity Data System (ATADS), and Air Traffic 

Control (ATC)/FAA data for the Airport. In addition, input from key stakeholders was 

provided by Airport management to validate fleet mix assumptions. 

The forecasts of AAD aircraft operations are derived from the annual forecasts of aircraft 

operations presented in Table 21. Table B-1 presents annual and average annual day aircraft 

operations 1 by type of operation for 2009 (the base year) and forecasts for 2020 and 2025. 

The AAD aircraft operations forecasts summarized in Table B-1 are the control totals for the 

development of detailed airline schedules and the distribution of aircraft operations by 

equipment type. 

Aircraft Fleet Forecasts 

Aircraft fleet forecasts for the Airport in 2020 and 2025 are presented in Table B-2 in terms of 

AAD aircraft operations. Assumptions regarding likely changes in fleet mix over the 

forecast period were based on the analysis of 2009 base year data, airline aircraft orders, and 

other reference data. A summary of active aircraft fleets and orders by airline and 

equipment type were compiled and reviewed in preparing the aircraft fleet forecasts. The 

active aircraft fleets and orders are presented for selected major U.S. airlines, low cost 

carriers, regional affiliates, and all-cargo airlines (Table B-6). The AAD fleet mix was based 

1 AAD aircraft operations are derived by dividing total annual operations by 365 days. 




B-1


on the following available information and assumptions: 

 

An average aircraft useful life is assumed to average 25 to 30 years. For example, the 

average age of the B-737-300 aircraft ranges from 18-23 years for the two airlines— 

Continental and Southwest—that operated those aircraft at the Airport in 2009. It is 

assumed that the B-737-300 aircraft will decrease in number and be replaced by 

newer, more fuel efficient aircraft by 2025. 

 

The rate at which older, less fuel efficient aircraft are retired from the fleet will 

depend on a combination of factors, including the financial ability of individual 

airlines to purchase new aircraft, the ability of aircraft manufacturers to produce 

replacement aircraft, the backlog of aircraft orders, the price of aviation fuel and the 

availability of credit and financing. 

 

Older, less fuel efficient aircraft are assumed to be replaced with aircraft of similar 

size (in terms of available seats) and range (in miles) consistent with the existing 

orders of individual airlines for replacement aircraft. For example, Southwest 

Airlines plans to replace its B-737-300 aircraft with the B-737-700 aircraft. In 2009, 

Southwest received delivery of a total of 13 new B-737-300 aircraft and retired 13 of 

its older B-737-300 aircraft. 2 

New aircraft such as the B-787-8 (first delivery is planned for the first quarter of 2011 

as of the writing of this report) and orders for other aircraft such as the B-737-800, 

A319, and A320 aircraft are included in the aircraft fleet during the forecast period. 

In October 2010, Southwest Airlines announced plans to convert orders for the B- 

737-700 aircraft to the B-737-800 aircraft, which was tentatively agreed to by the 

Southwest Airlines Pilot Association on October 14, 2010. 

 

The average size of the regional aircraft fleet at the Airport (in terms of seats per 

departure) is assumed to increase during the forecast period, reflecting input from 

airlines provided to Airport management and the overall increasing trend in the 

average aircraft size in the regional airline industry. On September 2, 2010, Comair, 

a wholly owned Delta Air Lines regional affiliate, announced plans to reduce the 

number of 50-seat regional jets in its fleet to 16 by 2012 (from 83 in 2009). 

2 Southwest Airlines, Form 10K, filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission on January 29, 2010. 




B-2


 

The types of aircraft used for military and general aviation aircraft operations at the 

Airport were obtained from the FAA’s Enhanced Traffic Management System 

Counts (ETMSC). 

As shown in Table B-2, passenger airlines accounted for 74.5% of total Airport aircraft 

operations in 2009, including 72.7% for domestic passenger service and 1.8% for 

international passenger service. General aviation accounted for the next largest share with 

15.8%, followed by all-cargo airlines (4.9%), non-scheduled air taxi activity, including 

operations by fractional ownership companies, corporate flight departments, and charters 

(4.3%), and military (less than 1%). 

Average Annual Day Aircraft Operation Forecasts 

AAD aircraft operations by time of day, profile stage, and equipment type for 2009 (the base 

year) and forecasts for 2020 and 2025 are presented in Tables B-3, B-4, and B-5. The AAD 

aircraft operations forecasts are based on the analysis of aircraft fleets described earlier as 

well as: 

 

The percent of day and night ** arrivals and departures by type of operation and 

equipment type based on detailed data for July 2009 

 

The percent of aircraft departures by profile stage (see definitions of profile stage in 

Tables B-3, B-4, and B-5) by type of operation and equipment type based on detailed 

data for July 2009 

 

It was assumed that the percent distribution of aircraft operations by time of day and 

profile stage would remain relatively unchanged in 2020 and 2025, except for the 

introduction of new aircraft and markets, particularly for international service. 

Figure B-1 presents the hourly distribution of total AAD aircraft operations at the 

Airport in 2009 and forecasts for 2020 and 2025. Figure B-2 presents the distribution 

of AAD aircraft departures at the Airport by profile stage in 2009 and forecasts for 

2020 and 2025. 

** Daytime = 7:00 a.m. to 9:59 p.m.; Nighttime = 10:00 p.m. to 6:59 a.m. 




B-3


Departures 

80 

60 

40 

20 

Figure B-1 

HISTORICAL AND FORECAST AVERAGE ANNUAL DAY 

AIRCRAFT OPERATIONS BY HOUR 


0 

20 

Arrivals 

40 

60 

80 

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 

Hour of the day 

2009 2020 2025 

Sources: Historical: Salt Lake City Aviation Department records, Official Airline Guides, Inc., online database, and U.S. 

Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, ATADS and ETMS online database, accessed June 2010. 

Forecast: LeighFisher, June 2010. 

700 

Figure B-2 

HISTORICAL AND FORECAST AVERAGE ANNUAL DAY 

AIRCRAFT DEPARTURES BY PROFILE STAGE 


Number of 

AAD aircraft departures 

600 

500 

400 

300 

200 

100 

0 

2009 2020 2025 2009 2020 2025 

Daytime 

Nighttime 

Profile stage: 

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 

Sources: Historical: Salt Lake City Aviation Department records, Official Airline Guides, Inc., online database, and U.S. 

Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, ATADS and ETMS online database, accessed June 2010. 

Forecast: LeighFisher, June 2010. 




B-4

Table B-1 

Average Annual Day Forecasts of Total Aircraft Operations by Type 





Annual totals 

Average annual day 



2009 2020 2025 2009 2020 2025 

PASSENGER AIRLINE AIRCRAFT OPERATIONS 

Domestic 

Mainline (a) 70,006 85,000 93,000 192 233 255 

Regional affiliate 163,696 192,000 202,000 448 526 553 

Low cost carriers 38,184 40, 44, 000 105000 

110 121 

271,886 317, 339, 000 745 000 

868 929 

International 6,282 8, 9, 000 17000 

22 25 

TOTAL PASSENGER OPERATIONS 278,168 325,000 348,000 762 890 953 

Average annual percent change -- 

ALL-CARGO AIRLINE AIRCRAFT OPERATIONS 

Air carrier 5,080 6,000 7,000 14 16 19 

Air taxi 12,658 15, 17, 000 35 000 

41 47 

TOTAL ALL-CARGO OPERATIONS 17,738 21,000 23,000 49 58 63 



Itinerant 58,167 67,000 72,000 159 184 197 

Local 444 1, 1, 000 000 1 3 3 

TOTAL GENERAL AVIATION OPERATIONS 58,611 68,000 73,000 161 186 200 


MILITARY OPERATIONS 

Itinerant 2,078 2,000 2,000 6 5 5 

Local - - - - - - 

TOTAL MILITARY OPERATIONS 2,078 2,000 2,000 6 5 5 

OTHER ACTIVITY (b) 16,085 19,000 20,000 44 52 55 

TOTAL AIRPORT--AIRCRAFT OPERATIONS 372,680 435,000 467,000 1,021 1,192 1,279 



(b) Includes nonscheduled and empty flights. Other operations accounted for 5.2% of commercial airline (passenger and all-cargo) 

operations in 2009 and are assumed to account for this share in future years. 

Sources: Historical: Salt Lake City Aviation Department records, Official Airline Guides, Inc., online database, 

U. S. Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, ATADS and ETMS online database, 

ac cessed June 2010. Forecast: LeighFisher, June 2010.

Table B-2 

Forecasts of Average Annual Day Aircraft Operatios by Equipment Type 


The forecasts presented in this table were prepared using the information and assumptions given in the accompanying text. Inevitably, some of the assumptions used to develop the 

forecasts will not be realized and unanticipated events and circumstances may occur. Therefore, there are likely to be differences between the forecast and actual results, and those 

differences may be material. 

Average annual day (AAD) aircraft operations Percent of total 

Seats per Aircraft Historical Forecast Historical 

Forecast 

aircraft age (years) 2009 2020 2025 2009 2020 2025 

PASSENGER AIRLINES 

Domestic 

Mainline 

Narrowbody 

A318 120 5 2 2 4 0.2% 0.2% 0.3% 

A319 120-136 2-9 13 21 46 1.3% 1.8% 3.6% 

A320 138-158 3-15 24 35 40 2.3% 2.9% 3.1% 

B-737-300/400/500 137/144/122 13-23 42 24 -- 4.1% 2.0% 0.0% 

B-737-700 (G) 124-137 1-10 44 74 101 4.3% 6.2% 7.9% 

B-737-800 (H) 148-167 7-10 54 102 114 5.3% 8.6% 8.9% 

MD 80 140-150 19-20 12 10 10 1.2% 0.8% 0.8% 

MD 90 150 14 45 43 43 4. 4% 3.6% 3.4% 

236 311 358 23.0% 26.1% 28.0% 

B-757-100/200 110-190 17 57 46 43 5.6% 3.9% 3.4% 

Widebody 

B-767-300 183-225 13-16 6 2 -- 0.6% 0.2% 0.0% 

B-787-8 210-250 n.a. --13 22 0. 0% 1.1% 1.7% 

6 15 22 06% 0.6% 13% 1.3% 17% 1.7% 


Canadair Regional Jet 50 6-8 216 58 57 21.1% 4.9% 4.5% 

Embraer Regional Jet 135/140/145 37/44/50 6 2 -- -- 0.2% 0.0% 0.0% 

Embraer Regional Jet 190 94-99 1 -- 4 4 0.0% 0.3% 0.3% 

Canadair Regional Jet 700 70-76 6 80 164 164 7.8% 13.8% 12.8% 


Embraer 120 (EM2) 30 12 62 68 6. 0% 5.2% 5.3% 

446 492 505 43. 5% 41.3% 39.5% 

Domestic subtotal 745 864 928 72.7% 72.6% 72.5% 


Mainline and Foreign Flag 

Narrowbody 

A319 120-136 2-9 -- 2 2 0.0% 0.2% 0.2% 

B-737-800 (H) 148-167 7-10 -- 810 0. 0% 0.7% 0.8% 

-- 10 12 0.0% 0.8% 0.9% 

Widebody 

A330-200 243-275 5 2 2 2 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 

B-767 168-174 19-23 2 -- -- 0.2% 0.0% 0.0% 

B-787-8 210-250 n.a. -- 2 20. 0% 0.2% 0.2% 

4 4 4 0.4% 0.3% 0.3% 


Canadair Regional Jet 50 6-8 8 -- -- 0.8% 0.0% 0.0% 


Canadair Regional Jet 900 76-86 1 4 8 80. 4% 0.7% 0.6% 

14 10 10 1. 4% 0.8% 0.8% 

International subtotal 18 24 26 1.8% 2.0% 2.0% 

TOTAL PASSENGER AIRLINES 763 888 954 74.4% 74.6% 74.5%

Table B-2 (page 2 of 2) 

Forecasts of Average Annual Day Aircraft Operatios by Equipment Type 


Average annual day (AAD) aircraft operations Percent of total 

Seats per Aircraft Historical Forecast Historical 

Forecast 

aircraft age (years) 2009 2020 2025 2009 2020 2025 

ALL-CARGO AIRLINES 

Air carrier 

Widebody 

A306 n.a. n.a. 18 22 24 1.8% 1.8% 1.9% 

DC-10 n.a. n.a. 4 4 40. 4% 0.3% 0.3% 

22 26 28 2.1% 2.2% 2.2% 

Regional feeder 

AT43 n.a. n.a. 2 2 2 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 

B190 n.a. n.a. 2 2 2 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 

BE99 n.a. n.a. 6 6 8 0.6% 0.5% 0.6% 

C208 n.a. n.a. 10 12 12 1.0% 1.0% 0.9% 

SW4 n.a. n.a. 810 12 0. 8% 0.8% 0.9% 

28 32 36 2.7% 2.7% 2.8% 

TOTAL ALL-CARGO AIRLINES 50 58 64 4.9% 4.9% 5.0% 

GENERAL AVIATION 

Business Jet multi-engine heavy n.a. n.a. 46 56 56 4.5% 4.7% 4.4% 

Business Jet multi-engine light plus n.a. n.a. 54 62 68 5.3% 5.2% 5.3% 

Multi-engine turboprop n.a. n.a. 34 38 44 3.3% 3.2% 3.4% 

Single engine n.a. n.a. 28 30 32 2. 7% 2.5% 2.5% 

TOTAL GENERAL AVIATION 162 186 200 15.8% 58% 15.6% 56% 15.6% 56% 

MILITARY OPERATIONS (b) 

Transport aircraft (C130, KC135) n.a. n.a. 6 6 6 0.6% 0.5% 0.5% 

OTHER ACTIVITY (a) 

Air taxi 

Business Jet multi-engine heavy n.a. n.a. 28 32 34 2.7% 2.7% 2.7% 

Business Jet multi-engine light plus n.a. n.a. 16 20 22 1. 6% 1.7% 1.7% 

TOTAL OTHER ACTIVITY 44 52 56 4.3% 4.4% 4.4% 

TOTAL AIRPORT AIRCRAFT OPERATIONS 1,025 1,190 1,280 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 

Notes: Totals may not add due to rounding. 

Seat s per aircraft vary by airline. Source: Official Airline Guide, Inc., online database, accessed January 2010. 

Av erage age (years): Individual airline filings with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission. 

Sources: Historical: Salt Lake City Aviation Department records, Official Airline Guides, Inc., online database, U.S. Department of Transportation, 

Feder al Aviation Administration, ATADS and ETMS online database, accessed June 2010. Forecast: LeighFisher, June 2010.

Table B-3 

Average Annual Day Aircraft Operations by Time of Day, Profile Stage, and Equipment Type: 2009 


Departures 

Daytime Nighttime 

Arrivals 

Profile stage Day Profile stage 

Night 

Day Night Total 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Total 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Total Total 


Domestic 

Mainline 

Narrowbody 

A318 1 -- 1 1 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 1 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 1 

A319 5 2 7 5 1 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 6 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 6 

A320 8 4 12 4 5 1 -- -- -- -- -- -- 10 -- 1 -- 1 -- -- -- -- -- 2 12 

B-737-300/400/500 19 2 21 10 7 3 -- -- -- -- -- -- 20 -- -- 1 -- -- -- -- -- -- 1 21 

B-737-700 (G) 20 2 22 13 5 1 1 -- -- -- -- -- 20 2 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 2 22 

B-737-800 (H) 27 -- 27 8 6 6 7 -- -- -- -- -- 27 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 27 

MD 80 5 1 6 -- 3 2 -- -- -- -- -- -- 5 -- 1 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 1 6 

MD 90 23 -- 23 5 12 5 -- -- -- -- -- -- 22 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 22 

108 11 119 46 39 18 8 -- -- -- -- -- 111 2 2 1 1 -- -- -- -- -- 6 117 

B-757-100/200 26 2 28 3 8 5 11 -- -- -- -- -- 27 -- -- 1 1 -- -- -- -- -- 2 29 

Widebody 

B-767-300 3 -- 3 -- -- 1 -- 2 -- -- -- -- 3 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 3 

B-787-8 --- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 

3 -- 3 -- -- 1 -- 2 -- -- -- -- 3 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 3 


Canadair Regional Jet 107 1 108 74 33 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 107 1 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 1 108 

Embraer Regional Jet 135/140/145 1 -- 1 -- -- 1 -- -- -- -- -- -- 1 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 1 

Embraer Regional Jet 190 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 

Canadair Regional Jet 700 37 3 40 20 14 4 -- -- -- -- -- -- 38 1 1 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 2 40 

Canadair Regional Jet 900 43 -- 43 11 17 15 -- -- -- -- -- -- 43 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 43 

Embraer 120 (EM2) 31 -- 31 31 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 31 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 31 

219 4223 136 64 20 -- -- -- -- -- -- 220 2 1 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 3 223 

Domestic subtotal 356 17 373 185 111 44 19 2 -- -- -- -- 361 4 3 2 2 -- -- -- -- -- 11 372 



Narrowbody 

A319 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 

B-737-800 (H) --- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 

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

Widebody 

A330-200 1 -- 1 -- -- -- -- -- -- 1 -- -- 1 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 1 

B-767 1 -- 1 -- -- -- -- -- 1 -- -- -- 1 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 1 

B-787-8 --- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 

2 -- 2 -- -- -- -- -- 1 1 -- -- 2 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 2 


Canadair Regional Jet 4 -- 4 -- 4 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 4 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 4 

Canadair Regional Jet 700 1 -- 1 -- 1 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 1 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 1 

Canadair Regional Jet 900 2-- 2-- 1 1 -- -- -- -- -- -- 2-- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 2 

7-- 7-- 6 1 -- -- -- -- -- -- 7-- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 7 

International subtotal 9 -- 9 -- 6 1 -- -- 1 1 -- -- 9 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 9 

TOTAL PASSENGER AIRLINES 365 17 382 185 117 45 19 2 1 1 -- -- 370 4 3 2 2 -- -- -- -- -- 11 381




Departures 


Arrivals Profile stage Day Profile stage 

Night 



Domestic 

Air carrier 

Widebody 

A306 7 2 9 1 1 1 -- -- -- -- -- -- 3 3 -- 3 -- -- -- -- -- -- 6 9 

DC-10 1 1 2-- -- 1 -- -- -- -- -- -- 1-- -- 1 -- -- -- -- -- -- 1 2 

8 3 11 1 1 2 -- -- -- -- -- -- 4 3 -- 4 -- -- -- -- -- -- 7 11 


AT43 1 -- 1 1 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 1 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 1 

B190 1 -- 1 1 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 1 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 1 

BE99 3 -- 3 2 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 2 1 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 1 3 

C208 5 -- 5 4 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 4 1 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 1 5 

SW4 4-- 4 2 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 2 2 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 2 4 

14 -- 14 10 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 10 4 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 4 14 

TOTAL ALL-CARGO AIRLINES 22 3 25 11 1 2 -- -- -- -- -- -- 14 7 -- 4 -- -- -- -- -- -- 11 25 


Business Jet multi-engine heavy 21 2 23 12 8 1 1 -- -- -- -- -- 22 -- -- -- 1 -- -- -- -- -- 1 23 

Business Jet multi-engine light plus 26 1 27 16 7 1 -- -- -- -- -- -- 24 2 1 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 3 27 

Multi-engine turboprop 17 -- 17 9 5 2 -- -- -- -- -- -- 16 1 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 1 17 

Single engine 14 -- 14 9 4 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 13 1 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 1 14 

TOTAL GENERAL AVIATION 78 3 81 46 24 4 1 -- -- -- -- -- 75 4 1 -- 1 -- -- -- -- -- 6 81 


Transport aircraft (C130, KC135) 3 -- 3 3 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 3 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 3 


Air taxi 

Business Jet multi-engine heavy 14 -- 14 4 8 1 -- -- -- -- -- -- 13 -- 1 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 1 14 

Business Jet multi-engine light plus 8-- 8 3 5 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 8-- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 8 

TOTAL OTHER ACTIVITY 22 -- 22 7 13 1 -- -- -- -- -- -- 21 -- 1 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 1 22 

TOTAL AIRPORT AIRCRAFT OPERATIONS 490 23 513 252 155 52 20 2 1 1 -- -- 483 15 5 6 3 -- -- -- -- -- 29 512 

Notes: Daytime = 7:00 a.m. to 9:59 p.m.; Nighttime = 10:00 p.m. to 6:59 a.m. 

T otals may not add due to rounding. 

Profile stage = a one-digit number that distinguishes members in a profile group. It is called "stage" because it is used to identify stage lengths for departure profiles. Stage length is a range of trip distances. 

Departure stage lengths (in nautical miles) are defined as follows: 

1. 0 to 500 4. 1,501 to 2,500 7. 4,501 to 5,500 

2. 501 to 1,000 5. 2,501 to 3,500 8. 5,501 to 6,500 

3. 1,001 to 1,500 6. 3,501 to 4,500 9. over 6,500 

(a) Other activity includes nonscheduled and empty flights. 



Table B-4 



The forecasts presented in this table were prepared using the information and assumptions given in the accompanying text. Inevitably, some of the assumptions used to develop the forecasts will not be realized and unanticipated events and circumstances may 

occur. Therefore, there are likely to be differences between the forecast and actual results, and those differences may be material. 

Departures 



Night 



Domestic 

Mainline 

Narrowbody 

A318 1 -- 1 1 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 1 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 1 

A319 9 2 11 8 1 1 -- -- -- -- -- -- 10 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 10 

A320 12 5 17 7 7 1 -- -- -- -- -- -- 15 -- 1 -- 2 -- -- -- -- -- 3 18 

B-737-300/400/500 11 1 12 5 6 1 -- -- -- -- -- -- 12 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 12 

B-737-700 (G) 35 2 37 20 10 3 2 -- -- -- -- -- 35 2 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 2 37 

B-737-800 (H) 49 2 51 10 16 12 12 -- -- -- -- -- 50 -- -- 1 -- -- -- -- -- -- 1 51 

MD 80 4 1 5 -- 2 2 -- -- -- -- -- -- 4 -- 1 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 1 5 

MD 90 22 -- 22 5 12 4 -- -- -- -- -- -- 21 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 21 

143 13 156 56 54 24 14 -- -- -- -- -- 148 2 2 1 2 -- -- -- -- -- 7 155 

B-757-100/200 21 1 22 2 8 5 8 -- -- -- -- -- 23 -- -- -- 1 -- -- -- -- -- 1 24 

Widebody 

B-767-300 1 -- 1 -- -- -- -- 1 -- -- -- -- 1 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 1 

B-787-8 6 1 7-- 1 2 1 1 -- -- -- -- 5-- -- 1 -- -- -- -- -- -- 1 6 

7 1 8 -- 1 2 1 2 -- -- -- -- 6 -- -- 1 -- -- -- -- -- -- 1 7 


Canadair Regional Jet 29 -- 29 23 6 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 29 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 29 

Embraer Regional Jet 135/140/145 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 

Embraer Regional Jet 190 2 -- 2 1 -- 1 -- -- -- -- -- -- 2 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 2 


Canadair Regional Jet 900 101 1 102 45 41 16 -- -- -- -- -- -- 102 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 102 

Embraer 120 (EM2) 31 -- 31 31 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 31 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 31 

242 4246 153 68 22 -- -- -- -- -- -- 243 2 1 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 3 246 




Narrowbody 

A319 1 -- 1 -- 1 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 1 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 1 

B-737-800 (H) 4-- 4-- 2 -- 2 -- -- -- -- -- 4-- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 4 

5 -- 5 -- 3 -- 2 -- -- -- -- -- 5 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 5 

Widebody 

A330-200 1 -- 1 -- -- -- -- -- -- 1 -- -- 1 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 1 

B-767 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 

B-787-8 1-- 1-- -- -- -- -- 1 -- -- -- 1-- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 1 

2 -- 2 -- -- -- -- -- 1 1 -- -- 2 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 2 


Canadair Regional Jet -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 



5-- 5-- 3 2 -- -- -- -- -- -- 5-- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 5 

International subtotal 12 -- 12 -- 6 2 2 -- 1 1 -- -- 12 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 12 





Departures 



Night 



Domestic 

Air carrier 

Widebody 

A306 8 3 11 1 2 1 -- -- -- -- -- -- 4 4 -- 3 -- -- -- -- -- -- 7 11 

DC-10 1 1 2-- -- 1 -- -- -- -- -- -- 1-- -- 1 -- -- -- -- -- -- 1 2 

9 4 13 1 2 2 -- -- -- -- -- -- 5 4 -- 4 -- -- -- -- -- -- 8 13 


AT43 1 -- 1 1 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 1 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 1 

B190 1 -- 1 1 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 1 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 1 

BE99 3 -- 3 2 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 2 1 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 1 3 

C208 6 -- 6 4 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 4 2 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 2 6 

SW4 5-- 5 3 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 3 2 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 2 5 

16 -- 16 11 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 11 5 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 5 16 






Single engine 15 -- 15 9 5 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 14 1 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 1 15 





Air taxi 


Business Jet multi-engine light plus 10 -- 10 5 5 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 10 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 10 







1. 0 to 500 4. 1,501 to 2,500 7. 4,501 to 5,500 

2. 501 to 1,000 5. 2,501 to 3,500 8. 5,501 to 6,500 

3. 1,001 to 1,500 6. 3,501 to 4,500 9. over 6,500 




Table B-5 



The forecasts presented in this table were prepared using the information and assumptions given in the accompanying text. Inevitably, some of the assumptions used to develop the forecasts will not be realized and unanticipated events and circumstances may 

occur. Therefore, there are likely to be differences between the forecast and actual results, and those differences may be material. 

Departures 



Night 



Domestic 

Mainline 

Narrowbody 

A318 2 -- 2 2 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 2 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 2 

A319 21 2 23 14 6 3 -- -- -- -- -- -- 23 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 23 

A320 15 5 20 7 8 2 -- -- -- -- -- -- 17 -- 1 -- 2 -- -- -- -- -- 3 20 

B-737-300/400/500 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 

B-737-700 (G) 48 3 51 26 16 4 2 -- -- -- -- -- 48 2 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 2 50 

B-737-800 (H) 55 2 57 10 21 12 12 -- -- -- -- -- 55 -- -- 1 1 -- -- -- -- -- 2 57 

MD 80 4 1 5 -- 2 2 -- -- -- -- -- -- 4 -- 1 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 1 5 

MD 90 22 -- 22 5 12 4 -- -- -- -- -- -- 21 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 21 

167 13 180 64 65 27 14 -- -- -- -- -- 170 2 2 1 3 -- -- -- -- -- 8 178 

B-757-100/200 20 1 21 2 7 5 7 -- -- -- -- -- 21 -- -- -- 1 -- -- -- -- -- 1 22 

Widebody 

B-767-300 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 

B-787-8 10 11 -- 3 3 2 2 -- -- -- -- 10 -- -- 1 -- -- -- -- -- -- 1 11 

10 1 11 -- 3 3 2 2 -- -- -- -- 10 -- -- 1 -- -- -- -- -- -- 1 11 


Canadair Regional Jet 28 -- 28 23 6 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 29 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 29 

Embraer Regional Jet 135/140/145 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 

Embraer Regional Jet 190 2 -- 2 1 -- 1 -- -- -- -- -- -- 2 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 2 


Canadair Regional Jet 900 105 1 106 50 40 16 -- -- -- -- -- -- 106 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 106 

Embraer 120 (EM2) 34 -- 34 34 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 34 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 34 

248 4252 161 68 21 -- -- -- -- -- -- 250 2 1 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 3 253 




Narrowbody 

A319 1 -- 1 -- 1 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 1 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 1 

B-737-800 (H) 5-- 5-- 2 1 2 -- -- -- -- -- 5-- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 5 

6 -- 6 -- 3 1 2 -- -- -- -- -- 6 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 6 

Widebody 

A330-200 1 -- 1 -- -- -- -- -- -- 1 -- -- 1 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 1 

B-767 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 

B-787-8 1-- 1-- -- -- -- -- 1 -- -- -- 1-- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 1 

2 -- 2 -- -- -- -- -- 1 1 -- -- 2 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 2 


Canadair Regional Jet -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 



5-- 5-- 3 2 -- -- -- -- -- -- 5-- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 5 

International subtotal 13 -- 13 -- 6 3 2 -- 1 1 -- -- 13 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 13 





Departures 



Night 



Domestic 

Air carrier 

Widebody 

A306 9 3 12 1 2 1 -- -- -- -- -- -- 4 4 -- 4 -- -- -- -- -- -- 8 12 

DC-10 1 1 2-- -- 1 -- -- -- -- -- -- 1-- -- 1 -- -- -- -- -- -- 1 2 

10 4 14 1 2 2 -- -- -- -- -- -- 5 4 -- 5 -- -- -- -- -- -- 9 14 


AT43 1 -- 1 1 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 1 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 1 

B190 1 -- 1 1 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 1 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 1 

BE99 4 -- 4 3 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 3 1 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 1 4 

C208 6 -- 6 4 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 4 2 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 2 6 

SW4 6-- 6 4 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 4 2 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 2 6 

18 -- 18 13 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 13 5 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 5 18 






Single engine 16 -- 16 10 5 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 15 1 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 1 16 





Air taxi 


Business Jet multi-engine light plus 11 -- 11 5 6 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 11 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 11 







1. 0 to 500 4. 1,501 to 2,500 7. 4,501 to 5,500 

2. 501 to 1,000 5. 2,501 to 3,500 8. 5,501 to 6,500 

3. 1,001 to 1,500 6. 3,501 to 4,500 9. over 6,500 




Table B-6 

Active Aircraft Fleets by Airline and Equipment Type for Selected U.S. Airlines: As of December 31, 2009 


Average 

age (years) 

Actual 2009 

Number 

of aircraft 

Delta 

Percent of 

fleet 

Projected 

number of 

aircraft in 

2014 

Orders/ 

options 

Average 

age (years) 

Actual 2009 

Number of 

aircraft 

American 

Percent 

of fleet 

Projected 

number of 

aircraft in 

2014 

Aircraft type/model 

Narrowbody 

A318 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 

A319 8 57 5.8% 57 -- -- -- -- -- -- 

A320 15 69 7.0% 69 -- -- -- -- -- -- 

A321 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 

B-717-200 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 

B-727-200 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 

B-737-300 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 

B-737-400 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 

B-737-400C -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 

B-737-400F -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 

B-737-500 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 

B-737-700 1 10 1.0% 10 -- -- -- -- -- -- 

B-737-800 9 71 7.2% 71 11 7 108 12.1% 235 64 

B-737-900 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 

B-737-900ER -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 

DC-9 38 66 6.7% -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 

MD 80 20 116 11.8% 116 -- 19 258 29.0% 132 -- 

MD 90 14 16 1. 6% 16 -- -- --- --- 

405 41.2% 339 366 41.1% 367 

B-757 

B-757-100/200 17 165 16.8% 165 -- 15 124 13.9% 124 -- 

B-757-300 7 16 1. 6% 16 -- -- --- --- 

181 18.4% 181 124 13.9% 124 

Widebody 

A300-600 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 

A310-200/300 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 

A330-200 5 11 1.1% 11 -- -- -- -- -- -- 

A330-300 4 20 2.0% 20 -- -- -- -- -- -- 

A340-300 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 

A350-800 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 

A350-900 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 

B-747-100/200 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 

B-747-400 16 16 1.6% 16 -- -- -- -- -- -- 

B-767-200 -- -- -- -- -- 23 15 1.7% 15 -- 

B-767-300 18 14 1.4% 14 -- -- -- -- -- -- 

B-767-300ER 14 56 5.7% 56 -- 16 58 6.5% 58 -- 

B-767-400 9 21 2.1% 21 -- -- -- -- -- -- 

B-777-200ER 10 8 0.8% 8 2 9 47 5.3% 54 7 

B-777-200LR 1 8 0.8% 8 -- -- -- -- -- -- 

B-777F -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 

B-787-8 -- -- -- 13 18 -- -- -- -- -- 

B-787-9 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 100 

DC-10F/MD-10F -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 

MD-11 -- --- --- -- --- --- 

154 15.7% 167 120 13.5% 127 

Regional aircraft 

Bombardier 200 (Q200) -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 

Bombardier 400 (Q400) -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 

Canadair Regional Jet 100 12 70 7.1% n.a. -- -- -- -- -- -- 


Canadair Regional Jet 700 6 15 1.5% n.a. -- 7 25 2.8% n.a. -- 


Cessna 208 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 

Embraer 120 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 

Embraer Regional Jet 135 -- -- -- -- -- 10 39 4.4% n.a. -- 



Embraer Regional Jet 170 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 

Embraer Regional Jet 175 2 36 3.7% n.a. -- -- -- -- -- -- 


SAAB 340 12 41 4.2% n.a. -- -- -- -- -- -- 

ATR -- --- -- -- 15 39 4. 4% n.a. -- 

243 24.7% 9 280 31.5% 

TOTAL FLEET 14 983 100.0% 31 n.a. 890 100.0% 171 

TOTAL FLEET (excluding 

regional aircraft) 740 687 15 610 618 

Orders/ 

options




Average age 

(years) 

Actual 2009 

Number 

of aircraft 

Southwest 

Percent 

of fleet 

Projected 

number of 

aircraft in 

2014 

Orders/ 

options 

Average 

age (years) 

Actual 2009 

Number of 

aircraft 

United (a) 

Percent 

of fleet 

Projected 

number of 

aircraft in 

2014 


Narrowbody 

A318 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 

A319 -- -- -- -- -- 10 55 8.5% 76 23 

A320 -- -- -- -- -- 12 97 15.0% 115 19 

A321 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 

B-717-200 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 

B-727-200 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 

B-737-300 18 172 32.0% 172 -- -- -- -- -- -- 

B-737-400 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 

B-737-400C -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 

B-737-400F -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 

B-737-500 19 25 4.7% 25 -- -- -- -- -- -- 

B-737-700 6 340 63.3% 403 154 -- -- -- -- -- 

B-737-800 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 

B-737-900 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 

B-737-900ER -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 

DC-9 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 

MD 80 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 

MD 90 -- --- --- -- -- --- 

537 100.0% 600 152 23.6% 191 

B-757 

B-757-100/200 -- -- -- -- -- 18 96 14.9% 96 -- 

B-757-300 -- --- --- -- -- --- 

-- 0.0% -- 96 14.9% 96 

Widebody 

A300-600 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 

A310-200/300 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 

A330-200 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 

A330-300 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 

A340-300 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 

A350-800 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 

A350-900 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 25 

B-747-100/200 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 

B-747-400 -- -- -- -- -- 15 25 3.9% 25 -- 

B-767-200 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 

B-767-300 -- -- -- -- -- 15 35 5.4% 35 -- 

B-767-300ER -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 

B-767-400 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 

B-777-200ER -- -- -- -- -- 11 52 8.1% 52 -- 

B-777-200LR -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 

B-777F -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 

B-787-8 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 25 

B-787-9 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 

DC-10F/MD-10F -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 

MD-11 -- --- --- -- -- --- 

-- -- 0.0% -- -- 112 17.4% 112 


Bombardier 200 (Q200) -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 

Bombardier 400 (Q400) -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 

Canadair Regional Jet 100 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- n.a. -- 

Canadair Regional Jet 200 -- -- -- -- -- -- 91 14.1% n.a. -- 

Canadair Regional Jet 700 -- -- -- -- -- -- 108 16.7% n.a. -- 

Canadair Regional Jet 900 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- n.a. -- 

Cessna 208 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 

Embraer 120 -- -- -- -- -- -- 12 1.9% n.a. -- 

Embraer Regional Jet 135 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- n.a. -- 


Embraer Regional Jet 145 -- -- -- -- -- -- 36 5.6% n.a. -- 




SAAB 340 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- n.a. -- 

ATR -- --- -- -- -- -- n.a. -- 

-- 0.0% 285 44.2% 

TOTAL FLEET 11 537 100.0% 600 n.a. 645 100.0% 92 


regional aircraft) 537 600 13 360 399 

Orders/ 

options




Average 

age (years) 

Actual 2009 

Number of 

aircraft 

US Airways 

Percent 

of fleet 

Projected 

number of 

aircraft in 

2014 

Orders/ 

options 

Average age 

(years) 

Actual 2009 

Number of 

aircraft 

Continental (a) 

Percent 

of fleet 

Projected 

number of 

aircraft in 

2014 


Narrowbody 

A318 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 

A319 9 93 26.3% 96 3 -- -- -- -- -- 

A320 11 69 19.5% 96 50 -- -- -- -- -- 

A321 5 44 12.4% 71 14 -- -- -- -- -- 

B-717-200 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 

B-727-200 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 

B-737-300 22 26 7.3% -- -- 24 3 0.5% -- -- 

B-737-400 20 40 11.3% -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 

B-737-400C -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 

B-737-400F -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 

B-737-500 -- -- -- -- -- 14 34 5.7% -- -- 

B-737-700 -- -- -- -- -- 11 36 6.0% 72 30 

B-737-800 -- -- -- -- -- 8 117 19.5% 130 18 

B-737-900 -- -- -- -- -- 8 12 2.0% 12 -- 

B-737-900ER 1 30 5.0% 37 3 

DC-9 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 

MD 80 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 

MD 90 -- -- -- -- -- --- 

272 76.8% 263 232 38.6% 251 

B-757 

B-757-100/200 19 35 9.9% 15 -- 13 41 6.8% 41 -- 

B-757-300 -- -- -- 7 183. 0% 18 -- 

35 9.9% 15 59 9.8% 59 

Widebody 

A300-600 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 

A310-200/300 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 

A330-200 0 3 0.8% 5 20 -- -- -- -- -- 

A330-300 9 9 2.5% 9 -- -- -- -- -- -- 

A340-300 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 

A350-800 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 

A350-900 -- -- -- -- 22 -- -- -- -- -- 

B-747-100/200 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 

B-747-400 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 

B-767-200 20 10 2.8% 10 -- 9 10 1.7% 10 -- 

B-767-300 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 

B-767-300ER -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 

B-767-400 -- -- -- -- -- 8 16 2.7% 16 -- 

B-777-200ER -- -- -- -- -- 10 20 3.3% 23 3 

B-777-200LR -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 

B-777F -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 

B-787-8 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 11 11 

B-787-9 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 

DC-10F/MD-10F -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 

MD-11 -- -- -- -- -- --- 

22 6.2% 24 46 7.7% 60 


Bombardier 200 (Q200) -- -- -- -- -- n.a. 16 2.7% n.a. -- 

Bombardier 400 (Q400) -- -- -- -- -- n.a. 14 2.3% n.a. -- 

Canadair Regional Jet 100 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 

Canadair Regional Jet 200 -- -- -- -- -- n.a. 7 1.2% n.a. -- 



Cessna 208 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 

Embraer 120 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 



Embraer Regional Jet 145 -- -- -- -- -- n.a. 227 37.8% n.a. -- 

Embraer Regional Jet 170 -- -- -- -- 20 -- -- -- -- -- 


Embraer Regional Jet 190 1 25 7.1% 23 27 -- -- -- -- -- 

SAAB 340 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 

ATR -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 

25 7.1% 23 264 43.9% 

TOTAL FLEET 12 354 100.0% 325 156 9 601 100.0% 65 


regional aircraft) 329 302 337 370 

Orders/ 

options




Average 

age (years) 

Actual 2009 

Number of 

aircraft 

JetBlue 

Percent 

of fleet 

Projected 

number of 

aircraft in 

2014 

Orders/ 

options 

Average age 

(years) 

Frontier (excludes Air Midwest and Republic) 

Actual 2009 

Projected 

number of 

Number of 

aircraft 

Percent 

of fleet 

aircraft in 

2014 


Narrowbody 

A318 -- -- -- -- -- 5 9 17.0% 9 -- 

A319 -- -- -- -- -- 6 38 71.7% 38 -- 

A320 5 110 72.8% 150 87 4 4 7.5% 15 8 

A321 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 

B-717-200 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 

B-727-200 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 

B-737-300 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 

B-737-400 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 

B-737-400C -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 

B-737-400F -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 

B-737-500 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 

B-737-700 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 

B-737-800 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 

B-737-900 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 

B-737-900ER -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 

DC-9 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 

MD 80 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 

MD 90 -- -- --- -- -- --- 

110 72.8% 150 51 96.2% 62 

B-757 

B-757-100/200 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 

B-757-300 -- -- --- -- -- --- 

-- 0.0% -- -- 0.0% -- 

Widebody 

A300-600 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 

A310-200/300 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 

A330-200 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 

A330-300 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 

A340-300 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 

A350-800 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 

A350-900 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 

B-747-100/200 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 

B-747-400 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 

B-767-200 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 

B-767-300 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 

B-767-300ER -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 

B-767-400 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 

B-777-200ER -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 

B-777-200LR -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 

B-777F -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 

B-787-8 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 

B-787-9 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 

DC-10F/MD-10F -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 

MD-11 -- -- --- -- -- --- 

-- 0.0% -- -- 0.0% -- 


Bombardier 200 (Q200) -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 

Bombardier 400 (Q400) -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 





Cessna 208 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 

Embraer 120 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 






Embraer Regional Jet 190 3 41 27.2% 70 150 -- -- -- -- -- 

SAAB 340 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 

ATR -- -- --- -- -- -- -- 

41 27.2% 70 2 3.8% 

TOTAL FLEET 151 100.0% 220 237 6 53 100.0% 8 


regional aircraft) 110 150 51 62 

Orders/ 

options




Skywest (excludes Atlantic Southeast Airlines) 

Actual 2009 

Projected 

number of 

Number of 

aircraft 

Percent 

of fleet 

aircraft in 

2014 

Average 

age (years) 

Orders/ 

options 

Average age 

(years) 

Actual 2009 

Number of 

aircraft 

Federal Express 

Percent 

of fleet 

Projected 

number of 

aircraft in 

2014 


Narrowbody 

A318 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 

A319 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 

A320 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 

A321 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 

B-717-200 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 

B-727-200 -- -- -- -- -- -- 77 11.6% -- -- 

B-737-300 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 

B-737-400 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 

B-737-400C -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 

B-737-400F -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 

B-737-500 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 

B-737-700 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 

B-737-800 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 

B-737-900 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 

B-737-900ER -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 

DC-9 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 

MD 80 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 

MD 90 -- -- --- -- -- --- 

-- 0.0% -- 77 11.6% -- 

B-757 

B-757-100/200 -- -- -- -- -- -- 36 5.4% 85 -- 

B-757-300 -- -- --- -- -- --- 

-- 0.0% -- 36 5.4% 85 

Widebody 

A300-600 -- -- -- -- -- -- 71 10.7% 71 -- 

A310-200/300 -- -- -- -- -- -- 49 7.4% 44 -- 

A330-200 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 

A330-300 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 

A340-300 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 

A350-800 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 

A350-900 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 

B-747-100/200 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 

B-747-400 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 

B-767-200 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 

B-767-300 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 

B-767-300ER -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 

B-767-400 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 

B-777-200ER -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 

B-777-200LR -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 

B-777F 6 0.9% 19 27 

B-787-8 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 

B-787-9 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 

DC-10F/MD-10F -- -- -- -- -- -- 75 11.3% 75 -- 

MD-11 -- -- --- -- 59 8. 9% 59 -- 

-- 0.0% -- 260 39.2% 268 


Bombardier 200 (Q200) -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 

Bombardier 400 (Q400) -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 



Canadair Regional Jet 700 5 61 37.0% n.a. 26 -- -- -- -- -- 


Cessna 208 -- -- -- -- -- -- 252 38.0% -- -- 

Embraer 120 13 9 5.5% n.a. -- -- -- -- -- -- 







SAAB 340 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 

ATR -- -- -- -- -- 39 5. 9% -- -- 

165 100.0% 291 43.8% 

TOTAL FLEET 6 165 100.0% 0 664 100.0% 27 


regional aircraft) -- -- 373 353 

Orders/ 

options




Average 

age 

(years) 

Actual 2009 

Number of 

aircraft 

United Parcel Service 

Percent 

of fleet 

Projected 

number of 

aircraft in 

2014 

Orders/ 

options 


Narrowbody 

A318 -- -- -- -- -- 

A319 -- -- -- -- -- 

A320 -- -- -- -- -- 

A321 -- -- -- -- -- 

B-717-200 -- -- -- -- -- 

B-727-200 -- -- -- -- -- 

B-737-300 -- -- -- -- -- 

B-737-400 -- -- -- -- -- 

B-737-400C -- -- -- -- -- 

B-737-400F -- -- -- -- -- 

B-737-500 -- -- -- -- -- 

B-737-700 -- -- -- -- -- 

B-737-800 -- -- -- -- -- 

B-737-900 -- -- -- -- -- 

B-737-900ER -- -- -- -- -- 

DC-9 -- -- -- -- -- 

MD 80 -- -- -- -- -- 

MD 90 -- -- --- 

-- 0.0% -- 

B-757 

B-757-100/200 -- 75 35.4% 75 -- 

B-757-300 -- -- --- 

75 35.4% 75 

Widebody 

A300-600 -- 53 25.0% 53 -- 

A310-200/300 -- -- -- -- -- 

A330-200 -- -- -- -- -- 

A330-300 -- -- -- -- -- 

A340-300 -- -- -- -- -- 

A350-800 -- -- -- -- -- 

A350-900 -- -- -- -- -- 

B-747-100/200 -- -- -- -- -- 

B-747-400 -- 12 5.7% 10 -- 

B-767-200 -- -- -- -- -- 

B-767-300 -- 34 16.0% 59 25 

B-767-300ER -- -- -- -- -- 

B-767-400 -- -- -- -- -- 

B-777-200ER -- -- -- -- -- 

B-777-200LR -- -- -- -- -- 

B-777F -- -- -- -- -- 

B-787-8 -- -- -- -- -- 

B-787-9 -- -- -- -- -- 

DC-10F/MD-10F -- -- -- -- -- 

MD-11 -- 38 17. 9% 38 -- 

137 64.6% 160 


Bombardier 200 (Q200) -- 

Bombardier 400 (Q400) -- -- -- -- -- 

Canadair Regional Jet 100 -- -- -- -- -- 




Cessna 208 -- -- -- -- -- 

Embraer 120 -- -- -- -- -- 

Embraer Regional Jet 135 -- -- -- -- -- 






SAAB 340 -- -- -- -- -- 

ATR -- -- -- -- 

-- 0.0% 

TOTAL FLEET 212 100.0% 25 


regional aircraft) 212 235




n.a. = Not available 

(a) Includes the aircraft of regional affiliates operating under mainline airline capacity purchase lease agreements. 

Sources: Actual 2009: Individual airline filings with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, Form 10K, 2009. 

Projected 2014 and orders and options: ESG Aviation Airline Services, The Airline Monitor, October 2010.

Appendix B 

Terminal Area Configuration and 

Construction Activities

Aviation + 

Transportation 

SLC Terminal Redevelopment Program 

Phasing Studies – Construction Sequence 

Option 1-ET EA Phasing August 11, 2011 

March 25, 2009

PROJECT UPDATE 

SALT LAKE CITY INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT August 11, 2011





































Appendix C 

Environmental Data Resources, Inc., 

Database Search Report


Terminal DR 

Salt Lake City, UT 84116 

Inquiry Number: 02814573.1r 

July 12, 2010 

The 

EDR Radius Map 

Report 

with GeoCheck® 

440 Wheelers Farms Road 

Milford, CT 06461 

Toll Free: 800.352.0050 

www.edrnet.com 

FORM-NULL-MEN

TABLE OF CONTENTS 

SECTION 

PAGE 

Executive Summary 

ES1 

Overview Map 2 

Detail Map 3 

Map Findings Summary 4 

Map Findings 7 

Orphan Summary 310 

Government Records Searched/Data Currency Tracking 

GR-1 

GEOCHECK ADDENDUM 

Physical Setting Source Addendum A-1 

Physical Setting Source Summary A-2 

Physical Setting SSURGO Soil Map A-5 

Physical Setting Source Map A-12 

Physical Setting Source Map Findings A-14 

Physical Setting Source Records Searched A-88 

Thank you for your business. 

Please contact EDR at 1-800-352-0050 

with any questions or comments. 

Disclaimer - Copyright and Trademark Notice 

This Report contains certain information obtained from a variety of public and other sources reasonably available to Environmental Data 

Resources, Inc. It cannot be concluded from this Report that coverage information for the target and surrounding properties does not exist from 

other sources. NO WARRANTY EXPRESSED OR IMPLIED, IS MADE WHATSOEVER IN CONNECTION WITH THIS REPORT. ENVIRONMENTAL 

DATA RESOURCES, INC. SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIMS THE MAKING OF ANY SUCH WARRANTIES, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, 

MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR USE OR PURPOSE. ALL RISK IS ASSUMED BY THE USER. IN NO EVENT SHALL 

ENVIRONMENTAL DATA RESOURCES, INC. BE LIABLE TO ANYONE, WHETHER ARISING OUT OF ERRORS OR OMISSIONS, NEGLIGENCE, 

ACCIDENT OR ANY OTHER CAUSE, FOR ANY LOSS OF DAMAGE, INCLUDING, WITHOUT LIMITATION, SPECIAL, INCIDENTAL, 

CONSEQUENTIAL, OR EXEMPLARY DAMAGES. ANY LIABILITY ON THE PART OF ENVIRONMENTAL DATA RESOURCES, INC. IS STRICTLY 

LIMITED TO A REFUND OF THE AMOUNT PAID FOR THIS REPORT. Purchaser accepts this Report "AS IS". Any analyses, estimates, ratings, 

environmental risk levels or risk codes provided in this Report are provided for illustrative purposes only, and are not intended to provide, nor 

should they be interpreted as providing any facts regarding, or prediction or forecast of, any environmental risk for any property. Only a Phase I 

Environmental Site Assessment performed by an environmental professional can provide information regarding the environmental risk for any 

property. Additionally, the information provided in this Report is not to be construed as legal advice. 

Copyright 2010 by Environmental Data Resources, Inc. All rights reserved. Reproduction in any media or format, in whole 

or in part, of any report or map of Environmental Data Resources, Inc., or its affiliates, is prohibited without prior written permission. 

EDR and its logos (including Sanborn and Sanborn Map) are trademarks of Environmental Data Resources, Inc. or its affiliates. All other 

trademarks used herein are the property of their respective owners. 

TC02814573.1r Page 1


A search of available environmental records was conducted by Environmental Data Resources, Inc (EDR). 

The report was designed to assist parties seeking to meet the search requirements of EPA’s Standards 

and Practices for All Appropriate Inquiries (40 CFR Part 312), the ASTM Standard Practice for 

Environmental Site Assessments (E 1527-05) or custom requirements developed for the evaluation of 

environmental risk associated with a parcel of real estate. 

TARGET PROPERTY INFORMATION 

ADDRESS 

COORDINATES 

TERMINAL DR 

SALT LAKE CITY, UT 84116 

Latitude (North): 

40.786200 - 40˚ 47’ 10.3’’ 

Longitude (West): 

111.982100 - 111˚ 58’ 55.6’’ 

Universal Tranverse Mercator: Zone 12 

UTM X (Meters): 

417134.8 

UTM Y (Meters): 

4515276.0 

Elevation: 

4236 ft. above sea level 

USGS TOPOGRAPHIC MAP ASSOCIATED WITH TARGET PROPERTY 

Target Property Map: 

Most Recent Revision: 

West Map: 


40111-G8 SALT LAKE CITY NORTH, UT 

2001 

40112-G1 SALTAIR, UT 

2001 

TARGET PROPERTY SEARCH RESULTS 

The target property was not listed in any of the databases searched by EDR. 

DATABASES WITH NO MAPPED SITES 

No mapped sites were found in EDR’s search of available ("reasonably ascertainable ") government 

records either on the target property or within the search radius around the target property for the 

following databases: 

STANDARD ENVIRONMENTAL RECORDS 

Federal NPL site list 

NPL 

Proposed NPL 

NPL LIENS 

National Priority List 

Proposed National Priority List Sites 

Federal Superfund Liens 

Federal Delisted NPL site list 

Delisted NPL 

National Priority List Deletions 

TC02814573.1r EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1


Federal CERCLIS list 

FEDERAL FACILITY 

Federal Facility Site Information listing 

Federal RCRA non-CORRACTS TSD facilities list 

RCRA-TSDF 

RCRA - Treatment, Storage and Disposal 

Federal institutional controls / engineering controls registries 

US ENG CONTROLS Engineering Controls Sites List 

US INST CONTROL Sites with Institutional Controls 

State- and tribal - equivalent CERCLIS 

SHWS 

This state does not maintain a SHWS list. See the Federal CERCLIS list and Federal 

NPL list. 

State and tribal leaking storage tank lists 

INDIAN LUST 

Leaking Underground Storage Tanks on Indian Land 

State and tribal registered storage tank lists 

INDIAN UST 

Underground Storage Tanks on Indian Land 

FEMA UST 

Underground Storage Tank Listing 

State and tribal institutional control / engineering control registries 

INST CONTROL 

Sites with Institutional Controls 

State and tribal voluntary cleanup sites 

VCP 

Voluntary Cleanup Sites List 

INDIAN VCP 

Voluntary Cleanup Priority Listing 

State and tribal Brownfields sites 

BROWNFIELDS 

Brownfields Assessment Sites Listing 

ADDITIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL RECORDS 

Local Brownfield lists 

US BROWNFIELDS 

A Listing of Brownfields Sites 

Local Lists of Landfill / Solid Waste Disposal Sites 

ODI 

Open Dump Inventory 

DEBRIS REGION 9 Torres Martinez Reservation Illegal Dump Site Locations 

INDIAN ODI 

Report on the Status of Open Dumps on Indian Lands 

Local Lists of Hazardous waste / Contaminated Sites 

US CDL 

Clandestine Drug Labs 



CDL 

US HIST CDL 

Local Land Records 

LIENS 2 

LUCIS 

Methamphetamine Contaminated Properties Listing 

National Clandestine Laboratory Register 

CERCLA Lien Information 

Land Use Control Information System 

Other Ascertainable Records 

DOT OPS 

Incident and Accident Data 

DOD 

Department of Defense Sites 

FUDS 

Formerly Used Defense Sites 

CONSENT 

Superfund (CERCLA) Consent Decrees 

ROD 

Records Of Decision 

UMTRA 

Uranium Mill Tailings Sites 

MINES 

Mines Master Index File 

TSCA 

Toxic Substances Control Act 

RADINFO 

Radiation Information Database 

RAATS 

RCRA Administrative Action Tracking System 

DRYCLEANERS 

Registered Drycleaners 

INDIAN RESERV 

Indian Reservations 

SCRD DRYCLEANERS State Coalition for Remediation of Drycleaners Listing 

PCB TRANSFORMER PCB Transformer Registration Database 

COAL ASH EPA 

Coal Combustion Residues Surface Impoundments List 

COAL ASH DOE 

Sleam-Electric Plan Operation Data 

EDR PROPRIETARY RECORDS 

EDR Proprietary Records 

Manufactured Gas Plants 

EDR Proprietary Manufactured Gas Plants 

SURROUNDING SITES: SEARCH RESULTS 

Surrounding sites were identified in the following databases. 

Elevations have been determined from the USGS Digital Elevation Model and should be evaluated on 

a relative (not an absolute) basis. Relative elevation information between sites of close proximity 

should be field verified. Sites with an elevation equal to or higher than the target property have been 

differentiated below from sites with an elevation lower than the target property. 

Page numbers and map identification numbers refer to the EDR Radius Map report where detailed 

data on individual sites can be reviewed. 

Sites listed in bold italics are in multiple databases. 

Unmappable (orphan) sites are not considered in the foregoing analysis. 





CERCLIS: The Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Information System 

contains data on potentially hazardous waste sites that have been reported to the USEPA by states, 

municipalities, private companies and private persons, pursuant to Section 103 of the Comprehensive 

Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA). CERCLIS contains sites which are either 

proposed to or on the National Priorities List (NPL) and sites which are in the screening and assessment phase 

for possible inclusion on the NPL. 

A review of the CERCLIS list, as provided by EDR, and dated 01/29/2010 has revealed that there are 2 

CERCLIS sites within approximately 2 miles of the target property. 

____________________ Lower Elevation 

________ Address 

Direction ___________________ / Distance Map _____ ID Page _____ 

151ST REFUELING UNIT, UTAH AIR 151 ARG/EM BUILDING 162 E 1 - 2 (1.329 mi.) 120 68 

NORTHWEST OIL DRAIN ROSE PARK TO 1000 N E 1 - 2 (1.827 mi.) 311 282 

Federal CERCLIS NFRAP site List 

CERC-NFRAP: Archived sites are sites that have been removed and archived from the inventory of CERCLIS 

sites. Archived status indicates that, to the best of EPA’s knowledge, assessment at a site has been completed 

and that EPA has determined no further steps will be taken to list this site on the National Priorities List 

(NPL), unless information indicates this decision was not appropriate or other considerations require a 

recommendation for listing at a later time. This decision does not necessarily mean that there is no hazard 

associated with a given site; it only means that, based upon available information, the location is not judged 

to be a potential NPL site. 

A review of the CERC-NFRAP list, as provided by EDR, and dated 06/23/2009 has revealed that there are 

2 CERC-NFRAP sites within approximately 2 miles of the target property. 




UNISYS CORPORATION 322 NORTH SPERRY WAY (2 ESE 1 - 2 (1.626 mi.) AN247 215 

BECKS SPUR LAND FILL (2200 NO 1300 WEST 2200 NORTH ENE 1 - 2 (1.666 mi.) 257 220 

Federal RCRA CORRACTS facilities list 

CORRACTS: CORRACTS is a list of handlers with RCRA Corrective Action Activity. This report shows 

which nationally-defined corrective action core events have occurred for every handler that has had corrective 

action activity. 

A review of the CORRACTS list, as provided by EDR, and dated 03/25/2010 has revealed that there are 2 

CORRACTS sites within approximately 2 miles of the target property. 




UNISYS CORPORATION 640 NORTH 2200 WEST E 1 - 2 (1.513 mi.) AB195 150 

EASTON TECHNICAL PRODUCTS, INC 5040 W. HAROLD GATTY DR WSW 1 - 2 (1.567 mi.) AJ223 189 



Federal RCRA generators list 

RCRA-LQG: RCRAInfo is EPA’s comprehensive information system, providing access to data supporting 

the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) of 1976 and the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments (HSWA) 

of 1984. The database includes selective information on sites which generate, transport, store, treat and/or 

dispose of hazardous waste as defined by the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). Large quantity 

generators (LQGs) generate over 1,000 kilograms (kg) of hazardous waste, or over 1 kg of acutely hazardous 

waste per month. 

A review of the RCRA-LQG list, as provided by EDR, and dated 02/17/2010 has revealed that there are 6 

RCRA-LQG sites within approximately 2 miles of the target property. 




NPS OUTSIDE SALES 431 NORTH WRIGHT BROTHEWSW 1 - 2 (1.371 mi.) R133 80 

L-3 COMMUNICATIONS, CS-WEST 640 NORTH 2200 WEST E 1 - 2 (1.513 mi.) AB192 141 

THE BOEING COMPANY 1215 NORTH SPERRY WY ENE 1 - 2 (1.542 mi.) AF208 167 


L-3 COMMUNICATION 322 NORTH 2200 WEST ESE 1 - 2 (1.626 mi.) AN245 212 

NORTHROP GRUMMAN GUIDANCE AND 2211 WEST NORTH TEMPLE SE 1 - 2 (1.794 mi.) BA308 269 

RCRA-SQG: RCRAInfo is EPA’s comprehensive information system, providing access to data supporting 



dispose of hazardous waste as defined by the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). Small quantity 

generators (SQGs) generate between 100 kg and 1,000 kg of hazardous waste per month. 

A review of the RCRA-SQG list, as provided by EDR, and dated 02/17/2010 has revealed that there are 

14 RCRA-SQG sites within approximately 2 miles of the target property. 

____________________ Equal/Higher Elevation 



SALT LAKE CITY INTERNATIONAL A 776 NORTH TERMINAL DRIV SE 0 - 1/8 (0.053 mi.) A5 8 

DELTA AIR LINES 765 NORTH TERMINAL DRIV ESE 0 - 1/8 (0.069 mi.) C17 14 

CHEVRON SALT LAKE AIRPORT P/L SALT LAKE INT’L AIRPORT WSW 0 - 1/8 (0.081 mi.) B18 22 



Direction ___________________ / Distance _____ Map ID _____ Page 

HERTZ CORPORATION 3757 WEST TERMINAL R NNW 1/8 - 1/4 (0.129 mi.) 20 24 

CEPHALON SALT LAKE CITY OPER. 4710 WILEY POST WAY SW 1 - 2 (1.431 mi.) U140 91 

US FEDERAL AVIATION ADMIN FMP 645 NORTH 2265 WEST E 1 - 2 (1.433 mi.) V142 95 

US FAA SALT LAKE HUB SECTOR AF 645 NORTH 2275 WEST ESE 1 - 2 (1.433 mi.) W147 98 

SMITHS FOOD & DRUG FLEET DEPT. 535 NORTH 2300 WEST ESE 1 - 2 (1.435 mi.) W148 100 

CEPHALON (PREV. ANESTA CORP 4745 WILEY POST WAY SUI SW 1 - 2 (1.462 mi.) U155 104 

CHEVRON PIPE LINE UANG P/L DEL 765 N 2200 W E 1 - 2 (1.495 mi.) Y170 119 

HOYT USA 475 NORTH NEIL ARMSTRON WSW 1 - 2 (1.533 mi.) AC203 160 

TSA AT SALT LAKE CITY INTERNAT 2284 WEST 160 NORTH ESE 1 - 2 (1.694 mi.) AR271 230 

ACETO CORPORATION 5185 HAROLD GATTY DRIVE W 1 - 2 (1.742 mi.) AV292 248 

EDO CORPORATION FIBER SCIENCE 506 NORTH BILLY MITCHEL WSW 1 - 2 (1.743 mi.) AX294 251 



RCRA-CESQG: RCRAInfo is EPA’s comprehensive information system, providing access to data supporting 



dispose of hazardous waste as defined by the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). Conditionally 

exempt small quantity generators (CESQGs) generate less than 100 kg of hazardous waste, or less than 1 kg of 

acutely hazardous waste per month. 

A review of the RCRA-CESQG list, as provided by EDR, and dated 02/17/2010 has revealed that there are 

23 RCRA-CESQG sites within approximately 2 miles of the target property. 




MODERN DISPLAY SERVICES INC. 3370 WEST 500 SOUTH S 1 - 2 (1.932 mi.) 329 295 




UNITED PARCEL SERVICE 370 NORTH 3700 WEST SSE 1/2 - 1 (0.644 mi.) I43 37 

FEDERAL EXPRESS CORPORATION 220 NORTH 3700 WEST S 1/2 - 1 (0.762 mi.) K90 51 

GE MEDICAL SYSTEM - OEC 640 WRIGHT BROTHERS DR. W 1 - 2 (1.254 mi.) N114 62 

NORTHWEST PIPELINE AVIATION 649 NORTH 2360 WEST E 1 - 2 (1.313 mi.) 117 65 

GE OEC MEDICAL SYSTEMS INC. 4745 AMELIA EARHART DR. WSW 1 - 2 (1.352 mi.) Q128 74 

OEC MEDICAL SYSTEMS, INC. 384 WRIGHT BRO. DRIVE WSW 1 - 2 (1.367 mi.) R132 78 

HARLAND CLARKE HOLDING CORPORA 4867 HAROLD GATTY DRIVE WSW 1 - 2 (1.380 mi.) S135 86 

UTAH SCIENTIFIC 4750 WILEY POST WY SUIT SW 1 - 2 (1.467 mi.) U158 107 

WORLD HEART 4750 WEST WILEY POST WA SW 1 - 2 (1.467 mi.) U159 109 

WINTERSTEIGER 217 WRIGHT BROS. DR SW 1 - 2 (1.494 mi.) 168 115 

UTAH AIR NATIONAL GUARD BASE 765 NORTH 2200 WEST E 1 - 2 (1.495 mi.) Y171 120 

THE BOEING CO., TULSA DIVISION 810 NORTH 2200 WEST E 1 - 2 (1.504 mi.) AA183 131 

INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAMPUS 551 NORTH 2200 WEST E 1 - 2 (1.506 mi.) AB185 135 

UNITED PARCEL SERVICE 439 NORTH NEIL ARMSTRON WSW 1 - 2 (1.539 mi.) AE207 166 

UNISYS 480 NORTH 2200 WEST ESE 1 - 2 (1.547 mi.) AG212 177 

SET SURFACE ENGINEERING TECH 425 NEIL ARMSTRONG WSW 1 - 2 (1.548 mi.) AE213 179 

SOUTHWEST AIRLINES 171 NORTH 2400 WEST SE 1 - 2 (1.601 mi.) AK237 205 

INFLABLOC PHARMACEUTICALS 2150 WEST DAUNTLESS AVE ENE 1 - 2 (1.601 mi.) AL238 207 

CARDIOPULMONICS INC 5060 WEST AMELIA EARHAR WSW 1 - 2 (1.717 mi.) AU278 234 

TEXTILE CARE SERVICES 5120 WEST AMELIA EARHAR WSW 1 - 2 (1.765 mi.) 299 262 

TEXSCAN MSI 124 NORTH CHARLES LINDB WSW 1 - 2 (1.842 mi.) 314 285 

C-STORE INC. 2198 WEST NORTH TEMPLE ESE 1 - 2 (1.860 mi.) BC318 288 

Federal ERNS list 

ERNS: The Emergency Response Notification System records and stores information on reported 

releases of oil and hazardous substances. The source of this database is the U.S. EPA. 

A review of the ERNS list, as provided by EDR, and dated 12/31/2009 has revealed that there are 15 

ERNS sites within approximately 2 miles of the target property. 




776 NORTH TERMINAL DRIVE 776 NORTH TERMINAL DRIV SE 0 - 1/8 (0.053 mi.) A3 8 

776 NORTH TERMINAL DRIVE 776 NORTH TERMINAL DRIV SE 0 - 1/8 (0.053 mi.) A7 10 

765 NORTH TERMINAL DR 765 NORTH TERMINAL DR ESE 0 - 1/8 (0.069 mi.) C15 13 




SALT LAKE CITY INTERNATIONAL A SALT LAKE CITY INTERNAT SE 1/2 - 1 (0.517 mi.) H36 32 

220 N. 3700 WEST 220 N. 3700 WEST S 1/2 - 1 (0.762 mi.) K81 49 




Address ________ Direction ___________________ / Distance _____ Map ID _____ Page 

765 NORTH 2200 WEST 765 NORTH 2200 WEST E 1 - 2 (1.495 mi.) Y172 124 

765 NORTH 2200 WEST 765 NORTH 2200 WEST E 1 - 2 (1.495 mi.) Y175 126 

640 N 2200 W 640 N 2200 W E 1 - 2 (1.513 mi.) AB197 154 

470 N 2400 WEST 470 N 2400 WEST SE 1 - 2 (1.572 mi.) AK231 202 

322 NORTH 2200 WEST 322 NORTH 2200 WEST ESE 1 - 2 (1.626 mi.) AN246 215 

2333 WEST NORTH TEMPLE 2333 WEST NORTH TEMPLE SE 1 - 2 (1.656 mi.) AO253 219 

238 NORTH 2200 WEST 238 NORTH 2200 WEST ESE 1 - 2 (1.683 mi.) AQ262 223 

238 N 2200W 238 N 2200W ESE 1 - 2 (1.706 mi.) AS275 233 

594 N. BILLY MITCHELL RD 594 N. BILLY MITCHELL R W 1 - 2 (1.732 mi.) AV288 246 

5787 W. HARROLD GADDY DR 5787 W. HARROLD GADDY D W 1 - 2 (1.998 mi.) 347 309 

State and tribal landfill and/or solid waste disposal site lists 

SWF/LF: The Solid Waste Facilities/Landfill Sites records typically contain an inventory of solid 

waste disposal facilities or landfills in a particular state. The data come from the Department of 

Environmental Quality’s Landfill Inventory/Closed Solid Waste Land Disposal Sites. 

A review of the SWF/LF list, as provided by EDR, and dated 06/01/2009 has revealed that there is 1 

SWF/LF site within approximately 2 miles of the target property. 




WASTE MANAGEMENT SALT LAKE C/D 3550 WEST 500 SOUTH S 1 - 2 (1.941 mi.) BG334 300 


LUST: The Leaking Underground Storage Tank Incident Reports contain an inventory of reported 

leaking underground storage tank incidents. The data come from the Department of Environmental Quality’s 

Potential Leaking UST Sites. 

A review of the LUST list, as provided by EDR, and dated 04/22/2010 has revealed that there are 31 

LUST sites within approximately 2 miles of the target property. 




DOLLAR RENT A CAR 3861 TERMINAL DR ESE 0 - 1/8 (0.015 mi.) A1 7 

Date Closed: 4/28/1995 

NATIONAL CAR RENTAL 3801 W TERMINAL DR W 0 - 1/8 (0.037 mi.) B2 7 

HERTZ RENT A CAR RENTAL 3757 TERMINAL BLVD ESE 0 - 1/8 (0.110 mi.) C19 23 


MILLION AIR 303 N 2370 W ESE 1 - 2 (1.470 mi.) X162 112 


FORMER PRECISION AIR 20 SOUTH 2400 WEST SE 1 - 2 (1.786 mi.) AZ307 268 



BONNEVILLE ARTEMIA INTERNATION 2904 S 500 W SSE 1 - 2 (1.987 mi.) BJ344 306 





K & T INC DBA BUDGET RENT A CA 3833 NEW TERMINAL DR S 1/4 - 1/2 (0.437 mi.) G32 29 






UNITED AIRLINES AIR CARGO SALT LAKE INTERNATIONAL SE 1/2 - 1 (0.522 mi.) H37 32 



FAA-SALT LAKE VORTAC E/G 3 MILES N OF SLC INTL A SE 1/2 - 1 (0.522 mi.) H39 33 


S.L.C. AIRPORT TU-1 BOILER PLA TU-1 GENERATOR SE 1/2 - 1 (0.580 mi.) 40 34 


FAA-SLC RVR E/G 34R MIDFIELD 34-16 SLC AIRP E 1/2 - 1 (0.657 mi.) 44 39 


FAA-SLC GS E/G RUNWAY 34 SALT LAKE CIT SE 1/2 - 1 (0.677 mi.) 46 40 


FEDERAL EXPRESS CORPORATION 220 N 3700 W S 1/2 - 1 (0.762 mi.) K89 50 



FAA-SALT LAKE CITY LOC E/G RUNWAY 16 SLC AIRPORT ESE 1/2 - 1 (0.805 mi.) 100 54 


AVIS RENT-A-CAR 3781 TERMINAL DR , SLC S 1/2 - 1 (0.860 mi.) 102 55 


SALT LAKE JET CENTER FUEL FARM APPROX 2280 W 470 N ESE 1 - 2 (1.417 mi.) T137 89 


NEWVECTOR COMMUNICATIONS INC 4745 WILEY POST WAY STE SW 1 - 2 (1.462 mi.) U156 106 


OLD INTERMOUNTAIN PIPER APPROX 400 N 2370 W ESE 1 - 2 (1.481 mi.) 167 114 



FAA - AIR TRAFFIC CONTROL CENT 2150 W 700 N E 1 - 2 (1.557 mi.) AH216 181 






COMPANY HANGAR AIRCRAFT OPERAT 171 N 2400 W SE 1 - 2 (1.601 mi.) AK235 204 


UDOT AIR HANGAR 105 NORTH 2400 WEST SE 1 - 2 (1.608 mi.) AM242 210 



ADVANTAGE RENT-A-CAR 2375 W NORTH TEMPLE SE 1 - 2 (1.629 mi.) AM249 216 


CONTINENTAL AIRLINES 2445 W JETWAY AVE SE 1 - 2 (1.665 mi.) AP256 219 


ALAMO RENT A CAR 37 N 2400 W SE 1 - 2 (1.713 mi.) AT277 234 



RADISSON AIRPORT INN 2177 W NORTH TEMPLE ESE 1 - 2 (1.829 mi.) BA312 285 


C STORE 2198 W NORTH TEMPLE ESE 1 - 2 (1.860 mi.) BC319 290 







SKAGG’S ALPHA BETA, INC. 5201 AMELIA EARHART DR WSW 1 - 2 (1.875 mi.) BD322 291 


PARK-N-JET 2085 W NORTH TEMPLE ESE 1 - 2 (1.945 mi.) BF336 302 


PST TERMINAL 1875 N 900 W E 1 - 2 (1.966 mi.) BI340 304 


LAST: The Leaking Aboveground Storage Tanks database 

A review of the LAST list, as provided by EDR, and dated 01/01/2010 has revealed that there are 2 

LAST sites within approximately 2 miles of the target property. 




SLC AIRPORT FUEL SYSTEM 3930 W 1070 N NNW 1/4 - 1/2 (0.479 mi.) 34 30 

Date Closed: 1995-08-31 00:00:00 

SERVISAIR TANK FARM APPROX 2280 W 470 N ESE 1 - 2 (1.564 mi.) AI219 184 

Date Closed: 2004-03-31 00:00:00 


UST: The Underground Storage Tank database contains a listing of Facility, Owner, Location & 

Tanks not Closed or Removed. USTs are regulated under Subtitle I of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act 

(RCRA). The data come from the Department of Environmental Quality’s Facilities with at Least One Non-exempt 

Tank. 

A review of the UST list, as provided by EDR, and dated 04/22/2010 has revealed that there are 58 UST 

sites within approximately 2 miles of the target property. 




DOLLAR RENT A CAR 3861 TERMINAL DR ESE 0 - 1/8 (0.015 mi.) A1 7 

NATIONAL CAR RENTAL 3801 W TERMINAL DR W 0 - 1/8 (0.037 mi.) B2 7 

HERTZ RENT A CAR RENTAL 3757 TERMINAL BLVD ESE 0 - 1/8 (0.110 mi.) C19 23 

MILLION AIR 303 N 2370 W ESE 1 - 2 (1.470 mi.) X162 112 

THRIFTY CAR RENTAL 15 S 2400 W SE 1 - 2 (1.786 mi.) AZ306 268 

FORMER PRECISION AIR 20 SOUTH 2400 WEST SE 1 - 2 (1.786 mi.) AZ307 268 

BONNEVILLE ARTEMIA INTERNATION 2904 S 500 W SSE 1 - 2 (1.987 mi.) BJ344 306 




ALAMO RENT A CAR 706 N 3800 W S 1/8 - 1/4 (0.175 mi.) D21 26 

HERTZ RENT A CAR 681 N 3800 W S 1/8 - 1/4 (0.201 mi.) D23 26 

AVIS UTAH, INC. 656 N 3800 W S 1/8 - 1/4 (0.230 mi.) E25 27 

BUDGET RENT A CAR 641 N 3800 W S 1/8 - 1/4 (0.250 mi.) E27 28 

S.L.C. INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT LOWER B CONCOURSE SE 1/4 - 1/2 (0.269 mi.) 28 28 

NATIONAL CAR RENTAL 606 N 3800 W S 1/4 - 1/2 (0.292 mi.) F29 28 

DOLLAR RENT A CAR 601 N 3800 W S 1/4 - 1/2 (0.299 mi.) F30 28 

S.L.C. INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT BUS PLAZA TU-1 SSW 1/4 - 1/2 (0.300 mi.) 31 29 

K & T INC DBA BUDGET RENT A CA 3833 NEW TERMINAL DR S 1/4 - 1/2 (0.437 mi.) G32 29 






EAST AIRFIELD VAULT RUNWAY 14/32 SOUTH PERI SE 1/2 - 1 (0.517 mi.) H35 32 


S.L.C.INTL. AIRPORT (WESTERN)/ AMF BOX 2200 SE 1/2 - 1 (0.522 mi.) H38 33 

FAA-SALT LAKE VORTAC E/G 3 MILES N OF SLC INTL A SE 1/2 - 1 (0.522 mi.) H39 33 

S.L.C. AIRPORT TU-1 BOILER PLA TU-1 GENERATOR SE 1/2 - 1 (0.580 mi.) 40 34 

EAST-WEST ELECTRICAL DISTRIBUT 1231 N 3875 W SE 1/2 - 1 (0.624 mi.) 42 36 

FAA-SLC RVR E/G 34R MIDFIELD 34-16 SLC AIRP E 1/2 - 1 (0.657 mi.) 44 39 

FAA-SALT LAKE CITY RTR-B E/G SALT LAKE CITY AIRPORT, SE 1/2 - 1 (0.667 mi.) 45 39 


FAA-SALT LAKE CITY MM E/G SOUTH RUNWAY 34 SALT LA SE 1/2 - 1 (0.717 mi.) 50 43 

FAA-SALT LAKE CITY ATBM SLC AIRPORT SE 1/2 - 1 (0.739 mi.) 51 44 

FAA-SALT LAKE CITY ASR-8 SALT LAKE CITY AIRPORT SE 1/2 - 1 (0.757 mi.) 52 44 

FEDERAL EXPRESS CORPORATION 220 N 3700 W S 1/2 - 1 (0.762 mi.) K89 50 

FAA-SALT LAKE CITY ALS -34 SOUTH RUNWAY 34 SALT LA SE 1/2 - 1 (0.765 mi.) 99 54 


S.L.C. INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT OLD FAA GENERATOR SE 1/2 - 1 (0.814 mi.) 101 55 

AVIS RENT-A-CAR 3781 TERMINAL DR , SLC S 1/2 - 1 (0.860 mi.) 102 55 

FORMER ARMY RESERVE HANGAR 581 N 2360 W ESE 1 - 2 (1.329 mi.) O119 67 


FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATIO 645 N 2265 W E 1 - 2 (1.433 mi.) V143 97 

FAA-SALT LAKE CITY ASR 8 & ASR 337 N 2370 W ESE 1 - 2 (1.460 mi.) X151 102 

NAT’L WEATHER SERV. FORECAST 337 N 2370 W ESE 1 - 2 (1.460 mi.) X154 103 


OLD INTERMOUNTAIN PIPER APPROX 400 N 2370 W ESE 1 - 2 (1.481 mi.) 167 114 


COUNTRY PRIDE FOODS 501 N 2200 W E 1 - 2 (1.506 mi.) AB187 137 

FAA - AIR TRAFFIC CONTROL CENT 2150 W 700 N E 1 - 2 (1.557 mi.) AH216 181 


COMPANY HANGAR AIRCRAFT OPERAT 171 N 2400 W SE 1 - 2 (1.601 mi.) AK235 204 

UDOT AIR HANGAR 105 NORTH 2400 WEST SE 1 - 2 (1.608 mi.) AM242 210 



CONTINENTAL AIRLINES 2445 W JETWAY AVE SE 1 - 2 (1.665 mi.) AP256 219 

KEYSTONE AVIATION HANGAR 5 2284 W 160 N ESE 1 - 2 (1.694 mi.) AR272 232 


TRANS WEST AIR SERVICE INC. 2282 W NORTH TEMPLE SE 1 - 2 (1.742 mi.) AW290 248 

WELLS FARGO CENTRAL OP. BLDG 260 NORTH CHARLES LINDB WSW 1 - 2 (1.750 mi.) 296 258 

C STORE 2198 W NORTH TEMPLE ESE 1 - 2 (1.860 mi.) BC319 290 

SKAGG’S ALPHA BETA, INC. 5201 AMELIA EARHART DR WSW 1 - 2 (1.875 mi.) BD322 291 

PARK-N-JET 2085 W NORTH TEMPLE ESE 1 - 2 (1.945 mi.) BF336 302 


AST: The Aboveground Storage Tank database contains registered ASTs. The data come from the 

Department of Environmental Quality’s Facilities with at Least One Non-exempt Tank. 

A review of the AST list, as provided by EDR, and dated 01/01/2010 has revealed that there are 12 AST 

sites within approximately 2 miles of the target property. 





FAA-SALT LAKE CITY RTR-B E/G SALT LAKE CITY AIRPORT, SE 1/2 - 1 (0.667 mi.) 45 39 


FAA-SALT LAKE CITY MM E/G SOUTH RUNWAY 34 SALT LA SE 1/2 - 1 (0.717 mi.) 50 43 







MILLION AIR TANK FARM APPROX 2280 W 470 N ESE 1 - 2 (1.432 mi.) T141 94 

FAA-SALT LAKE CITY ASR 8 & ASR 337 N 2370 W ESE 1 - 2 (1.460 mi.) X151 102 

NEWVECTOR COMMUNICATIONS INCOR 4745 WILEY POST WAY STE SW 1 - 2 (1.462 mi.) U157 107 

SERVISAIR TANK FARM APPROX 2280 W 470 N ESE 1 - 2 (1.564 mi.) AI220 184 


ENTERPRISE RENT A CAR 72 NORTH 2400 WEST SE 1 - 2 (1.668 mi.) AP258 221 


Records of Emergency Release Reports 

HMIRS: The Hazardous Materials Incident Report System contains hazardous material spill incidents 

reported to the Department of Transportation. The source of this database is the U.S. EPA. 

A review of the HMIRS list, as provided by EDR, and dated 04/06/2010 has revealed that there are 60 

HMIRS sites within approximately 2 miles of the target property. 




Not reported 776 NORTH TERMINAL DRIV SE 0 - 1/8 (0.053 mi.) A4 8 

Not reported 776 N TERMINAL DR SE 0 - 1/8 (0.053 mi.) A6 10 

Not reported 776 N. TERMINAL DR (AIR SE 0 - 1/8 (0.053 mi.) A8 10 

3815 W 1580 NO 3815 W 1580 NO N 1 - 2 (1.223 mi.) M107 57 

3815 W 1580 NO 3815 W 1580 NO N 1 - 2 (1.223 mi.) M108 57 

3815 WEST 1580 NORTH 3815 WEST 1580 NORTH N 1 - 2 (1.224 mi.) M109 57 

Not reported 3815 W. 1580 N. N 1 - 2 (1.224 mi.) M110 57 

3975 WEST 1580 NORTH 3975 WEST 1580 NORTH N 1 - 2 (1.243 mi.) 111 57 

Not reported 3700 WEST 2200 NORTH N 1 - 2 (1.850 mi.) 316 287 




220 N 3700 W 220 N 3700 W S 1/2 - 1 (0.762 mi.) K53 44 

Not reported 220 N 3700 W S 1/2 - 1 (0.762 mi.) K54 44 


220 N 3700 W 220 N 3700 W S 1/2 - 1 (0.762 mi.) K56 45 

220 N 3700 W 220 N 3700 W S 1/2 - 1 (0.762 mi.) K57 45 

Not reported 220 NORTH 3700 WEST S 1/2 - 1 (0.762 mi.) K58 45 


220 N 3700 W 220 N 3700 W S 1/2 - 1 (0.762 mi.) K60 45 




220 N 3700 W 220 N 3700 W S 1/2 - 1 (0.762 mi.) K64 46 

220 N 3700 W 220 N 3700 W S 1/2 - 1 (0.762 mi.) K65 46 

Not reported 220 N 3700 WEST S 1/2 - 1 (0.762 mi.) K66 46 


220 N 3700 W 220 N 3700 W S 1/2 - 1 (0.762 mi.) K68 47 

220 N 3700 W 220 N 3700 W S 1/2 - 1 (0.762 mi.) K69 47 

220 N 3700 W 220 N 3700 W S 1/2 - 1 (0.762 mi.) K70 47 

220 N 3700 W 220 N 3700 W S 1/2 - 1 (0.762 mi.) K71 47 

220 N 3700 W 220 N 3700 W S 1/2 - 1 (0.762 mi.) K72 47 








220 N 3700 W 220 N 3700 W S 1/2 - 1 (0.762 mi.) K76 48 

220 N 3700 W 220 N 3700 W S 1/2 - 1 (0.762 mi.) K77 48 

220 N 3700 W 220 N 3700 W S 1/2 - 1 (0.762 mi.) K78 48 

220 N 3700 W 220 N 3700 W S 1/2 - 1 (0.762 mi.) K79 49 

220 N 3700 W 220 N 3700 W S 1/2 - 1 (0.762 mi.) K80 49 

220 N 3700 W 220 N 3700 W S 1/2 - 1 (0.762 mi.) K82 49 

220 N 3700 W 220 N 3700 W S 1/2 - 1 (0.762 mi.) K83 49 

220 N 3700 W 220 N 3700 W S 1/2 - 1 (0.762 mi.) K84 49 


220 N 3700 W 220 N 3700 W S 1/2 - 1 (0.762 mi.) K86 50 

220 N 3700 W 220 N 3700 W S 1/2 - 1 (0.762 mi.) K87 50 










Not reported 220 NORTH 3700 WEST SSE 1/2 - 1 (0.936 mi.) L104 56 



Not reported 470 NO 2400 W SE 1 - 2 (1.572 mi.) AK226 200 

Not reported 72 NORTH 2400 WEST SE 1 - 2 (1.668 mi.) AP259 221 

Not reported 220 NORTH 2200 WEST ESE 1 - 2 (1.695 mi.) AQ273 233 

Not reported 5066 AMELIA EARHART DRI WSW 1 - 2 (1.722 mi.) AU279 237 

Not reported 5066 AMELIA EARHART DRI WSW 1 - 2 (1.722 mi.) AU280 237 

SPILLS: Incidents reported to the Division of Environmental Response and Remediation . 

A review of the SPILLS list, as provided by EDR, and dated 03/31/2010 has revealed that there are 32 

SPILLS sites within approximately 2 miles of the target property. 




Not reported 776 N. TERMINAL DRIVE- SE 0 - 1/8 (0.053 mi.) A10 11 

Not reported 776 N TERMINAL DRIVE SE 0 - 1/8 (0.053 mi.) A11 11 


Not reported 776 N. TERMINAL DR. SE 0 - 1/8 (0.053 mi.) A13 12 


Not reported 765 NORTH TERMINAL DRIV ESE 0 - 1/8 (0.069 mi.) C16 13 

Not reported 303 NORTH 2370 WEST ESE 1 - 2 (1.470 mi.) X164 113 

Not reported 3000 SOUTH 500 WEST SSE 1 - 2 (1.970 mi.) 341 304 

DATS TRUCKING INC, 3330 WEST 500 SOUTH SSE 1 - 2 (1.996 mi.) BJ346 307 





Not reported 320 NORTH 3700 WEST SSE 1/2 - 1 (0.684 mi.) I47 40 

Not reported 220 NORTH 3700 WEST - S SSE 1/2 - 1 (0.936 mi.) L103 56 

Not reported 384 WRIGHT BROTHERS DRI WSW 1 - 2 (1.366 mi.) R130 77 

Not reported 4867 HAROLD GATTY DRIVE WSW 1 - 2 (1.380 mi.) S134 85 





Not reported 337 NORTH 2370 WEST ESE 1 - 2 (1.460 mi.) X150 102 


UTAH AIR NATIONAL GUARD 765 NORTH 2200 WEST E 1 - 2 (1.495 mi.) Y169 117 

Not reported 765 N. 2200 W. BUILDING E 1 - 2 (1.497 mi.) Y176 126 

Not reported I-80 / BANGERTER HIGHWA S 1 - 2 (1.507 mi.) 188 137 

Not reported 640 N 2200 W E 1 - 2 (1.513 mi.) AB194 150 

Not reported 470 NORTH 2400 WEST SE 1 - 2 (1.572 mi.) AK228 201 

Not reported 235 N. 2400 W. SE 1 - 2 (1.594 mi.) AK234 203 

Not reported 322 N. 2200 WEST ESE 1 - 2 (1.626 mi.) AN244 211 

Not reported 2333 WEST NORTH TEMPLE SE 1 - 2 (1.656 mi.) AO251 217 

Not reported 2445 WEST JETWAY AVENUE SE 1 - 2 (1.665 mi.) AP254 219 

Not reported 238 NORTH 2200 WEST ESE 1 - 2 (1.683 mi.) AQ261 222 

Not reported 176 NORTH 2200 WEST ESE 1 - 2 (1.724 mi.) AS281 237 

Not reported 594 N. BILLY MITCHELL R W 1 - 2 (1.732 mi.) AV284 243 

Not reported 2242 WEST NORTH TEMPLE SE 1 - 2 (1.772 mi.) AW301 264 

Not reported 2110 WEST NORTH TEMPLE ESE 1 - 2 (1.908 mi.) BF328 294 

Not reported 1886 WEST 900 NORTH E 1 - 2 (1.964 mi.) BI337 303 

Not reported 288 NORTH 1950 WEST ESE 1 - 2 (1.965 mi.) 338 303 


RCRA-NonGen: RCRAInfo is EPA’s comprehensive information system, providing access to data supporting 



dispose of hazardous waste as defined by the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). Non-Generators do 

not presently generate hazardous waste. 

A review of the RCRA-NonGen list, as provided by EDR, and dated 02/17/2010 has revealed that there 

are 16 RCRA-NonGen sites within approximately 2 miles of the target property. 




SKYWEST AIRLINE SALT LAKE CITY 1129 NORTH 3950 WEST NNW 1/2 - 1 (0.601 mi.) 41 35 

GREAT WESTERN PUBLISHING-SLC 640 NORTH WRIGHT BROTHEW 1 - 2 (1.254 mi.) N112 57 

PANEL PRINTS INC. 410 NORTH WRIGHT BROS D WSW 1 - 2 (1.341 mi.) P122 69 

DELUXE CHECK PRINTERS INC 4745 AMELIA EARHART, SU WSW 1 - 2 (1.352 mi.) Q124 71 

BECTON-DICKINSON CO INC. 810 N 2200 W E 1 - 2 (1.504 mi.) AA184 133 

UNISYS CORPORATION 640 NORTH 2200 WEST E 1 - 2 (1.513 mi.) AB195 150 

WESTERN SPRAY PAINTING 563 NORTH NEIL ARMSTRON WSW 1 - 2 (1.518 mi.) AC198 154 

BEEHIVE INTERNATIONAL# 4910 AMELIA EARHART DR WSW 1 - 2 (1.525 mi.) AD200 158 

BARKEN INTRNL SALT LAKE CITY INTL AIR NE 1 - 2 (1.536 mi.) 204 163 

US FED AVIATION ADMIN SLC ARTC 2150 WEST 700 NORTH E 1 - 2 (1.557 mi.) AH218 182 

MAJESTIC AIRLINES 180 NORTH 2400 WEST SE 1 - 2 (1.601 mi.) AK241 209 

THE BOEING CO., TULSA DIVISION 236 NORTH 2200 WEST ESE 1 - 2 (1.685 mi.) AQ265 226 

VIKTRON LIKA UTAH 594 NORTH BILLY MITCHEL W 1 - 2 (1.732 mi.) AV283 238 

BROKEN ARROW ENVIRONMENTAL INC 8960 N HWY 40 WSW 1 - 2 (1.757 mi.) 298 258 

SKAGGS ALPHA BETA 369 BILLY MITCHELL WY WSW 1 - 2 (1.784 mi.) AY304 266 

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT LLC 683 NORTH MORTEN DRIVE E 1 - 2 (1.939 mi.) BH333 299 



TRIS: The Toxic Chemical Release Inventory System identifies facilities that release toxic 

chemicals to the air, water, and land in reportable quantities under SARA Title III, Section 313. The source 

of this database is the U.S. EPA. 

A review of the TRIS list, as provided by EDR, and dated 12/31/2008 has revealed that there are 3 

TRIS sites within approximately 2 miles of the target property. 




U.S. DOD USAF UTAH ANG BASE RA 765 N 2200 W E 1 - 2 (1.495 mi.) Y174 125 

L-3 COMMUNICATIONS CSW 640 N 2200 W E 1 - 2 (1.513 mi.) AB191 141 


FTTS: FTTS tracks administrative cases and pesticide enforcement actions and compliance 

activities related to FIFRA, TSCA and EPCRA (Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act) over the 

previous five years. To maintain currency, EDR contacts the Agency on a quarterly basis. 

A review of the FTTS list, as provided by EDR, and dated 04/09/2009 has revealed that there are 2 

FTTS sites within approximately 2 miles of the target property. 




MCDONNELL DOUGLAS CORP, DOUGLA 1215 NORTH 2200 WEST ENE 1 - 2 (1.542 mi.) AF210 176 

BINGHAM ENVIRONMENTAL, INC. 5160 WILEY POST ROAD WSW 1 - 2 (1.908 mi.) BE326 293 

HIST FTTS: A complete administrative case listing from the FIFRA/TSCA Tracking System (FTTS) for all 

ten EPA regions. The information was obtained from the National Compliance Database (NCDB). NCDB supports 

the implementation of FIFRA (Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act) and TSCA (Toxic Substances 

Control Act). Some EPA regions are now closing out records. Because of that, and the fact that some EPA 

regions are not providing EPA Headquarters with updated records, it was decided to create a HIST FTTS 

database. It included records that may not be included in the newer FTTS database updates. This database is 

no longer updated. 

A review of the HIST FTTS list, as provided by EDR, and dated 10/19/2006 has revealed that there are 

2 HIST FTTS sites within approximately 2 miles of the target property. 




MCDONNELL DOUGLAS CORP, DOUGLA 1215 NORTH 2200 WEST ENE 1 - 2 (1.542 mi.) AF210 176 

BINGHAM ENVIRONMENTAL, INC. 5160 WILEY POST ROAD WSW 1 - 2 (1.908 mi.) BE326 293 

SSTS: Section 7 of the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act, as amended (92 Stat. 

829) requires all registered pesticide-producing establishments to submit a report to the Environmental 

Protection Agency by March 1st each year. Each establishment must report the types and amounts of pesticides, 

active ingredients and devices being produced, and those having been produced and sold or distributed in the 

past year. 

A review of the SSTS list, as provided by EDR, and dated 12/31/2008 has revealed that there is 1 SSTS 

site within approximately 2 miles of the target property. 




US MAGNESIUM, LLC 238 NO. 2200 W ESE 1 - 2 (1.683 mi.) AQ264 223 



ICIS: The Integrated Compliance Information System (ICIS) supports the information needs of the 

national enforcement and compliance program as well as the unique needs of the National Pollutant Discharge 

Elimination System (NPDES) program. 

A review of the ICIS list, as provided by EDR, and dated 04/24/2010 has revealed that there are 3 

ICIS sites within approximately 2 miles of the target property. 




METAL MANAGEMENT WEST, INC. 3260 WEST 500 SOUTH S 1 - 2 (1.937 mi.) BG331 297 




TUBING MANUFACTURING FACILITY 5040 HAROLD GATTY DRIVE WSW 1 - 2 (1.567 mi.) AJ221 185 


PADS: The PCB Activity Database identifies generators, transporters, commercial storers and/or 

brokers and disposers of PCBs who are required to notify the United States Environmental Protection Agency of 

such activities. The source of this database is the U.S. EPA. 

A review of the PADS list, as provided by EDR, and dated 09/01/2009 has revealed that there are 2 

PADS sites within approximately 2 miles of the target property. 




SALT LAKE (HUB) AIRWAY FAC SEC 2298 WEST 650 NORTH E 1 - 2 (1.351 mi.) 123 71 

BROKEN ARROW ENVIRONMENTAL INC 8960 N HWY 40 WSW 1 - 2 (1.757 mi.) 298 258 

MLTS: The Material Licensing Tracking System is maintained by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission 

and contains a list fo approximately 8,100 sites which possess or use radioactive materials and are subject to 

NRC licensing requirements. 

A review of the MLTS list, as provided by EDR, and dated 03/18/2010 has revealed that there are 3 

MLTS sites within approximately 2 miles of the target property. 




BECTON DICKINSON IMMUNODIAGNOS 810 N. 2200 WEST E 1 - 2 (1.504 mi.) AA180 129 

BINGHAM ENVIRONMENTAL INC. 5160 WILEY POST WAY WSW 1 - 2 (1.908 mi.) BE324 292 

BINGHAM ENVIRONMENTAL, INCORPO 5160 WILEY POST WAY WSW 1 - 2 (1.908 mi.) BE327 294 

FINDS: The Facility Index System contains both facility information and "pointers" to other 

sources of information that contain more detail. These include: RCRIS; Permit Compliance System (PCS); 

Aerometric Information Retrieval System (AIRS); FATES (FIFRA [Federal Insecticide Fungicide Rodenticide Act] 

and TSCA Enforcement System, FTTS [FIFRA/TSCA Tracking System]; CERCLIS; DOCKET (Enforcement Docket used to 

manage and track information on civil judicial enforcement cases for all environmental statutes); Federal 

Underground Injection Control (FURS); Federal Reporting Data System (FRDS); Surface Impoundments (SIA); TSCA 

Chemicals in Commerce Information System (CICS); PADS; RCRA-J (medical waste transporters/disposers); TRIS; 

and TSCA. The source of this database is the U.S. EPA/NTIS. 

A review of the FINDS list, as provided by EDR, and dated 04/14/2010 has revealed that there are 124 

FINDS sites within approximately 2 miles of the target property. 




SALT LAKE CITY INTERNATIONAL A 776 NORTH TERMINAL DRIV SE 0 - 1/8 (0.053 mi.) A5 8 





FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATIO 776 NORTH TERMINAL DRIV SE 0 - 1/8 (0.053 mi.) A9 10 

DELTA AIR LINES 765 NORTH TERMINAL DRIV ESE 0 - 1/8 (0.069 mi.) C17 14 

CHEVRON SALT LAKE AIRPORT P/L SALT LAKE INT’L AIRPORT WSW 0 - 1/8 (0.081 mi.) B18 22 

AMES CONSTRUCTION 303 NORTH 2370 WEST ESE 1 - 2 (1.470 mi.) X163 113 

KEYSTONE AVIATION 303 N 2370 W ESE 1 - 2 (1.470 mi.) X165 114 

KEYSTONE AVIATION 303 NORTH 2370 WEST ESE 1 - 2 (1.470 mi.) X166 114 

THRIFTY CAR RENTAL 15 S 2400 W SE 1 - 2 (1.786 mi.) AZ305 268 

20TH CENTURY LITES 1560 W 2200 N NE 1 - 2 (1.875 mi.) BB320 291 

MODERN DISPLAY SERVICES INC. 3370 WEST 500 SOUTH S 1 - 2 (1.932 mi.) 329 295 

METAL MANAGEMENT WEST, INC. 3260 WEST 500 SOUTH S 1 - 2 (1.936 mi.) BG330 296 





HERTZ CORPORATION 3757 WEST TERMINAL R NNW 1/8 - 1/4 (0.129 mi.) 20 24 

ALAMO RENT A CAR 706 N 3800 W S 1/8 - 1/4 (0.175 mi.) D22 26 

AVIS UTAH INCORPORATED 656 N 3800 W S 1/8 - 1/4 (0.229 mi.) E24 27 

BUDGET RENT A CAR 641 N 3800 W S 1/8 - 1/4 (0.249 mi.) E26 27 

K & T INCORPORATED DBA BUDGET 3833 NEW TERMINAL DR S 1/4 - 1/2 (0.437 mi.) G33 30 

UNITED PARCEL SERVICE 370 NORTH 3700 WEST SSE 1/2 - 1 (0.644 mi.) I43 37 

MARKETING RESERVATION TRAINING 3842 WEST 1200 NORTH N 1/2 - 1 (0.706 mi.) J48 41 

FEDERAL EXPRESS CORPORATION 220 NORTH 3700 WEST S 1/2 - 1 (0.762 mi.) K90 51 

GREAT WESTERN PUBLISHING-SLC 640 NORTH WRIGHT BROTHEW 1 - 2 (1.254 mi.) N112 57 

PUBLISHING FACILITY 640 N WRIGHT BROTHERS D W 1 - 2 (1.254 mi.) N113 62 

GE MEDICAL SYSTEM - OEC 640 WRIGHT BROTHERS DR. W 1 - 2 (1.254 mi.) N114 62 

PRINTING PRESS AND THERMAL OXI 590 WRIGHT BROTHERS DR W 1 - 2 (1.255 mi.) N115 64 

NORTHWEST PIPELINE AVIATION 649 NORTH 2360 WEST E 1 - 2 (1.313 mi.) 117 65 

FORMER ARMY RESERVE HANGER 581 N 2360 W ESE 1 - 2 (1.329 mi.) O118 67 

151ST REFUELING UNIT, UTAH AIR 151 ARG/EM BUILDING 162 E 1 - 2 (1.329 mi.) 120 68 

PANEL PRESS INC 410 N WRIGHT BROTHERS D WSW 1 - 2 (1.340 mi.) P121 69 

PANEL PRINTS INC. 410 NORTH WRIGHT BROS D WSW 1 - 2 (1.341 mi.) P122 69 

FOODSERVICE SPECIALTY BAKERS 4745 AMELIA EARHART DRI WSW 1 - 2 (1.352 mi.) Q125 73 

DELUXE CHECK PRINTERS INC 4745 AMELIA EARHART, SU WSW 1 - 2 (1.352 mi.) Q126 73 

GE OEC MEDICAL SYSTEMS 4745 AMELIA EARHART DRI WSW 1 - 2 (1.352 mi.) Q127 74 

GE OEC MEDICAL SYSTEMS 384 WRIGHT BROTHERS DRI WSW 1 - 2 (1.366 mi.) R129 77 

OEC MEDICAL SYSTEMS, INC 384 WRIGHT BROTHER DR WSW 1 - 2 (1.366 mi.) R131 77 

NPS OUTSIDE SALES 431 NORTH WRIGHT BROTHEWSW 1 - 2 (1.371 mi.) R133 80 

JOHN H HARLAND CO 4867 HAROLD GATTY DRIVE WSW 1 - 2 (1.380 mi.) S136 88 

LEHI INDEPENDENT POWER ASSOCIA UNK ESE 1 - 2 (1.423 mi.) T138 90 

CEPHALON SALT LAKE CITY OPER. 4710 WILEY POST WAY SW 1 - 2 (1.431 mi.) U139 90 

US FEDERAL AVIATION ADMIN FMP 645 NORTH 2265 WEST E 1 - 2 (1.433 mi.) V142 95 

FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATIO 645 N 2265 W E 1 - 2 (1.433 mi.) V144 97 

SALT LAKE JET CENTER 369 N 2370 W ESE 1 - 2 (1.433 mi.) T145 97 

BARKEN INTERNATIONAL 369 N 2370 W ESE 1 - 2 (1.433 mi.) T146 98 

US FAA SALT LAKE HUB SECTOR AF 645 NORTH 2275 WEST ESE 1 - 2 (1.433 mi.) W147 98 

SMITHS FOOD & DRUG FLEET DEPT. 535 NORTH 2300 WEST ESE 1 - 2 (1.435 mi.) W148 100 

INT’L AIRPORT EASTSIDE 350 N 2300 W ESE 1 - 2 (1.449 mi.) W149 101 

NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE FORCA 337 N 2370 W ESE 1 - 2 (1.460 mi.) X152 103 

FAA SALT LAKE CITY ASR & ASR 9 337 N 2370 W ESE 1 - 2 (1.460 mi.) X153 103 

CEPHALON (PREV. ANESTA CORP 4745 WILEY POST WAY SUI SW 1 - 2 (1.462 mi.) U155 104 

NEWVECTOR COMMUNICATIONS INCOR 4745 WILEY POST WAY STE SW 1 - 2 (1.462 mi.) U157 107 

UTAH SCIENTIFIC 4750 WILEY POST WY SUIT SW 1 - 2 (1.467 mi.) U158 107 

ARTELL VIDEO SYSTEMS INCORPORA 4750 WILEY POST WAY SW 1 - 2 (1.467 mi.) U160 112 

WORLD HEART 4750 WEST WILEY POST WA SW 1 - 2 (1.467 mi.) U161 112 

WINTERSTEIGER 217 WRIGHT BROS. DR SW 1 - 2 (1.494 mi.) 168 115 

CHEVRON PIPE LINE UANG P/L DEL 765 N 2200 W E 1 - 2 (1.495 mi.) Y170 119 





U.S. AIR FORCE UTAH ANG BASE R 765 N 2200 W E 1 - 2 (1.495 mi.) Y173 125 

GADDIS INVESTMENT 810 NORTH 2200 WEST E 1 - 2 (1.504 mi.) AA181 129 

BECTON-DICKINSON CO INC. 810 N 2200 W E 1 - 2 (1.504 mi.) AA182 131 

THE BOEING CO., TULSA DIVISION 810 NORTH 2200 WEST E 1 - 2 (1.504 mi.) AA183 131 

INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAMPUS 551 NORTH 2200 WEST E 1 - 2 (1.506 mi.) AB185 135 

COUNTRY PRIDE FOODS 501 N 2200 W E 1 - 2 (1.506 mi.) AB186 137 

L-3 COMMUNICATIONS, CS-WEST 640 NORTH 2200 WEST E 1 - 2 (1.513 mi.) AB192 141 

PARAMAX SYSTEMS CORP PARAMAX 640 N. 2200 W. E 1 - 2 (1.513 mi.) AB193 149 

ELECTRONICS MANUFACTURING FACI 640 N 2200 W E 1 - 2 (1.513 mi.) AB196 154 

WESTERN SPRAY PAINTING 563 NORTH NEIL ARMSTRON WSW 1 - 2 (1.518 mi.) AC198 154 

HOYT USA 543 N NEIL ARMSTRONG DR WSW 1 - 2 (1.521 mi.) AC199 157 

BEEHIVE INTERNATIONAL# 4910 AMELIA EARHART DR WSW 1 - 2 (1.525 mi.) AD201 159 

FINISHING SHOP FOR METAL & PLA 505 N NEIL ARMSTRONG RD WSW 1 - 2 (1.527 mi.) AC202 160 

HOYT USA 475 NORTH NEIL ARMSTRON WSW 1 - 2 (1.533 mi.) AC203 160 

BARKEN INTRNL SALT LAKE CITY INTL AIR NE 1 - 2 (1.536 mi.) 204 163 

TREASURE CHEST ADVERTISING 430 NORTH NEIL ARMSTRON WSW 1 - 2 (1.538 mi.) AE205 165 

SALT LAKE INTERNATIONAL CENTER 430 NEIL ARMSTRONG RD WSW 1 - 2 (1.538 mi.) AE206 165 

UNITED PARCEL SERVICE 439 NORTH NEIL ARMSTRON WSW 1 - 2 (1.539 mi.) AE207 166 

THE BOEING COMPANY 1215 NORTH SPERRY WY ENE 1 - 2 (1.542 mi.) AF208 167 

CEMENT PLANT 1100 W 2200 N ENE 1 - 2 (1.546 mi.) AF211 176 

SET SURFACE ENGINEERING TECH 425 NEIL ARMSTRONG WSW 1 - 2 (1.548 mi.) AE213 179 

FAA AIR TRAFFIC CONTROL CENTER 2150 W 700 N E 1 - 2 (1.550 mi.) AH214 181 

WATERLINE BREAK 470 N 2200 W ESE 1 - 2 (1.551 mi.) AG215 181 

US FED AVIATION ADMIN SLC ARTC 2150 WEST 700 NORTH E 1 - 2 (1.557 mi.) AH217 182 

UNISYS 420 NORTH 2200 WEST ESE 1 - 2 (1.567 mi.) AI222 188 

EASTON TECHNICAL PRODUCTS, INC 5040 HAROLD GATTY DRIVE WSW 1 - 2 (1.567 mi.) AJ225 199 

JET FUEL 470 N 2400 W SE 1 - 2 (1.572 mi.) AK227 200 

HUDSON GENERAL LLC 470 N 2400 W SE 1 - 2 (1.572 mi.) AK229 201 

SERVISAIR & SHELL/GLOBEGROUND/ 470 NORTH 2400 WEST SE 1 - 2 (1.572 mi.) AK230 202 

SCHENKERS INT’L FORWARDERS INC 4980 AMELIA EARHART DR WSW 1 - 2 (1.582 mi.) 232 202 

COMPANY HANGER AIRCRAFT OPERAT 171 N 2400 W SE 1 - 2 (1.601 mi.) AK236 204 

SOUTHWEST AIRLINES 171 NORTH 2400 WEST SE 1 - 2 (1.601 mi.) AK237 205 

INFLABLOC PHARMACEUTICALS 2150 WEST DAUNTLESS AVE ENE 1 - 2 (1.601 mi.) AL239 208 

MAJESTIC AIRLINES 180 NORTH 2400 WEST SE 1 - 2 (1.601 mi.) AK240 209 

CEMENT PLANT NUMBER 3 1100 N 2200 W ENE 1 - 2 (1.613 mi.) 243 211 


UNISYS CORPORATION 322 N 2200 W ESE 1 - 2 (1.626 mi.) AN248 216 

ADVANTAGE RENT A CAR 2375 W NORTH TEMPLE SE 1 - 2 (1.629 mi.) AM250 217 

AIRPORT INN AND SUITES 2333 W N TEMPLE SE 1 - 2 (1.656 mi.) AO252 218 

CONTINENTAL AIRLINES 2445 JETWAY AVE SE 1 - 2 (1.665 mi.) AP255 219 

BECKS SPUR LAND FILL (2200 NO 1300 WEST 2200 NORTH ENE 1 - 2 (1.666 mi.) 257 220 

MAGNESIUM CORPORATION AMERICA 238 NORTH 2200 WEST ESE 1 - 2 (1.683 mi.) AQ263 223 

MCDONNELL DOUGLAS 236 N 2200 WEST ESE 1 - 2 (1.685 mi.) AQ268 229 

THE BOEING CO., TULSA DIVISION 236 NORTH 2200 WEST ESE 1 - 2 (1.685 mi.) AQ269 230 

TSA AT SALT LAKE CITY INTERNAT TERMINAL 2 PARKING STRU ESE 1 - 2 (1.693 mi.) AR270 230 

AMERICAN STORES COMPANY HANGAR 2280 W 160 N ESE 1 - 2 (1.697 mi.) AR274 233 


CARDIOPULMONICS INC 5060 WEST AMELIA EARHAR WSW 1 - 2 (1.717 mi.) AU278 234 


PHOTO IMAGABLE SOLDER MASK PRO 594 BILLY MITCHELL RD W 1 - 2 (1.732 mi.) AV287 246 

TRANS WEST AIR SERVICE INCORPO 2282 W NORTH TEMPLE SE 1 - 2 (1.742 mi.) AW291 248 

ACETO CORPORATION 5185 HAROLD GATTY DRIVE W 1 - 2 (1.742 mi.) AV293 251 

EDO CORPORATION FIBER SCIENCE 506 NORTH BILLY MITCHEL WSW 1 - 2 (1.743 mi.) AX294 251 

CARGO-LINK INTERNATIONAL 5106 AMELIA EARHART DR WSW 1 - 2 (1.754 mi.) AU297 258 

TEXTILE CARE SERVICES 5120 WEST AMELIA EARHAR WSW 1 - 2 (1.765 mi.) 299 262 

NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE, WRH 2242 WEST NORTH TEMPLE SE 1 - 2 (1.772 mi.) AW300 264 





EMERGENCY GENERATOR 2242 W NORTH TEMPLE SE 1 - 2 (1.772 mi.) AW302 266 

SKAGGS ALPHA BETA 369 BILLY MITCHELL WY WSW 1 - 2 (1.784 mi.) AY303 266 

NORTHROP GRUMMAN GUIDANCE AND 2211 WEST NORTH TEMPLE SE 1 - 2 (1.794 mi.) BA308 269 

NORTHWEST OIL DRAIN ROSE PARK TO 1000 N E 1 - 2 (1.827 mi.) 311 282 

RADISON AIRPORT INN 2177 W NORTH TEMPLE ESE 1 - 2 (1.829 mi.) BA313 285 

TEXSCAN MSI 124 NORTH CHARLES LINDB WSW 1 - 2 (1.842 mi.) 314 285 

SANITATION PLANT 5275 W HAROLD GATTY DR W 1 - 2 (1.849 mi.) 315 287 

C-STORE INC. 2198 WEST NORTH TEMPLE ESE 1 - 2 (1.860 mi.) BC318 288 

SKAGGS ALPHA BETA INCORPORATED 5201 AMELIA EARHART DR WSW 1 - 2 (1.875 mi.) BD321 291 

AT&T UNIVERSAL CARD SERVICES 5201 AMELIA EARHART DRI WSW 1 - 2 (1.875 mi.) BD323 292 

BINGHAM ENVIRONMENTAL, INCORPO 5160 WILEY POST WAY WSW 1 - 2 (1.908 mi.) BE325 293 

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT LLC 683 NORTH MORTEN DRIVE E 1 - 2 (1.939 mi.) BH332 298 


MEADOWLARK SCHOOL 497 N MORTON DR ESE 1 - 2 (1.975 mi.) 342 305 

NPDES: A listing of Division of Water Quality permits. 

A review of the NPDES list, as provided by EDR, and dated 04/05/2010 has revealed that there are 23 

NPDES sites within approximately 2 miles of the target property. 




SKY WEST PROJECT 1440 NORTH 2200 WEST NE 1 - 2 (1.859 mi.) BB317 288 

WASTE MANAGEMENT SALT LAKE C/D 3550 WEST 500 SOUTH S 1 - 2 (1.941 mi.) BG335 301 





MARKETING RESERVATION TRAINING 3842 WEST 1200 NORTH N 1/2 - 1 (0.706 mi.) J49 42 

JH TILE 550 NORTH WRIGHT BROTHE WSW 1 - 2 (1.294 mi.) 116 65 

UTAH AIR NATIONAL GUARD 765 NORTH 2200 WEST E 1 - 2 (1.495 mi.) Y169 117 

PLANT# 3 900 W 2200 NORTH E 1 - 2 (1.498 mi.) Z177 126 

PLANT #3 900 W 2200 N E 1 - 2 (1.498 mi.) Z178 127 

GADDIS INVESTMENTS 810 NORTH 2200 WEST E 1 - 2 (1.504 mi.) AA179 128 

GADDIS INVESTMENT 810 NORTH 2200 WEST E 1 - 2 (1.504 mi.) AA181 129 

L-3 COMMUNICATIONS-CSW 640 NORTH 2200 WEST E 1 - 2 (1.513 mi.) AB190 139 

THE BOEING COMPANY 1215 NORTH 2200 WEST ENE 1 - 2 (1.542 mi.) AF209 174 

EASTON TECHINICAL PRODUCTS 5040 WEST HAROLD GATTY WSW 1 - 2 (1.567 mi.) AJ224 197 

END OF RUNWAY DEICE PROGRAM 2800 WEST NORTH TEMPLE SE 1 - 2 (1.589 mi.) 233 203 

SPRINGHILL SUITES MARRIOTT 4955 WILEY POST WAY WSW 1 - 2 (1.674 mi.) 260 221 

MCDONNELL DOUGLAS 236 N 2200 W ESE 1 - 2 (1.685 mi.) AQ266 228 

MCDONNELL DOUGLAS 236 N 2200 WEST ESE 1 - 2 (1.685 mi.) AQ267 228 

UTAH PIPE TRADES EDUCATION PRO 640 NORTH BILLY MITCHEL W 1 - 2 (1.729 mi.) AV282 238 

VIKTRON UTAH 594 NORTH BILLY MITCHEL W 1 - 2 (1.732 mi.) AV285 243 

EDO FIBER SCIENCE 506 NORTH BILLY MITCHEL WSW 1 - 2 (1.743 mi.) AX295 256 

NORTHROP GRUMMAN BUILDING ADDI 2211 WEST NORTH TEMPLE SE 1 - 2 (1.794 mi.) BA309 279 

LITTON SYSTEMS 2211 W NORTH TEMPLE SE 1 - 2 (1.794 mi.) BA310 281 

MULTI-AGENCY OFFICE BLDG. 251 N. 1950 WEST ESE 1 - 2 (1.984 mi.) 343 305 



Due to poor or inadequate address information, the following sites were not mapped: 

Site Name Database(s) 

____________ ____________ 

MCGILLIS JEWISH COMMUNITY CENTER S FTTS,HIST FTTS INSP 

GRANITE SCHOOL DISTRICT FTTS,FINDS,HIST FTTS INSP 

SALT LAKE CITY SCHOOL DISTRICT FTTS,HIST FTTS INSP 

BULLOUGHS INSULATION\BEAVER COUNTY FTTS,HIST FTTS INSP,FINDS 

MORTON SALT FTTS,HIST FTTS INSP 

ZECCO CORRACTS,RCRA-LQG,MANIFEST,MANIFEST,RAATS,RCRA-TS 

ALLIANT TECHSYSTEMS - BACCHUS WORK CORRACTS,FINDS,TRIS,RCRA-TSDF,MANIFEST,HAZNET,INST C 

ENERCOR CERCLIS-NFRAP 

US MAGNESIUM LLC CERCLIS-NFRAP,FINDS,TRIS,RCRA-LQG 

BULLOUGH ASBESTOS CERCLIS-NFRAP 

BROWN DUMP, LEON CERCLIS-NFRAP 

FAA-SALT LAKE CITY ATBM E/G FINDS,LUST,UST 

KENNECOTT MAGNA CONCENTRATOR FINDS,RCRA-LQG 

EMERALD SERVICES, INC. RCRA-NLR 

UTAH POWER HYDRAULIC FINDS,RCRA-NLR 

RIVERSIDE CEBTER - TRADES FINDS,RCRA-CESQG 

CONTINENTAL AIRLINES FINDS,RCRA-CESQG 

KENNECOT UTAH COPPER - ARBOR PARK ICIS 

VAN WATERS & ROGERS INC (SUB OF UN SSTS 

KUCC MOLYBDENUM AUTOCLAVE PROCESSI NPDES 


EDR Inc. 

138 kV 

138 kV 

138 kV 

138 kV 138 kV 138 kV 

138 kV 138 kV 138 kV 

138 kV 

138 kV 

138 kV

EDR Inc.

MAP FINDINGS SUMMARY 

Search 

Target Distance Total 

Database Property (Miles) < 1/8 1/8 - 1/4 1/4 - 1/2 1/2 - 1 > 1 Plotted 



NPL 

Proposed NPL 

NPL LIENS 

2.000 

2.000 

2.000 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 


Delisted NPL 

2.000 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 


CERCLIS 

FEDERAL FACILITY 

2.000 

2.000 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

2 

0 

2 

0 


CERC-NFRAP 

2.000 

0 

0 

0 

0 

2 

2 


CORRACTS 

2.000 

0 

0 

0 

0 

2 

2 


RCRA-TSDF 

2.000 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 


RCRA-LQG 

RCRA-SQG 

RCRA-CESQG 

2.000 

2.000 

2.000 

0 

3 

0 

0 

1 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

2 

6 

10 

21 

6 

14 

23 

Federal institutional controls / 

engineering controls registries 

US ENG CONTROLS 

US INST CONTROL 

2.000 

2.000 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 


ERNS 

2.000 

3 

0 

0 

2 

10 

15 


SHWS 

N/A 

N/A 

N/A 

N/A 

N/A 

N/A 

N/A 

State and tribal landfill and/or 

solid waste disposal site lists 

SWF/LF 

2.000 

0 

0 

0 

0 

1 

1 


LUST 

LAST 

INDIAN LUST 

2.000 

2.000 

2.000 

3 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

1 

1 

0 

8 

0 

0 

19 

1 

0 

31 

2 

0 


UST 

2.000 

3 

4 

6 

17 

28 

58 

TC02814573.1r Page 4


Search 



AST 

INDIAN UST 

FEMA UST 

2.000 

2.000 

2.000 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

1 

0 

0 

4 

0 

0 

7 

0 

0 

12 

0 

0 

State and tribal institutional 

control / engineering control registries 

INST CONTROL 

2.000 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 


VCP 

INDIAN VCP 

2.000 

2.000 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 


BROWNFIELDS 

2.000 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 



US BROWNFIELDS 

2.000 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

Local Lists of Landfill / Solid 

Waste Disposal Sites 

ODI 

DEBRIS REGION 9 

INDIAN ODI 

2.000 

2.000 

2.000 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

Local Lists of Hazardous waste / 

Contaminated Sites 

US CDL 

CDL 

US HIST CDL 

2.000 

2.000 

2.000 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 


LIENS 2 

LUCIS 

2.000 

2.000 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 


HMIRS 

SPILLS 

2.000 

2.000 

3 

6 

0 

0 

0 

0 

46 

3 

11 

23 

60 

32 


RCRA-NonGen 

DOT OPS 

DOD 

FUDS 

CONSENT 

ROD 

UMTRA 

MINES 

TRIS 

2.000 

2.000 

2.000 

2.000 

2.000 

2.000 

2.000 

2.000 

2.000 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

1 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

15 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

3 

16 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

3 

TC02814573.1r Page 5


Search 



TSCA 

FTTS 

HIST FTTS 

SSTS 

ICIS 

PADS 

MLTS 

RADINFO 

FINDS 

RAATS 

DRYCLEANERS 

NPDES 

INDIAN RESERV 

SCRD DRYCLEANERS 

PCB TRANSFORMER 

COAL ASH EPA 

COAL ASH DOE 

2.000 

2.000 

2.000 

2.000 

2.000 

2.000 

2.000 

2.000 

2.000 

2.000 

2.000 

2.000 

2.000 

2.000 

2.000 

2.000 

2.000 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

4 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

4 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

1 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

3 

0 

0 

1 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

2 

2 

1 

3 

2 

3 

0 

112 

0 

0 

22 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

2 

2 

1 

3 

2 

3 

0 

124 

0 

0 

23 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 



Manufactured Gas Plants 

2.000 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

NOTES: 

TP = Target Property 

NR = Not Requested at this Search Distance 

Sites may be listed in more than one database 

N/A = This State does not maintain a SHWS list. See the Federal CERCLIS list. 

TC02814573.1r Page 6

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

A1 DOLLAR RENT A CAR 

LUST U000813153 

ESE 3861 TERMINAL DR UST N/A 

< 1/8 SALT LAKE CITY, UT 84122 

0.015 mi. 

77 ft. Site 1 of 13 in cluster A 

Relative: 

Higher 

Actual: 

4238 ft. 

LUST: 

Facility ID: 

Release Id: 

Closed Date: 

Notification Date: 

Owner Name: 

Owner Address: 

Owner City: 

Owner State: 

Owner Zip: 

Owner City,St,Zip: 

Project Manager: 

4001501 

ICJ 

4/28/1995 

5/13/1993 

DOLLAR RENT A CAR 

AMF BOX 22083 

SALT LAKE CITY 

UT 

84122 


[Evan Sullivan] 

UST: 

Facility ID: 

Owner Name: 



Owner Phone: 

Total Tanks: 

Closed Tanks: 

4001501 

DOLLAR RENT A CAR 

AMF BOX 22083 


(801) 575-2580 

1 

1 

B2 NATIONAL CAR RENTAL 

LUST U000558855 

West 3801 W TERMINAL DR UST N/A 


0.037 mi. 

196 ft. Site 1 of 2 in cluster B 

Relative: 

Higher 

Actual: 

4237 ft. 

LUST: 

Facility ID: 

Release Id: 

Closed Date: 


Owner Name: 



Owner State: 

Owner Zip: 



4001089 

HPB 

Not reported 

6/12/1992 

MIDWEST CAR CORPORATION 

P O BOX 800 

KAUKAUNA 

WI 

54130 

KAUKAUNA, WI 54130 

Mike Pecorelli 

UST: 

Facility ID: 

Owner Name: 



Owner Phone: 

Total Tanks: 

Closed Tanks: 

4001089 

MIDWEST CAR CORPORATION 

P O BOX 800 

KAUKAUNA, WI 54130 

(414) 766-3581 

1 

1 

TC02814573.1r Page 7

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

A3 776 NORTH TERMINAL DRIVE ERNS 92275782 

SE 776 NORTH TERMINAL DRIVE N/A 


0.053 mi. 


Relative: 

Equal 

Click this hyperlink while viewing on your computer to access 

additional ERNS detail in the EDR Site Report. 

Actual: 

4236 ft. 

A4 HMIRS 98010426 


< 1/8 SALT LAKE CITY, UT 

0.053 mi. 


Relative: 

Equal 


additional HMIRS detail in the EDR Site Report. 

Actual: 

4236 ft. 

A5 SALT LAKE CITY INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT RCRA-SQG 1000120168 

SE 776 NORTH TERMINAL DRIVE FINDS UTD982595662 


0.053 mi. 


Relative: 

Equal 

Actual: 

4236 ft. 

RCRA-SQG: 

Date form received by agency:02/17/1989 

Facility name: 

SLC INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT 

Facility address: 

776 NORTH TERMINAL DR 


EPA ID: 

UTD982595662 

Mailing address: 

AMF BOX 22084 


Contact: 

STEVEN DOMINO 

Contact address: 

AMF BOX 22084 


Contact country: 

US 

Contact telephone: 

(801) 575-2991 

Contact email: 

Not reported 

EPA Region: 

08 

Classification: 

Small Small Quantity Generator 

Description: 

Handler: generates more than 100 and less than 1000 kg of hazardous 

waste during any calendar month and accumulates less than 6000 kg of 

hazardous waste at any time; or generates 100 kg or less of hazardous 

waste during any calendar month, and accumulates more than 1000 kg of 

hazardous waste at any time 

Owner/Operator Summary: 

Owner/operator name: 

Owner/operator address: 

Owner/operator country: 

Owner/operator telephone: 

Legal status: 

Owner/Operator Type: 

Owner/Op start date: 

Owner/Op end date: 

SALT LAKE CITY CORP 

DATA NOT REQUESTED 

DATA NOT REQUESTED, UT 99999 

Not reported 

(999) 999-9999 

Municipal 

Owner 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Handler Activities Summary: 

TC02814573.1r Page 8

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

SALT LAKE CITY INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT (Continued) 1000120168 

U.S. importer of hazardous waste: 

Mixed waste (haz. and radioactive): 

Recycler of hazardous waste: 

Transporter of hazardous waste: 

Treater, storer or disposer of HW: 

Underground injection activity: 

On-site burner exemption: 

Furnace exemption: 

Used oil fuel burner: 

Used oil processor: 

User oil refiner: 

Used oil fuel marketer to burner: 

Used oil Specification marketer: 

Used oil transfer facility: 

Used oil transporter: 

Off-site waste receiver: 

No 

Unknown 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

Verified to be non-commercial 

Hazardous Waste Summary: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Violation Status: 

FINDS: 

F003 

THE FOLLOWING SPENT NON-HALOGENATED SOLVENTS: XYLENE, ACETONE, ETHYL 

ACETATE, ETHYL BENZENE, ETHYL ETHER, METHYL ISOBUTYL KETONE, N-BUTYL 

ALCOHOL, CYCLOHEXANONE, AND METHANOL; ALL SPENT SOLVENT 

MIXTURES/BLENDS CONTAINING, BEFORE USE, ONLY THE ABOVE SPENT 

NON-HALOGENATED SOLVENTS; AND ALL SPENT SOLVENT MIXTURES/BLENDS 

CONTAINING, BEFORE USE, ONE OR MORE OF THE ABOVE NON-HALOGENATED 

SOLVENTS, AND, A TOTAL OF TEN PERCENT OR MORE (BY VOLUME) OF ONE OR 

MORE OF THOSE SOLVENTS LISTED IN F001, F002, F004, AND F005, AND STILL 

BOTTOMS FROM THE RECOVERY OF THESE SPENT SOLVENTS AND SPENT SOLVENT 

MIXTURES. 

F005 

THE FOLLOWING SPENT NON-HALOGENATED SOLVENTS: TOLUENE, METHYL ETHYL 

KETONE, CARBON DISULFIDE, ISOBUTANOL, PYRIDINE, BENZENE, 

2-ETHOXYETHANOL, AND 2-NITROPROPANE; ALL SPENT SOLVENT MIXTURES/BLENDS 

CONTAINING, BEFORE USE, A TOTAL OF TEN PERCENT OR MORE (BY VOLUME) OF 

ONE OR MORE OF THE ABOVE NON-HALOGENATED SOLVENTS OR THOSE SOLVENTS 

LISTED IN F001, F002, OR F004; AND STILL BOTTOMS FROM THE RECOVERY OF 

THESE SPENT SOLVENTS AND SPENT SOLVENT MIXTURES. 

No violations found 

Registry ID: 

110002380316 

Environmental Interest/Information System 

The NEI (National Emissions Inventory) database contains information 

on stationary and mobile sources that emit criteria air pollutants and 

their precursors, as well as hazardous air pollutants (HAPs). 

US National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) module of 

the Compliance Information System (ICIS) tracks surface water permits 

issued under the Clean Water Act. Under NPDES, all facilities that 

discharge pollutants from any point source into waters of the United 

States are required to obtain a permit. The permit will likely contain 

limits on what can be discharged, impose monitoring and reporting 

requirements, and include other provisions to ensure that the 

TC02814573.1r Page 9

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

SALT LAKE CITY INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT (Continued) 1000120168 

discharge does not adversely affect water quality. 

RCRAInfo is a national information system that supports the Resource 

Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) program through the tracking of 

events and activities related to facilities that generate, transport, 

and treat, store, or dispose of hazardous waste. RCRAInfo allows RCRA 

program staff to track the notification, permit, compliance, and 

corrective action activities required under RCRA. 

PCS (Permit Compliance System) is a computerized management 

information system that contains data on National Pollutant Discharge 

Elimination System (NPDES) permit holding facilities. PCS tracks the 

permit, compliance, and enforcement status of NPDES facilities. 

A6 HMIRS 97060475 

SE 776 N TERMINAL DR N/A 


0.053 mi. 


Relative: 

Equal 



Actual: 

4236 ft. 

A7 776 NORTH TERMINAL DRIVE ERNS 2003655864 



0.053 mi. 


Relative: 

Equal 



Actual: 

4236 ft. 

A8 HMIRS 97110570 

SE 776 N. TERMINAL DR (AIRPORT) N/A 


0.053 mi. 


Relative: 

Equal 



Actual: 

4236 ft. 

A9 FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION FINDS 1004605583 



0.053 mi. 


Relative: 

Equal 

Actual: 

4236 ft. 

FINDS: 

Registry ID: 

110001884462 


AFS (Aerometric Information Retrieval System (AIRS) Facility 

Subsystem) replaces the former Compliance Data System (CDS), the 

TC02814573.1r Page 10

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION (Continued) 1004605583 

National Emission Data System (NEDS), and the Storage and Retrieval of 

Aerometric Data (SAROAD). AIRS is the national repository for 

information concerning airborne pollution in the United States. AFS is 

used to track emissions and compliance data from industrial plants. 

AFS data are utilized by states to prepare State Implementation Plans 

to comply with regulatory programs and by EPA as an input for the 

estimation of total national emissions. AFS is undergoing a major 

redesign to support facility operating permits required under Title V 

of the Clean Air Act. 

A10 SPILLS S105222990 

SE 776 N. TERMINAL DRIVE- NEW SKYWEST FACIL N/A 


0.053 mi. 


Relative: 

Equal 

Actual: 

4236 ft. 

SPILLS: 

New Incident Number: 1001 

Old incident number: 94101 

Date Reported: 

4/15/1994 

Incident Start Date: 

Not reported 

Responsible Party Name: UNKNOWN 

RP Address: 

Not reported 

RP Phone: 

(000)-000-0000 

Highway: 

Not reported 

Milemarker: 

Not reported 

Incident Summary: DISCOVERED CONTAMINATED SOIL AND GROUND WATER WHILE INSTALLING SEWER 

LINE FOR NEW SKYWEST FACIL. USED TO BE AN OLD FUEL FARM IN THE AREA 

FOR MANY YEARS. HAVE HAD SOIL AND GROUND WATER TESTED. WILL CONTINUE 

WITH SITE ASSESSMENT. SUBSTANCES RELEASED: FLIGHT FUEL- EXTENT NOT 

KNOWN 

A11 SPILLS S109540459 

SE 776 N TERMINAL DRIVE N/A 


0.053 mi. 


Relative: 

Equal 

Actual: 

4236 ft. 

SPILLS: 


Old incident number: Not reported 


3/29/2009 


3/29/2009 

Responsible Party Name: Salt Lake City Dept. of Airports 

RP Address: 

776 N Terminal Drive 

RP Phone: 

Not reported 

Highway: 

Not reported 

Milemarker: 

0 

Incident Summary: Plane lost fuel off end of runway when landing gear collapsed. 

Estimate 100 gallons was released 20-30 gallons was not recovered and 

had absorbed into the ground. No impact to surface waters. Before 

remediation can begin Blue Stakes must be called out. Release is 

secure. 

TC02814573.1r Page 11

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

A12 SPILLS S105222928 



0.053 mi. 


Relative: 

Equal 

Actual: 

4236 ft. 

SPILLS: 




7/27/1992 


7/26/1992 

Responsible Party Name: AIRPORT AUTHORITY 

RP Address: 

776 NORTH TERMINAL DRIVE 

RP Phone: 

(801)-575-2995 

Highway: 

Not reported 

Milemarker: 

Not reported 

Incident Summary: JET FUEL SPILLED JET A FUEL 50 GALLONS FAULTY VALVE ON AIRPLANE 

CONTAINED AND ABSORBED WITH CAT LITTER AND WILL BE DISPOSED OF 




9/3/2003 


9/3/2003 

Responsible Party Name: Harper Excavation (SLC) 

RP Address: 

Not reported 

RP Phone: 

Not reported 

Highway: 

Not reported 

Milemarker: 

0 

Incident Summary: Caller reports a trackhoe, operated by a contractor doing work at the 

airport, had cracked a fuel supply line while digging a trench. 

Released material was JP-8 jet fuel in the amount of 500 gallons. 

Most of the fuel was contained in the trench, but some ran into the 

airports self-contained storm water drain system. TW was called in to 

remediate. The have skimmed the retention pond and recovered fuel in 

the trench. The affected soils will be removed on 9/04/03. 

A13 SPILLS S108031410 

SE 776 N. TERMINAL DR. N/A 


0.053 mi. 


Relative: 

Equal 

Actual: 

4236 ft. 

SPILLS: 




6/9/2006 


6/9/2006 

Responsible Party Name: SLC Int’l Airport 

RP Address: 

776 N. Terminal Dr. (3800 West) 

RP Phone: 

8015753472 

Highway: 

Not reported 

Milemarker: 

0 

Incident Summary: Maintenance crews spilled approximately half of a 55-gallon drum of 

"blue juice" (toilet flush solution) onto the runway near the United 

Cargo area. The liquid contains a germicide. No liquid reached any 

storm drains. Response: Crews are containing the liquid with "kitty 

litter" absorbent and will dispose of the spent material. The blue 

juice was unused and not contaminated. 

TC02814573.1r Page 12

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

A14 SPILLS S105222903 



0.061 mi. 


Relative: 

Equal 

Actual: 

4236 ft. 

SPILLS: 




1/25/1992 


1/25/1992 

Responsible Party Name: Avis 

RP Address: 

International Airport 

RP Phone: 

(801)-575-2684 

Highway: 

Not reported 

Milemarker: 

Not reported 

Incident Summary: Gasoline Gasoline 5 Gal. 

C15 765 NORTH TERMINAL DR ERNS 2003639736 

ESE 765 NORTH TERMINAL DR N/A 


0.069 mi. 

365 ft. Site 1 of 4 in cluster C 

Relative: 

Equal 



Actual: 

4236 ft. 

C16 SPILLS S105811369 

ESE 765 NORTH TERMINAL DRIVE SLC, SLC INT’L AIRPORT N/A 


0.069 mi. 


Relative: 

Equal 

Actual: 

4236 ft. 

SPILLS: 




3/17/2003 


3/14/2003 

Responsible Party Name: Delta Airlines 

RP Address: 

1020 Delta Blvd Dept 885, Bldg A2 Atlanta GA 30354 

RP Phone: 

404-714-4658 

Highway: 

Not reported 

Milemarker: 

0 

Incident Summary: Delta crew noted one of their ground support vehicles (de-icing 

truck) spewing black smoke. They removed it from service and parked 

it in a corner of the repair facility for followup inspection the 

following day (Saturday). Upon inspection of the vehicle the 

following day, the Delta crew discovered that it had leaked an 

estimated 20-30 gallons of hydraulic fluid and determined that a 

hydraulic valve failed. They cleaned up and recovered an estimated 10 

gallons the remaining fraction flowed to a floor drain in the 

building. Delta is currently determining the cause but will revise 

procedures to avoid recurrence. 11:30 AM SLCIA provided a courtesy 

notification. SLCIA reported that due to mis-communication they were 

just notified of the incident today 3/17/03 late this morning. Delta 

reported to SLCIA that they cleaned up the spill but noted that 25-30 

gallons of the fluid entered a floor drain that feeds into the storm 

water system at the east mid-field pump station. 

TC02814573.1r Page 13

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

C17 DELTA AIR LINES RCRA-SQG 1000394809 

ESE 765 NORTH TERMINAL DRIVE FINDS UTD112359997 


0.069 mi. 


Relative: 

Equal 

Actual: 

4236 ft. 

RCRA-SQG: 



DELTA AIR LINES 


3625 WEST 510 NORTH DEPT. 587 


EPA ID: 

UTD112359997 


AMF 22003, DEPT. 587 


Contact: 

GARY E LINDEBURG 


P.O. BOX AMF 22003 



US 


(801) 578-2618 


Not reported 

EPA Region: 

08 

Land type: 

Private 



Description: 











Legal status: 








Legal status: 




DELTA AIRLINES 

3625 WEST 510 NORTH 


US 

(801) 578-2618 

Private 

Operator 

04/01/1987 

Not reported 


AMF 22033 DEPT.587 


US 

(801) 578-2518 

Private 

Owner 

04/01/1987 

Not reported 









No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

TC02814573.1r Page 14

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

DELTA AIR LINES (Continued) 1000394809 










No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

Commercial status unknown 

Historical Generators: 




Site name: 

DELTA AIR LINES-SALT LAKE CITY 


Conditionally Exempt Small Quantity Generator 




Site name: 



Small Quantity Generator 




Site name: 







Site name: 

DELTA AIR LINES, INC. 


Large Quantity Generator 




Site name: 

DELTA AIR LINES - SALT LAKE CITY 






Site name: 

DELTA AIR LINES, INC. - SEA 






Site name: 

DELTA AIR LINES, INC. SLC 






Site name: 





Waste code: 

Waste name: 

D001 

IGNITABLE HAZARDOUS WASTES ARE THOSE WASTES WHICH HAVE A FLASHPOINT OF 

LESS THAN 140 DEGREES FAHRENHEIT AS DETERMINED BY A PENSKY-MARTENS 

CLOSED CUP FLASH POINT TESTER. ANOTHER METHOD OF DETERMINING THE 

TC02814573.1r Page 15

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 


FLASH POINT OF A WASTE IS TO REVIEW THE MATERIAL SAFETY DATA SHEET, 

WHICH CAN BE OBTAINED FROM THE MANUFACTURER OR DISTRIBUTOR OF THE 

MATERIAL. LACQUER THINNER IS AN EXAMPLE OF A COMMONLY USED SOLVENT 

WHICH WOULD BE CONSIDERED AS IGNITABLE HAZARDOUS WASTE. 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

D006 

CADMIUM 

D007 

CHROMIUM 

D008 

LEAD 

D009 

MERCURY 

D018 

BENZENE 

D035 

METHYL ETHYL KETONE 

F001 

THE FOLLOWING SPENT HALOGENATED SOLVENTS USED IN DEGREASING: 

TETRACHLOROETHYLENE, TRICHLOROETHYLENE, METHYLENE CHLORIDE, 

1,1,1-TRICHLOROETHANE, CARBON TETRACHLORIDE, AND CHLORINATED 

FLUOROCARBONS; ALL SPENT SOLVENT MIXTURES/BLENDS USED IN DEGREASING 


ONE OR MORE OF THE ABOVE HALOGENATED SOLVENTS OR THOSE SOLVENTS LISTED 

IN F002, F004, AND F005, AND STILL BOTTOMS FROM THE RECOVERY OF THESE 

SPENT SOLVENTS AND SPENT SOLVENT MIXTURES. 

F002 

THE FOLLOWING SPENT HALOGENATED SOLVENTS: TETRACHLOROETHYLENE, 

METHYLENE CHLORIDE, TRICHLOROETHYLENE, 1,1,1-TRICHLOROETHANE, 

CHLOROBENZENE, 1,1,2-TRICHLORO-1,2,2-TRIFLUOROETHANE, 

ORTHO-DICHLOROBENZENE, TRICHLOROFLUOROMETHANE, AND 

1,1,2-TRICHLOROETHANE; ALL SPENT SOLVENT MIXTURES/BLENDS CONTAINING, 

BEFORE USE, A TOTAL OF TEN PERCENT OR MORE (BY VOLUME) OF ONE OR MORE 

OF THE ABOVE HALOGENATED SOLVENTS OR THOSE LISTED IN F001, F004, OR 

F005, AND STILL BOTTOMS FROM THE RECOVERY OF THESE SPENT SOLVENTS AND 

SPENT SOLVENT MIXTURES. 

F003 










MIXTURES. 

F004 

TC02814573.1r Page 16

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 


Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

THE FOLLOWING SPENT NON-HALOGENATED SOLVENTS: CRESOLS AND CRESYLIC 

ACID, AND NITROBENZENE; ALL SPENT SOLVENT MIXTURES/BLENDS CONTAINING, 


OF THE ABOVE NON-HALOGENATED SOLVENTS OR THOSE SOLVENTS LISTED IN 

F001, F002, AND F005; AND STILL BOTTOMS FROM THE RECOVERY OF THESE 


F005 








Facility Has Received Notices of Violations: 

Regulation violated: SR - inadequate plans 

Area of violation: 

Generators - General 

Date violation determined: 05/02/1996 

Date achieved compliance: 08/05/1996 

Violation lead agency: State 

Enforcement action: WRITTEN INFORMAL 

Enforcement action date: 07/05/1996 

Enf. disposition status: Not reported 

Enf. disp. status date: Not reported 

Enforcement lead agency: State 

Proposed penalty amount: Not reported 

Final penalty amount: Not reported 

Paid penalty amount: Not reported 

Regulation violated: 


Date violation determined: 

Date achieved compliance: 

Violation lead agency: 

Enforcement action: 

Enforcement action date: 

Enf. disposition status: 

Enf. disp. status date: 

Enforcement lead agency: 

Proposed penalty amount: 

Final penalty amount: 

Paid penalty amount: 













Not reported 


03/06/1990 

03/12/1990 

State 

INITIAL 3008(A) COMPLIANCE 

08/28/1990 

Not reported 

Not reported 

State 

2500 

2500 

2500 

Not reported 


11/29/1989 

09/28/1990 

State 


03/06/1990 

Not reported 

Not reported 

State 

Not reported 

Not reported 

TC02814573.1r Page 17

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 























































Not reported 

Not reported 


11/29/1989 

09/28/1990 

State 


08/28/1990 

Not reported 

Not reported 

State 

2500 

2500 

2500 

Not reported 


03/07/1989 

03/07/1989 

State 


03/07/1989 

Not reported 

Not reported 

State 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 


03/07/1989 

03/31/1989 

State 


03/07/1989 

Not reported 

Not reported 

State 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 


03/07/1989 

03/07/1989 

State 

FINAL 3008(A) COMPLIANCE ORDER 

05/31/1990 

Not reported 

Not reported 

State 

10000 

10000 

10000 

TC02814573.1r Page 18

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 























































Not reported 


03/07/1989 

04/14/1989 

State 


03/07/1989 

Not reported 

Not reported 

State 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 


03/07/1989 

03/31/1989 

State 


05/31/1990 

Not reported 

Not reported 

State 

10000 

10000 

10000 

Not reported 


03/07/1989 

04/14/1989 

State 


05/31/1990 

Not reported 

Not reported 

State 

10000 

10000 

10000 

Not reported 


01/18/1989 

06/30/1990 

State 

WRITTEN INFORMAL 

03/07/1989 

Not reported 

Not reported 

State 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

TC02814573.1r Page 19

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 






















































01/18/1989 

06/30/1990 

State 


05/31/1990 

Not reported 

Not reported 

State 

10000 

10000 

10000 

Not reported 


01/18/1989 

06/30/1990 

State 

REFERRAL TO ATTORNEY GENERAL 

09/29/1989 

Not reported 

Not reported 

State 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 


01/18/1989 

06/30/1990 

State 


03/07/1989 

Not reported 

Not reported 

State 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 


01/18/1989 

06/30/1990 

State 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Evaluation Action Summary: 

Evaluation date: 

05/02/1996 

TC02814573.1r Page 20

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 


Evaluation: 



Evaluation lead agency: 


Evaluation: 





Evaluation: 





Evaluation: 





Evaluation: 





Evaluation: 





Evaluation: 




FINDS: 

COMPLIANCE EVALUATION INSPECTION ON-SITE 


08/05/1996 

State 

11/29/1989 

COMPLIANCE SCHEDULE EVALUATION 


09/28/1990 

State 

11/29/1989 

COMPLIANCE SCHEDULE EVALUATION 


03/12/1990 

State 

01/20/1989 



03/07/1989 

State 

01/20/1989 



04/14/1989 

State 

01/20/1989 



03/31/1989 

State 

01/18/1989 



06/30/1990 

State 

Registry ID: 

110001138402 













TC02814573.1r Page 21

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 








B18 CHEVRON SALT LAKE AIRPORT P/L DELIVERY F RCRA-SQG 1000434268 

WSW SALT LAKE INT’L AIRPORT 

FINDS UTD000826388 


0.081 mi. 

429 ft. Site 2 of 2 in cluster B 

Relative: 

Higher 

Actual: 

4237 ft. 

RCRA-SQG: 



CHEVRON SALT LAKE AIRPORT P/L DELIVERY F 


SALT LAKE INT AIRPORT 


EPA ID: 

UTD000826388 


PO BOX 25117 


Contact: 

DAVID BLACK 


PO BOX 25117 



US 


(801) 322-1511 


Not reported 

EPA Region: 

08 



Description: 























No 

Unknown 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 



Waste code: 

Waste name: 

D000 

Not Defined 

TC02814573.1r Page 22

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

CHEVRON SALT LAKE AIRPORT P/L DELIVERY F (Continued) 1000434268 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 


FINDS: 

Registry ID: 

D001 









110007197363 



















C19 HERTZ RENT A CAR RENTAL 

LUST U000813227 

ESE 3757 TERMINAL BLVD UST N/A 


0.110 mi. 


Relative: 

Equal 

Actual: 

4236 ft. 

LUST: 

Facility ID: 

Release Id: 

Closed Date: 


Owner Name: 



Owner State: 

Owner Zip: 



4001297 

FCY 

3/28/1996 

6/28/1988 

HERTZ CORPORATION 

P O BOX 22044 


UT 

84122 


[Dale Urban] 

UST: 

Facility ID: 

Owner Name: 

4001297 


TC02814573.1r Page 23

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

HERTZ RENT A CAR RENTAL (Continued) 

Owner Address: P O BOX 22044 

Owner City,St,Zip: SALT LAKE CITY, UT 84122 

Owner Phone: (801) 575-2683 

Total Tanks: 5 

Closed Tanks: 5 

U000813227 

20 HERTZ CORPORATION RCRA-SQG 1000657254 

NNW 3757 WEST TERMINAL R FINDS UTD988071171 

1/8-1/4 SALT LAKE CITY, UT 84116 

0.129 mi. 

679 ft. 

Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4229 ft. 

RCRA-SQG: 





681 NORTH 3800 WEST 


EPA ID: 

UTD988071171 


P.O. BOX 22044 


Contact: 

JOHN K FULLER 


3800 WEST 



US 


(801) 575-2683 

Telephone ext.: 

8681 


JKFULLER@HERTZ.COM 

EPA Region: 

08 

Land type: 

Private 



Description: 











Legal status: 








Legal status: 







US 

(801) 575-2683 

Private 

Operator 

11/01/1986 

Not reported 




US 

(801) 575-2683 

Private 

Owner 

11/01/1986 

Not reported 

TC02814573.1r Page 24

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

HERTZ CORPORATION (Continued) 1000657254 


















No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 


Universal Waste Summary: 

Waste type: 

Accumulated waste on-site: 

Generated waste on-site: 

Waste type: 



Waste type: 



Waste type: 



Batteries 

No 

Not reported 

Lamps 

No 

Not reported 

Pesticides 

No 

Not reported 

Thermostats 

No 

Not reported 








Waste code: 

Waste name: 


D009 

MERCURY 




Evaluation: 




FINDS: 

02/24/2009 

COMPLIANCE ASSISTANCE VISIT 

Not reported 

Not reported 

State 

TC02814573.1r Page 25

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

HERTZ CORPORATION (Continued) 1000657254 

Registry ID: 

110005204894 








D21 ALAMO RENT A CAR 

UST U004137891 

South 706 N 3800 W N/A 


0.175 mi. 

924 ft. Site 1 of 3 in cluster D 

Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4234 ft. 

UST: 

Facility ID: 

Owner Name: 



Owner Phone: 

Total Tanks: 

Closed Tanks: 

4001917 

SALT LAKE CITY DEPARTMENT OF AIRPORTS 

PO BOX 145550 


(801) 575-2995 

1 

0 

D22 ALAMO RENT A CAR FINDS 1005795454 

South 706 N 3800 W N/A 


0.175 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4234 ft. 

FINDS: 

Registry ID: 

110002276162 


The CIM (Utah - Common Identifier Mechanism) is Utah’s Department of 

Environmental Quality (UDEQ) mechanism for compliance and permitting 

operations. 

D23 HERTZ RENT A CAR 

UST U004137890 

South 681 N 3800 W N/A 


0.201 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4233 ft. 

UST: 

Facility ID: 

Owner Name: 



Owner Phone: 

Total Tanks: 

4001915 


PO BOX 145550 


(801) 575-2995 

1 

TC02814573.1r Page 26

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

HERTZ RENT A CAR (Continued) 

U004137890 

Closed Tanks: 

0 

E24 AVIS UTAH INCORPORATED FINDS 1005795308 

South 656 N 3800 W N/A 


0.229 mi. 

1211 ft. Site 1 of 4 in cluster E 

Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4232 ft. 

FINDS: 

Registry ID: 

110002277562 




operations. 

E25 AVIS UTAH, INC. 

UST U004137892 

South 656 N 3800 W N/A 


0.230 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4232 ft. 

UST: 

Facility ID: 

Owner Name: 



Owner Phone: 

Total Tanks: 

Closed Tanks: 

4001951 


PO BOX 145550 


(801) 575-2995 

2 

0 

E26 BUDGET RENT A CAR FINDS 1005795258 

South 641 N 3800 W N/A 


0.249 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4232 ft. 

FINDS: 

Registry ID: 

110002278437 




operations. 

TC02814573.1r Page 27

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

E27 BUDGET RENT A CAR 

UST U004137893 

South 641 N 3800 W N/A 


0.250 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4232 ft. 

UST: 

Facility ID: 

Owner Name: 



Owner Phone: 

Total Tanks: 

Closed Tanks: 

4001916 


PO BOX 145550 


(801) 575-2995 

2 

0 

28 S.L.C. INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT 

UST U000813416 

SE LOWER B CONCOURSE N/A 


0.269 mi. 

1421 ft. 

Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4232 ft. 

UST: 

Facility ID: 

Owner Name: 



Owner Phone: 

Total Tanks: 

Closed Tanks: 

4000824 

SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION 

325 W 800 S 


(801) 535-6962 

1 

1 

F29 NATIONAL CAR RENTAL 

UST U004137889 

South 606 N 3800 W N/A 


0.292 mi. 

1540 ft. Site 1 of 2 in cluster F 

Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4232 ft. 

UST: 

Facility ID: 

Owner Name: 



Owner Phone: 

Total Tanks: 

Closed Tanks: 

4001937 


PO BOX 145550 


(801) 575-2995 

1 

0 

F30 DOLLAR RENT A CAR 

UST U004137894 

South 601 N 3800 W N/A 


0.299 mi. 

1579 ft. Site 2 of 2 in cluster F 

Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4232 ft. 

UST: 

Facility ID: 

Owner Name: 



Owner Phone: 

4001918 


PO BOX 145550 


(801) 575-2995 

TC02814573.1r Page 28

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

DOLLAR RENT A CAR (Continued) 

U004137894 

Total Tanks: 

Closed Tanks: 

1 

0 


UST U000559026 

SSW BUS PLAZA TU-1 N/A 


0.300 mi. 

1582 ft. 

Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4232 ft. 

UST: 

Facility ID: 

Owner Name: 



Owner Phone: 

Total Tanks: 

Closed Tanks: 

4000821 


325 W 800 S 


(801) 535-6962 

2 

2 

G32 K & T INC DBA BUDGET RENT A CAR 

LUST U000813255 

South 3833 NEW TERMINAL DR UST N/A 


0.437 mi. 

2308 ft. Site 1 of 2 in cluster G 

Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4232 ft. 

LUST: 

Facility ID: 

Release Id: 

Closed Date: 


Owner Name: 



Owner State: 

Owner Zip: 



4000473 

HPC 

7/26/1999 

6/12/1992 

BUDGET RENT A CAR 

AMF BOX 22112 


UT 

84122 


[Robin Jenkins] 

UST: 

Facility ID: 

Owner Name: 



Owner Phone: 

Total Tanks: 

Closed Tanks: 

4000473 

BUDGET RENT A CAR 

AMF BOX 22112 


(801) 363-1501 

3 

3 

TC02814573.1r Page 29

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

G33 K & T INCORPORATED DBA BUDGET RENT A CAR FINDS 1005797750 

South 3833 NEW TERMINAL DR N/A 


0.437 mi. 

2308 ft. Site 2 of 2 in cluster G 

Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4232 ft. 

FINDS: 

Registry ID: 

110002167967 




operations. 

34 SLC AIRPORT FUEL SYSTEM 

UST U000813278 

NNW 3930 W 1070 N LAST N/A 


AST 

0.479 mi. 

2530 ft. 

Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4229 ft. 

UST: 

Facility ID: 

Owner Name: 



Owner Phone: 

Total Tanks: 

Closed Tanks: 

4000518 

AIRCRAFT SERVICE INTERNATIONAL GROUP 

PO BOX 22287 


(801) 531-4710 

7 

5 

LAST: 

Facility ID: 

Release ID: 

Site Type: 

Federal Registered: 

Date Closed: 

Facility ID: 

Release ID: 

Site Type: 


Date Closed: 

4000518 

GRB 

AST w/RP Lead (Agreement) 

False 

Not reported 

4000518 

IZG 

AST w/RP Lead 

False 

1995-08-31 00:00:00 

AST: 

Owner Name: 

Facility Id: 

Tank Id: 

Tank Status: 

Substance Stored: 

Tank Capacity: 

AST: 

Owner Name: 

Facility Id: 

Tank Id: 

Tank Status: 




4000518 

12 

Currently In Use 

Jet Fuel 

1680000 

True 


4000518 

13 


Jet Fuel 

1680000 

TC02814573.1r Page 30

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

SLC AIRPORT FUEL SYSTEM (Continued) 

U000813278 

AST: 

True 

Owner Name: 

Facility Id: 

Tank Id: 

Tank Status: 



AST: 

Owner Name: 

Facility Id: 

Tank Id: 

Tank Status: 



AST: 

Owner Name: 

Facility Id: 

Tank Id: 

Tank Status: 



AST: 

Owner Name: 

Facility Id: 

Tank Id: 

Tank Status: 



AST: 

Owner Name: 

Facility Id: 

Tank Id: 

Tank Status: 



AST: 

Owner Name: 

Facility Id: 

Tank Id: 

Tank Status: 



AST: 


4000518 

14 


Gasoline 

18000 

True 


4000518 

15 


Diesel 

12000 

True 


4000518 

8 


Jet Fuel 

210000 

True 


4000518 

9 


Jet Fuel 

210000 

True 


4000518 

10 


Jet Fuel 

1260000 

True 


4000518 

11 


Jet Fuel 

1260000 

True 

TC02814573.1r Page 31

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

H35 EAST AIRFIELD VAULT 

UST U003229697 

SE RUNWAY 14/32 SOUTH PERIMETER RD, SALT LAKE INTERNA N/A 

1/2-1 SALT LAKE CITY, UT 84122 

0.517 mi. 

2732 ft. Site 1 of 5 in cluster H 

Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4229 ft. 

UST: 

Facility ID: 

Owner Name: 



Owner Phone: 

Total Tanks: 

Closed Tanks: 

4002180 


PO BOX 145550 


(801) 575-2995 

1 

0 

H36 SALT LAKE CITY INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT ERNS 8720921 

SE SALT LAKE CITY INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT N/A 

1/2-1 SALT LAKE CITY, UT 

0.517 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 



Actual: 

4229 ft. 

H37 UNITED AIRLINES AIR CARGO 

LUST U003367146 

SE SALT LAKE INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT,GATE B-7 UST N/A 


SPILLS 

0.522 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4229 ft. 

LUST: 

Facility ID: 

Release Id: 

Closed Date: 


Owner Name: 



Owner State: 

Owner Zip: 



4001105 

GDA 

6/6/1995 

9/14/1990 

UNITED AIRLINES 

AMF BOX 22004 


UT 

84122 



Facility ID: 

Release Id: 

Closed Date: 


Owner Name: 



Owner State: 

Owner Zip: 



4001105 

MBG 

4/21/2006 

2/22/2006 


AMF BOX 22004 


UT 

84122 


[DeAnn Rasmussen] 

UST: 

Facility ID: 

Owner Name: 

4001105 


TC02814573.1r Page 32

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

UNITED AIRLINES AIR CARGO (Continued) 

Owner Address: AMF BOX 22004 


Owner Phone: (801) 575-2364 



U003367146 

SPILLS: 




4/3/1996 


Not reported 

Responsible Party Name: Not Reported 

RP Address: 

Not reported 

RP Phone: 

Not reported 

Highway: 

Not reported 

Milemarker: 

Not reported 

Incident Summary: Called in to report they would be using their De-contamination shower 

on a pepper-gas-sprayed individual. Said they were required to report 

when ever it is used so a record of what has been washed through it 

can be kept. 

H38 S.L.C.INTL. AIRPORT 

UST U003229690 

SE (WESTERN)/ AMF BOX 22003 N/A 


0.522 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4229 ft. 

UST: 

Facility ID: 

Owner Name: 



Owner Phone: 

Total Tanks: 

Closed Tanks: 

4001257 

WESTERN AIRLINES 

6060 AVION 

LOS ANGELES, CA 90045 

(213) 216-3607 

1 

1 

H39 FAA-SALT LAKE VORTAC E/G 

LUST U000813431 

SE 3 MILES N OF SLC INTL AIRPORT UST N/A 


0.522 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4229 ft. 

LUST: 

Facility ID: 

Release Id: 

Closed Date: 


Owner Name: 



Owner State: 

Owner Zip: 



4001757 

KTE 

5/17/1999 

11/23/1998 

FAA SALT LAKE SMO SAFETY OFFICE 

2150 W 700 N BUILDING 1 


UT 

84116 



TC02814573.1r Page 33

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

FAA-SALT LAKE VORTAC E/G (Continued) 

U000813431 

UST: 

Facility ID: 

Owner Name: 



Owner Phone: 

Total Tanks: 

Closed Tanks: 

4001757 




(801) 320-2059 

1 

1 

40 S.L.C. AIRPORT TU-1 BOILER PLANT 

LUST U000813415 

SE TU-1 GENERATOR UST N/A 


0.580 mi. 

3061 ft. 

Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4232 ft. 

LUST: 

Facility ID: 

Release Id: 

Closed Date: 


Owner Name: 



Owner State: 

Owner Zip: 



4000823 

LNL 

Not reported 

3/4/2002 


PO BOX 145550 


UT 

84114 


Morgan Atkinson 

Facility ID: 

Release Id: 

Closed Date: 


Owner Name: 



Owner State: 

Owner Zip: 



Facility ID: 

Release Id: 

Closed Date: 


Owner Name: 



Owner State: 

Owner Zip: 



4000823 

KUG 

2/16/1999 

12/22/1998 


PO BOX 145550 


UT 

84114 



4000823 

MAE 

Not reported 

10/17/2005 


PO BOX 145550 


UT 

84114 



UST: 

Facility ID: 

Owner Name: 



4000823 


PO BOX 145550 


TC02814573.1r Page 34

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

S.L.C. AIRPORT TU-1 BOILER PLANT (Continued) 

Owner Phone: (801) 575-2995 



U000813415 

41 SKYWEST AIRLINE SALT LAKE CITY RCRA-NonGen 1000696417 

NNW 1129 NORTH 3950 WEST UTD988074761 


0.601 mi. 

3175 ft. 

Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4229 ft. 

RCRA-NonGen: 



SKYWEST AIRLINE SALT LAKE CITY 




EPA ID: 

UTD988074761 


PO BOX 22305 


Contact: 

ROBERT LAPP 


PO BOX 22305 



US 


(801) 575-2050 


Not reported 

EPA Region: 

08 

Land type: 

Private 


Non-Generator 

Description: 

Handler: Non-Generators do not presently generate hazardous waste 






Legal status: 





AMF BOX 22084 


Not reported 

(801) 575-2408 

Private 

Owner 

01/01/0001 

Not reported 


















No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 


TC02814573.1r Page 35

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

SKYWEST AIRLINE SALT LAKE CITY (Continued) 1000696417 




SKYWEST AIRLINE SALT LAKE CITY 


Not a generator, verified 


Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 


D001 








F003 










MIXTURES. 




Evaluation: 




07/06/2007 


Not reported 

Not reported 

State 

42 EAST-WEST ELECTRICAL DISTRIBUTION 

UST U003150610 

SE 1231 N 3875 W N/A 


0.624 mi. 

3294 ft. 

Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4232 ft. 

UST: 

Facility ID: 

Owner Name: 



Owner Phone: 

Total Tanks: 

Closed Tanks: 

4002002 


PO BOX 145550 


(801) 575-2995 

2 

0 

TC02814573.1r Page 36

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

I43 UNITED PARCEL SERVICE RCRA-CESQG 1004788915 

SSE 370 NORTH 3700 WEST FINDS UTR000002162 


0.644 mi. 

3403 ft. Site 1 of 2 in cluster I 

Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4229 ft. 

RCRA-CESQG: 



UNITED PARCEL SERVICE 



AIR CARGO BLDG #2 


EPA ID: 

UTR000002162 


PARKWAY BLVD 

WEST VALLEY CITY, UT 84119 

Contact: 

DAVID TAPPENDORF 


2040 PARKWAY BLVD 

WEST VALLEY CITY, UT 84119 


US 


(801) 973-3625 


Not reported 

EPA Region: 

08 



Description: 

Handler: generates 100 kg or less of hazardous waste per calendar 

month, and accumulates 1000 kg or less of hazardous waste at any time; 

or generates 1 kg or less of acutely hazardous waste per calendar 

month, and accumulates at any time: 1 kg or less of acutely hazardous 

waste; or 100 kg or less of any residue or contaminated soil, waste or 

other debris resulting from the cleanup of a spill, into or on any 

land or water, of acutely hazardous waste; or generates 100 kg or less 

of any residue or contaminated soil, waste or other debris resulting 

from the cleanup of a spill, into or on any land or water, of acutely 

hazardous waste during any calendar month, and accumulates at any 

time: 1 kg or less of acutely hazardous waste; or 100 kg or less of 

any residue or contaminated soil, waste or other debris resulting from 

the cleanup of a spill, into or on any land or water, of acutely 

hazardous waste 






Legal status: 




SLC CORP/DIR OF AIRPORTS 

AMF BOX 22084 SL INT’L AIRPORT 


Not reported 

(801) 973-3625 

Private 

Owner 

Not reported 

Not reported 










No 

Unknown 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

TC02814573.1r Page 37

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

UNITED PARCEL SERVICE (Continued) 1004788915 









No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 



Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 


FINDS: 

D000 

Not Defined 

D001 








D002 

A WASTE WHICH HAS A PH OF LESS THAN 2 OR GREATER THAN 12.5 IS 

CONSIDERED TO BE A CORROSIVE HAZARDOUS WASTE. SODIUM HYDROXIDE, A 

CAUSTIC SOLUTION WITH A HIGH PH, IS OFTEN USED BY INDUSTRIES TO CLEAN 

OR DEGREASE PARTS. HYDROCHLORIC ACID, A SOLUTION WITH A LOW PH, IS 

USED BY MANY INDUSTRIES TO CLEAN METAL PARTS PRIOR TO PAINTING. WHEN 

THESE CAUSTIC OR ACID SOLUTIONS BECOME CONTAMINATED AND MUST BE 

DISPOSED, THE WASTE WOULD BE A CORROSIVE HAZARDOUS WASTE. 

D003 

A MATERIAL IS CONSIDERED TO BE A REACTIVE HAZARDOUS WASTE IF IT IS 

NORMALLY UNSTABLE, REACTS VIOLENTLY WITH WATER, GENERATES TOXIC GASES 

WHEN EXPOSED TO WATER OR CORROSIVE MATERIALS, OR IF IT IS CAPABLE OF 

DETONATION OR EXPLOSION WHEN EXPOSED TO HEAT OR A FLAME. ONE EXAMPLE 

OF SUCH WASTE WOULD BY WASTE GUNPOWDER. 

D006 

CADMIUM 

D007 

CHROMIUM 

D008 

LEAD 


Registry ID: 

110005209176 





TC02814573.1r Page 38

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 





44 FAA-SLC RVR E/G 34R 

LUST U000813179 

East MIDFIELD 34-16 SLC AIRPORT UST N/A 


0.657 mi. 

3470 ft. 

Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4232 ft. 

LUST: 

Facility ID: 

Release Id: 

Closed Date: 


Owner Name: 



Owner State: 

Owner Zip: 



4001404 

JWY 

4/2/1999 

1/10/1997 




UT 

84116 



UST: 

Facility ID: 

Owner Name: 



Owner Phone: 

Total Tanks: 

Closed Tanks: 

4001404 




(801) 320-2059 

1 

1 

45 FAA-SALT LAKE CITY RTR-B E/G 

UST U003150430 

SE SALT LAKE CITY AIRPORT, SOUTH OF RUNWAY 34 AST N/A 


0.667 mi. 

3522 ft. 

Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4232 ft. 

UST: 

Facility ID: 

Owner Name: 



Owner Phone: 

Total Tanks: 

Closed Tanks: 

4001416 




(801) 320-2059 

1 

1 

AST: 

Owner Name: 

Facility Id: 

Tank Id: 

Tank Status: 




4001416 

2 


Not Listed 

500 

TC02814573.1r Page 39

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

FAA-SALT LAKE CITY RTR-B E/G (Continued) 

AST: 

True 

U003150430 

46 FAA-SLC GS E/G 

LUST U000813183 

SE RUNWAY 34 SALT LAKE CITY AIRPORT UST N/A 


AST 

0.677 mi. 

3576 ft. 

Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4232 ft. 

LUST: 

Facility ID: 

Release Id: 

Closed Date: 


Owner Name: 



Owner State: 

Owner Zip: 



4001408 

KRR 

6/17/1999 

10/22/1998 




UT 

84116 


Mark Crim 

UST: 

Facility ID: 

Owner Name: 



Owner Phone: 

Total Tanks: 

Closed Tanks: 

4001408 




(801) 320-2059 

1 

1 

AST: 

Owner Name: 

Facility Id: 

Tank Id: 

Tank Status: 



AST: 


4001408 

2 


Diesel 

500 

True 

I47 SPILLS S105743057 

SSE 320 NORTH 3700 WEST N/A 


0.684 mi. 

3612 ft. Site 2 of 2 in cluster I 

Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4229 ft. 

SPILLS: 

New Incident Number: 

Old incident number: 



Responsible Party Name: 

RP Address: 

RP Phone: 

Highway: 

Milemarker: 

4760 

Not reported 

1/13/2003 

1/13/2003 

Unknown 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

0 

TC02814573.1r Page 40

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

(Continued) 

Incident Summary: 

Callers from US Post Office facility located at the SLC International 

Airport called to report strong, obnoxious odors during the night. At 

21:00 hours employees were bothered by strong sulphurous odor, calm 

air, no noticeable wind. At 05:00 hours the next morning the 

employees again had very strong, sulfurous odors, causing headaches 

in some. Winds were reported as light out of the south. Ms. Donahue 

also told the duty officer that the employees of FedEx, next door had 

called some days before this event and said they were experiencing an 

odor causing some to be sick. This airport facility has been 

experiencing this problem for about 2-3 weeks. This is an ongoing 

event, air samples were sent to lab for analysis yesterday with 

expected results by Friday 17th. 

S105743057 




12/30/2003 


12/29/2003 

Responsible Party Name: U.S. Postal Service 

RP Address: 

320 North 3700 West, SLC 

RP Phone: 

(801) 974-2266 

Highway: 

Not reported 

Milemarker: 

0 

Incident Summary: Report via a fax 01-05-04 from UDEQ/DWQ: A release of an estimated 60 

gallons of glycol was spilled to the ground. Some time during the 

night between 01:00 and 04:00 a sprinkler head was broken releasing a 

60/40 mix of water and glycol. The SLVHD investigated and determined 

than no waterways were affected. The sprinkler system was repaired on 

12-30-03. The contact for the facility is Jerry Jensen, (303) 

589-1253. 

J48 MARKETING RESERVATION TRAINING FINDS 1010351137 

North 3842 WEST 1200 NORTH N/A 


0.706 mi. 

3725 ft. Site 1 of 2 in cluster J 

Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4232 ft. 

FINDS: 

Registry ID: 

110030920421 










TC02814573.1r Page 41

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

J49 MARKETING RESERVATION TRAINING 

NPDES S107869117 



0.706 mi. 

3725 ft. Site 2 of 2 in cluster J 

Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4232 ft. 

NPDES: 

Facid: 

Not reported 

Permit Number: 

UTR000283 

Status of Owner/Operator: 

Not reported 

Facility Contact Name: 

Not reported 

Facility Operator Name: 


Facility Operator Contact Person: Not reported 

Group 1: 

Not reported 

Group 2: 

Not reported 

Group 3: 

Not reported 

Group 4: 

Not reported 

Group 5: 

Not reported 

Issue Date: 

10/11/1994 

Effective Date: 

Not reported 

Expiration Date: 

9/30/1997 

Municipal Operating Storm Sewer System: MUNICIPAL 

Receiving Water Body: 

LEE DRAIN 

Primary SIC Code: 

Not reported 

Primary Sector: 

Not reported 

Certification Name: 

Not reported 

Amount Paid: 

270 

Inactivated: 

Not reported 

No Exposure: 

Not reported 

Not Received: 

Not reported 

Fac Oper Address: 


Fac Oper City: 


Fac Oper State: 

UT 

Fac Oper Zip: 

84122- 

Fac Oper Phone #: 

(801) 575-8651 

Fac Site Lat: 

Not reported 

Fac Site Long: 

Not reported 

Secondary Sector: 

Not reported 

Third Sector: 

Not reported 

Fourth Sector: 

Not reported 

Date Noi Received: 

10/10/1994 

Date Noi Complete: 

Not reported 

Permit Name: 

Not reported 

State Water Body Name: 

Not reported 

Facid: 





Facility Operator Contact Person: 

Group 1: 

Group 2: 

Group 3: 

Group 4: 

Group 5: 

Issue Date: 



Not reported 

UTR000283 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

10/11/1994 

10/11/1994 

9/30/1997 

TC02814573.1r Page 42

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

MARKETING RESERVATION TRAINING (Continued) 

Municipal Operating Storm Sewer System: Not reported 


Not reported 


Not reported 


Not reported 


Not reported 

Amount Paid: 

Not reported 

Inactivated: 

Not reported 

No Exposure: 

Not reported 

Not Received: 

Not reported 


Not reported 


Not reported 


Not reported 

Fac Oper Zip: 

Not reported 


Not reported 

Fac Site Lat: 

40.79638 


111.98076 


Not reported 

Third Sector: 

Not reported 


Not reported 


Not reported 


Not reported 

Permit Name: 



LEE CREEK 

S107869117 

50 FAA-SALT LAKE CITY MM E/G 

UST U000813182 

SE SOUTH RUNWAY 34 SALT LAKE AIRPORT AST N/A 


0.717 mi. 

3788 ft. 

Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4232 ft. 

UST: 

Facility ID: 

Owner Name: 



Owner Phone: 

Total Tanks: 

Closed Tanks: 

4001412 




(801) 320-2059 

1 

1 

AST: 

Owner Name: 

Facility Id: 

Tank Id: 

Tank Status: 



AST: 


4001412 

1 


Other 

200 

True 

TC02814573.1r Page 43

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

51 FAA-SALT LAKE CITY ATBM 

UST U000558626 

SE SLC AIRPORT N/A 


0.739 mi. 

3904 ft. 

Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4232 ft. 

UST: 

Facility ID: 

Owner Name: 



Owner Phone: 

Total Tanks: 

Closed Tanks: 

4001406 




(801) 320-2059 

1 

1 

52 FAA-SALT LAKE CITY ASR-8 

UST U000813180 

SE SALT LAKE CITY AIRPORT N/A 


0.757 mi. 

3997 ft. 

Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4232 ft. 

UST: 

Facility ID: 

Owner Name: 



Owner Phone: 

Total Tanks: 

Closed Tanks: 

4001414 




(801) 320-2059 

1 

1 

K53 220 N 3700 W HMIRS 2008438334 

South 220 N 3700 W N/A 


0.762 mi. 

4023 ft. Site 1 of 46 in cluster K 

Relative: 

Lower 



Actual: 

4229 ft. 

K54 HMIRS 2001030682 

South 220 N 3700 W N/A 


0.762 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4229 ft. 



TC02814573.1r Page 44

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

K55 HMIRS 9999030577 

South 220 N 3700 W N/A 


0.762 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 



Actual: 

4229 ft. 

K56 220 N 3700 W HMIRS 2007430343 

South 220 N 3700 W N/A 


0.762 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 



Actual: 

4229 ft. 

K57 220 N 3700 W HMIRS 2007433243 

South 220 N 3700 W N/A 


0.762 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 



Actual: 

4229 ft. 

K58 HMIRS 20018051 

South 220 NORTH 3700 WEST N/A 


0.762 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 



Actual: 

4229 ft. 

K59 HMIRS 2001686 

South 220 N 3700 W N/A 


0.762 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 



Actual: 

4229 ft. 

K60 220 N 3700 W HMIRS 2007444697 

South 220 N 3700 W N/A 


0.762 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4229 ft. 



TC02814573.1r Page 45

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

K61 HMIRS 2001020806 

South 220 N 3700 W N/A 


0.762 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 



Actual: 

4229 ft. 

K62 HMIRS 9900004175 



0.762 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 



Actual: 

4229 ft. 

K63 HMIRS 20015303 

South 220 N 3700 W N/A 


0.762 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 



Actual: 

4229 ft. 

K64 220 N 3700 W HMIRS 2008446473 

South 220 N 3700 W N/A 


0.762 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 



Actual: 

4229 ft. 

K65 220 N 3700 W HMIRS 2008457103 

South 220 N 3700 W N/A 


0.762 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 



Actual: 

4229 ft. 

K66 HMIRS 2004091447 

South 220 N 3700 WEST N/A 


0.762 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4229 ft. 



TC02814573.1r Page 46

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

K67 HMIRS 20011198 

South 220 N 3700 W N/A 


0.762 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 



Actual: 

4229 ft. 

K68 220 N 3700 W HMIRS 2008432310 

South 220 N 3700 W N/A 


0.762 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 



Actual: 

4229 ft. 

K69 220 N 3700 W HMIRS 2008427998 

South 220 N 3700 W N/A 


0.762 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 



Actual: 

4229 ft. 

K70 220 N 3700 W HMIRS 2005701511 

South 220 N 3700 W N/A 


0.762 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 



Actual: 

4229 ft. 

K71 220 N 3700 W HMIRS 2008440483 

South 220 N 3700 W N/A 


0.762 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 



Actual: 

4229 ft. 

K72 220 N 3700 W HMIRS 2009047844 

South 220 N 3700 W N/A 


0.762 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4229 ft. 



TC02814573.1r Page 47

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

K73 HMIRS 2004111198 

South 220 N 3700 W N/A 


0.762 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 



Actual: 

4229 ft. 

K74 HMIRS 9999040688 

South 220 N 3700 W N/A 


0.762 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 



Actual: 

4229 ft. 

K75 HMIRS 9900003560 

South 220 N 3700 W N/A 


0.762 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 



Actual: 

4229 ft. 

K76 220 N 3700 W HMIRS 2008441210 

South 220 N 3700 W N/A 


0.762 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 



Actual: 

4229 ft. 

K77 220 N 3700 W HMIRS 2005702944 

South 220 N 3700 W N/A 


0.762 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 



Actual: 

4229 ft. 

K78 220 N 3700 W HMIRS 2007444560 

South 220 N 3700 W N/A 


0.762 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4229 ft. 



TC02814573.1r Page 48

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

K79 220 N 3700 W HMIRS 2007437884 

South 220 N 3700 W N/A 


0.762 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 



Actual: 

4229 ft. 

K80 220 N 3700 W HMIRS 2005700662 

South 220 N 3700 W N/A 


0.762 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 



Actual: 

4229 ft. 

K81 220 N. 3700 WEST ERNS 2005603248 

South 220 N. 3700 WEST N/A 


0.762 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 



Actual: 

4229 ft. 

K82 220 N 3700 W HMIRS 2008443308 

South 220 N 3700 W N/A 


0.762 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 



Actual: 

4229 ft. 

K83 220 N 3700 W HMIRS 2008446889 

South 220 N 3700 W N/A 


0.762 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 



Actual: 

4229 ft. 

K84 220 N 3700 W HMIRS 2008436473 

South 220 N 3700 W N/A 


0.762 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4229 ft. 



TC02814573.1r Page 49

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

K85 HMIRS 9900014128 

South 220 N 3700 W N/A 


0.762 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 



Actual: 

4229 ft. 

K86 220 N 3700 W HMIRS 2008429675 

South 220 N 3700 W N/A 


0.762 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 



Actual: 

4229 ft. 

K87 220 N 3700 W HMIRS 2008436475 

South 220 N 3700 W N/A 


0.762 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 



Actual: 

4229 ft. 

K88 HMIRS 9999031304 



0.762 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 



Actual: 

4229 ft. 

K89 FEDERAL EXPRESS CORPORATION LUST 1000455203 

South 220 N 3700 W UST N/A 


0.762 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4229 ft. 

LUST: 

Facility ID: 

Release Id: 

Closed Date: 


Owner Name: 



Owner State: 

Owner Zip: 



4001437 

LVZ 

2/10/2010 

5/7/2004 

FEDEX ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT DEPT 

3620 HACKS CROSS RD BLDG B 2ND FLOOR 

MEMPHIS 

TN 

38125 

MEMPHIS, TN 38125 


Facility ID: 

Release Id: 

4001437 

KVN 

TC02814573.1r Page 50

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

FEDERAL EXPRESS CORPORATION (Continued) 1000455203 

Closed Date: 


Owner Name: 



Owner State: 

Owner Zip: 



6/3/2002 

1/20/1999 



MEMPHIS 

TN 

38125 



UST: 

Facility ID: 

Owner Name: 



Owner Phone: 

Total Tanks: 

Closed Tanks: 

4001437 




(901) 434-8468 

2 

2 

K90 FEDERAL EXPRESS CORPORATION RCRA-CESQG 1004788662 

South 220 NORTH 3700 WEST FINDS UTD988066577 


0.762 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4229 ft. 

RCRA-CESQG: 



FEDERAL EXPRESS CORPORATION 




EPA ID: 

UTD988066577 


NORTH 3700 WEST 


Contact: 

EARL PHILLIPS 





US 


(801) 539-8775 


Not reported 

EPA Region: 

08 



Description: 















TC02814573.1r Page 51

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

FEDERAL EXPRESS CORPORATION (Continued) 1004788662 






Legal status: 




FEDERAL EXPRESS CORP 

2003 CORPORATE AVE 


Not reported 

(901) 395-3761 

Private 

Owner 

Not reported 

Not reported 


















No 

Unknown 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

Yes 

No 

No 

No 



Waste code: 

Waste name: 


FINDS: 

D001 









Registry ID: 

110002165914 










operations. 

TC02814573.1r Page 52

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

K91 HMIRS 9900002639 

South 220 N 3700 W N/A 


0.762 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 



Actual: 

4229 ft. 

K92 HMIRS 9998030683 



0.762 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 



Actual: 

4229 ft. 

K93 HMIRS 9999031132 

South 220 N 3700 W N/A 


0.762 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 



Actual: 

4229 ft. 

K94 HMIRS 9900002816 



0.762 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 



Actual: 

4229 ft. 

K95 HMIRS 9999050180 



0.762 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 



Actual: 

4229 ft. 

K96 HMIRS 9998041153 



0.762 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4229 ft. 



TC02814573.1r Page 53

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

K97 HMIRS 2002044780 

South 220 N 3700 W N/A 


0.762 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 



Actual: 

4229 ft. 

K98 HMIRS 9900002126 

South 220 N 3700 W N/A 


0.762 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 



Actual: 

4229 ft. 

99 FAA-SALT LAKE CITY ALS -34 

UST U003150439 

SE SOUTH RUNWAY 34 SALT LAKE CITY AIRPORT N/A 


0.765 mi. 

4038 ft. 

Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4232 ft. 

UST: 

Facility ID: 

Owner Name: 



Owner Phone: 

Total Tanks: 

Closed Tanks: 

4001988 




(801) 320-2059 

1 

0 

100 FAA-SALT LAKE CITY LOC E/G 

LUST U000558628 

ESE RUNWAY 16 SLC AIRPORT UST N/A 


AST 

0.805 mi. 

4248 ft. 

Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4232 ft. 

LUST: 

Facility ID: 

Release Id: 

Closed Date: 


Owner Name: 



Owner State: 

Owner Zip: 



4001405 

KRO 

4/10/2000 

10/22/1998 




UT 

84116 



UST: 

Facility ID: 

Owner Name: 



4001405 




TC02814573.1r Page 54

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

FAA-SALT LAKE CITY LOC E/G (Continued) 

U000558628 

Owner Phone: 

Total Tanks: 

Closed Tanks: 

(801) 320-2059 

1 

1 

AST: 

Owner Name: 

Facility Id: 

Tank Id: 

Tank Status: 



AST: 


4001405 

2 


Not Listed 

500 

True 


UST U000813417 

SE OLD FAA GENERATOR N/A 


0.814 mi. 

4299 ft. 

Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4229 ft. 

UST: 

Facility ID: 

Owner Name: 



Owner Phone: 

Total Tanks: 

Closed Tanks: 

4000825 


325 W 800 S 


(801) 535-6962 

1 

1 

102 AVIS RENT-A-CAR 

LUST U003229688 

South 3781 TERMINAL DR , SLC AIRPORT UST N/A 


0.860 mi. 

4543 ft. 

Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4229 ft. 

LUST: 

Facility ID: 

Release Id: 

Closed Date: 


Owner Name: 



Owner State: 

Owner Zip: 



4000046 

IIL 

10/29/1999 

11/1/1993 

AVIS RENT A CAR 

900 OLD COUNTRY RD DEPT 93-IT 

GARDEN CITY 

NY 

11530 

GARDEN CITY, NY 11530 


UST: 

Facility ID: 

Owner Name: 



Owner Phone: 

Total Tanks: 

Closed Tanks: 

4000046 

AVIS RENT A CAR 

900 OLD COUNTRY RD DEPT 93-IT 

GARDEN CITY, NY 11530 

(516) 222-3424 

4 

4 

TC02814573.1r Page 55

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

L103 SPILLS S106424020 

SSE 220 NORTH 3700 WEST - SALT LAKE INT’L AIRPORT N/A 


0.936 mi. 

4944 ft. Site 1 of 4 in cluster L 

Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4229 ft. 

SPILLS: 




3/8/2004 


12/29/2003 

Responsible Party Name: Federal Express 

RP Address: 

220 North 3700 West - SLC Int’l Airport 

RP Phone: 

Not reported 

Highway: 

Not reported 

Milemarker: 

0 

Incident Summary: Caller reported that an overfill released 75 gallons of diesel fuel 

to a storm drain. Caller did not know if storm drain is part of a 

containment system for overfills or a public storm drain. TW company 

was contacted at time of the release and performed cleanup services. 

Contact at TW Company is Jeremy Furse (801) 699-1102. 

L104 HMIRS 2000018711 


1/2-1 SALT LAKE, UT 

0.936 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 



Actual: 

4229 ft. 

L105 HMIRS 9900016953 



0.936 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 



Actual: 

4229 ft. 

L106 HMIRS 2000018710 



0.936 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4229 ft. 



TC02814573.1r Page 56

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

M107 3815 W 1580 NO HMIRS 2009051724 

North 3815 W 1580 NO N/A 

> 1 SALT LAKE CITY, UT 84116 

1.223 mi. 

6458 ft. Site 1 of 4 in cluster M 

Relative: 

Higher 



Actual: 

4245 ft. 

M108 3815 W 1580 NO HMIRS 2009050406 

North 3815 W 1580 NO N/A 


1.223 mi. 


Relative: 

Higher 



Actual: 

4245 ft. 

M109 3815 WEST 1580 NORTH HMIRS 2005708134 


> 1 SALT LAKE CITY, UT 

1.224 mi. 


Relative: 

Higher 



Actual: 

4245 ft. 

M110 HMIRS 20014397 

North 3815 W. 1580 N. N/A 


1.224 mi. 


Relative: 

Higher 



Actual: 

4245 ft. 

111 3975 WEST 1580 NORTH HMIRS 2008429738 



1.243 mi. 

6563 ft. 

Relative: 

Higher 



Actual: 

4245 ft. 

N112 GREAT WESTERN PUBLISHING-SLC RCRA-NonGen 1001091721 

West 640 NORTH WRIGHT BROTHERS DR. FINDS UTR000001081 


MANIFEST 

1.254 mi. 

6622 ft. Site 1 of 4 in cluster N 

Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4224 ft. 

RCRA-NonGen: 



GREAT WESTERN PUBLISHING-SLC 


640 NORTH WRIGHT BROTHERS DR. 


TC02814573.1r Page 57

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

GREAT WESTERN PUBLISHING-SLC (Continued) 1001091721 

EPA ID: 


Contact: 





EPA Region: 

Land type: 


Description: 

UTR000001081 

SAME AS ABOVE 


DAVID HELMSING 

640 NORTH WRIGHT BROTHERS DR. 


US 

(801) 533-0850 

Not reported 

08 

Private 

Non-Generator 







Legal status: 




GREAT WESTERN PUBLISHING INC. 

1850 EAST WATKINS SUITE 20 

PHOENIX, AZ 85034 

Not reported 

(602) 229-1212 

Private 

Owner 

01/01/0001 

Not reported 


















No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 
















TC02814573.1r Page 58

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 



Evaluation: 




FINDS: 

07/02/1996 

FOCUSED COMPLIANCE INSPECTION 

Not reported 

Not reported 

State 

Registry ID: 

110001884701 



















NY MANIFEST: 

EPA ID: 

Country: 

Mailing Name: 

Mailing Contact: 

Mailing Address: 

Mailing Address 2: 

Mailing City: 

Mailing State: 

Mailing Zip: 

Mailing Zip4: 

Mailing Country: 

Mailing Phone: 

UTR000001081 

USA 

GREAT WESTERN PUBLISHING 

EDWIN TAMOUA 

640 NORTH WRIGHT BROTHERS 

Not reported 


UT 

84116 

Not reported 

USA 

801-533-0850 

Document ID: 

Manifest Status: 

Trans1 State ID: 


Generator Ship Date: 

Trans1 Recv Date: 


TSD Site Recv Date: 

Part A Recv Date: 

Part B Recv Date: 

Generator EPA ID: 

NYG0552051 

Not reported 

NYD980769947 

Not reported 

06/03/1998 

06/03/1998 

Not reported 

06/29/1998 

Not reported 

Not reported 

UTR000001081 

TC02814573.1r Page 59

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 


Trans1 EPA ID: 


TSDF ID: 

Waste Code: 

Quantity: 

Units: 

Number of Containers: 

Container Type: 

Handling Method: 

Specific Gravity: 

Year: 

Manifest Tracking Num: 

Import Ind: 

Export Ind: 

Discr Quantity Ind: 

Discr Type Ind: 

Discr Residue Ind: 

Discr Partial Reject Ind: 

Discr Full Reject Ind: 

Manifest Ref Num: 

Alt Fac RCRA Id: 

Alt Fac Sign Date: 

Mgmt Method Type Code: 

NYD045604964 

Not reported 

11282PNY 

D011 - SILVER 5.0 MG/L TCLP 

00105 

G - Gallons (liquids only)* (8.3 pounds) 

007 

DF - Fiberboard or plastic drums (glass) 

T Chemical, physical, or biological treatment. 

01.00 

98 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Document ID: 













TSDF ID: 

Waste Code: 

Quantity: 

Units: 





Year: 


Import Ind: 

Export Ind: 








NYG1358037 

Not reported 

NYD980769947 

Not reported 

10/14/1998 

10/14/1998 

Not reported 

11/18/1998 

Not reported 

Not reported 

UTR000001081 

NYD045604964 

Not reported 

Not reported 


00045 


003 


R Material recovery of more than 75 percent of the total material. 

01.00 

98 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

TC02814573.1r Page 60

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 




Not reported 

Not reported 

Document ID: 













TSDF ID: 

Waste Code: 

Quantity: 

Units: 





Year: 


Import Ind: 

Export Ind: 










NYB7117074 

Completed after the designated time period for a TSDF to get a copy to the DEC 

11282PNY 

Not reported 

971212 

971212 

Not reported 

980113 

Not reported 

980209 

UTR000001081 

NYD980769947 

Not reported 

NYD045604964 

D002 - NON-LISTED CORROSIVE WASTES 

00045 


003 



120 

97 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Document ID: 













TSDF ID: 

Waste Code: 

Quantity: 

Units: 

NYG1083798 

Not reported 

NYD980769947 

Not reported 

02/02/1999 

02/02/1999 

Not reported 

02/11/1999 

Not reported 

Not reported 

UTR000001081 

NYD045604964 

Not reported 

Not reported 


00045 


TC02814573.1r Page 61

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 






Year: 


Import Ind: 

Export Ind: 










003 



01.00 

99 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

N113 PUBLISHING FACILITY FINDS 1007841054 

West 640 N WRIGHT BROTHERS DR N/A 


1.254 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4224 ft. 

FINDS: 

Registry ID: 

110020098142 




operations. 

N114 GE MEDICAL SYSTEM - OEC RCRA-CESQG 1004789093 

West 640 WRIGHT BROTHERS DR. FINDS UTR000006130 


1.254 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4224 ft. 

RCRA-CESQG: 



GE MEDICAL SYSTEM - OEC 


640 WRIGHT BROTHERS DR. 


EPA ID: 

UTR000006130 


WRIGHT BROTHERS DRIVE 


Contact: 

KATHERIN MOODY 


640 WRIGHT BROTHERS DRIVE 



US 


(801) 536-4906 


Not reported 

EPA Region: 

08 

Land type: 

Private 

TC02814573.1r Page 62

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

GE MEDICAL SYSTEM - OEC (Continued) 1004789093 


Description: 





















Legal status: 




GENERAL ELECTRIC CO. 

3135 EASTERN TURNPIKE 

FAIRFIELD, CT 06431 

Not reported 

(801) 536-4906 

Private 

Owner 

01/01/0001 

Not reported 


















No 

Unknown 

No 

Yes 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 



Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

D000 

Not Defined 

D007 

CHROMIUM 

D008 

LEAD 

D009 

TC02814573.1r Page 63

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

GE MEDICAL SYSTEM - OEC (Continued) 1004789093 

Waste name: 


MERCURY 




Evaluation: 




FINDS: 

07/17/2007 


Not reported 

Not reported 

State 

Registry ID: 

110005211920 
















N115 PRINTING PRESS AND THERMAL OXIDIZER FINDS 1005795736 

West 590 WRIGHT BROTHERS DR N/A 


1.255 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4224 ft. 

FINDS: 

Registry ID: 

110002272264 




operations. 

TC02814573.1r Page 64

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

116 JH TILE 

NPDES S109539636 

WSW 550 NORTH WRIGHT BROTHERS DRIVE N/A 


1.294 mi. 

6830 ft. 

Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4225 ft. 

NPDES: 

Facid: 

490000099673 


UTR110121 


Not reported 


Not reported 


Not reported 


Group 1: 

Not reported 

Group 2: 

Not reported 

Group 3: 

Not reported 

Group 4: 

Not reported 

Group 5: 

Not reported 

Issue Date: 

Not reported 


Not reported 


4/30/2009 



Not reported 


Not reported 


Not reported 


Not reported 

Amount Paid: 

Not reported 

Inactivated: 

Not reported 

No Exposure: 

Not reported 

Not Received: 

Not reported 


Not reported 


Not reported 


Not reported 

Fac Oper Zip: 

Not reported 


Not reported 

Fac Site Lat: 

Not reported 


Not reported 


Not reported 

Third Sector: 

Not reported 


Not reported 


Not reported 


Not reported 

Permit Name: 

Not reported 


Not reported 

117 NORTHWEST PIPELINE AVIATION RCRA-CESQG 1004788744 

East 649 NORTH 2360 WEST FINDS UTD988074530 


1.313 mi. 

6933 ft. 

Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4232 ft. 

RCRA-CESQG: 



NORTHWEST PIPELINE AVIATION 




EPA ID: 

UTD988074530 


MS 10368 PO BOX 58900 


Contact: 

SANDY FISHLER 

TC02814573.1r Page 65

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

NORTHWEST PIPELINE AVIATION (Continued) 1004788744 





EPA Region: 


Description: 

MS 10368 PO BOX 58900 


US 

(801) 584-6730 

Not reported 

08 





















Legal status: 




NORTHWEST PIPELINE CORPORATION 

PO BOX 58900 


Not reported 

(801) 584-6730 

Private 

Owner 

Not reported 

Not reported 


















No 

Unknown 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 



Waste code: 

Waste name: 

D001 




TC02814573.1r Page 66

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

NORTHWEST PIPELINE AVIATION (Continued) 1004788744 






FINDS: 

Registry ID: 


110005206062 








O118 FORMER ARMY RESERVE HANGER FINDS 1005796670 

ESE 581 N 2360 W N/A 


1.329 mi. 

7016 ft. Site 1 of 2 in cluster O 

Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4229 ft. 

FINDS: 

Registry ID: 

110002166049 




operations. 

O119 FORMER ARMY RESERVE HANGAR 

UST U003379096 

ESE 581 N 2360 W N/A 


1.329 mi. 

7016 ft. Site 2 of 2 in cluster O 

Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4229 ft. 

UST: 

Facility ID: 

Owner Name: 



Owner Phone: 

Total Tanks: 

Closed Tanks: 

4002203 


PO BOX 145550 


(801) 575-2995 

1 

1 

TC02814573.1r Page 67

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

120 151ST REFUELING UNIT, UTAH AIR NATIONAL GUARD CERCLIS 1000984306 

East 151 ARG/EM BUILDING 1624 FINDS UT0000984286 


1.329 mi. 

7016 ft. 

Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4229 ft. 

CERCLIS: 

Site ID: 

Federal Facility: 

NPL Status: 

Non NPL Status: 

0801481 

Federal Facility 

Not on the NPL 

Assessment Complete - Decision Needed 

CERCLIS Site Contact Name(s): 

Contact Name: 

Jim Kiefer 

Contact Tel: 

(303) 312-6907 

Contact Title: 

Remedial Project Manager (RPM) 

CERCLIS Site Alias Name(s): 

Alias Name: 

UTAH AIR NATIONAL GUARD 151ST REFUELING 

Alias Address: 

151 ARG/EM BUILING 1624 


Alias Name: 

ARMY RESERVE AVIATION HELICOPTER UNIT 


Not reported 

UT 

Alias Name: 

151ST AIR REFUELING GROUP 


Not reported 

UT 

Alias Name: 

151ST REFUELING UNIT, UTAH AIR NATIONAL GUARD 


151 ARG/EM, BLDG 1624 


Site Description: THE SITE IS LOCATED EAST OF THE SALT LAKE INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT. THE SITE HAS 

BEEN A LEAKING UNDERGROUND STORAGE TANK (LUST) SITE FOR OVER 2 YEARS. SOLVENTS 

WERE DISCOVERED IN THE SOIL AND GROUNDWATER (TCE, 1,1-DCE, AND 1,1,1-TCA). 

CERCLIS Assessment History: 

Action: 

Date Started: 

Date Completed: 

Priority Level: 

DISCOVERY 

Not reported 

05/30/88 

Not reported 

Action: 

Date Started: 



Action: 

Date Started: 



Action: 

Date Started: 



FEDERAL FACILITY PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT REVIEW 

05/30/88 

11/30/89 

Low priority for further assessment 

FEDERAL FACILITY SITE INSPECTION REVIEW 

10/30/92 

03/30/93 

Higher priority for further assessment 

FEDERAL FACILITY REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION 

08/30/05 

Not reported 

Not reported 

FINDS: 

TC02814573.1r Page 68

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

151ST REFUELING UNIT, UTAH AIR NATIONAL GUARD (Continued) 1000984306 

Registry ID: 

110009314143 





CERCLIS (Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and 

Liability Information System) is the Superfund database that is used 

to support management in all phases of the Superfund program. The 

system contains information on all aspects of hazardous waste sites, 

including an inventory of sites, planned and actual site activities, 

and financial information. 



operations. 

P121 PANEL PRESS INC FINDS 1007738292 

WSW 410 N WRIGHT BROTHERS DRIVE N/A 


1.340 mi. 

7073 ft. Site 1 of 2 in cluster P 

Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4224 ft. 

FINDS: 

Registry ID: 

110020077520 




operations. 

P122 PANEL PRINTS INC. RCRA-NonGen 1001198144 

WSW 410 NORTH WRIGHT BROS DRIVE FINDS UTR000002808 


1.341 mi. 

7082 ft. Site 2 of 2 in cluster P 

Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4225 ft. 

RCRA-NonGen: 



PANEL PRINTS INC. 


410 NORTH WRIGHT BROS DRIVE 


EPA ID: 

UTR000002808 


NORTH WRIGHT BROS DRIVE 


Contact: 

JOHN SMITH 


410 NORTH WRIGHT BROS DRIVE 



US 


(801) 533-0194 


Not reported 

EPA Region: 

08 

TC02814573.1r Page 69

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

PANEL PRINTS INC. (Continued) 1001198144 

Land type: 


Description: 

Facility is not located on Indian land. Additional information is not known. 

Non-Generator 







Legal status: 




LAIRD INC. 

5016 PARKWAY PLAZA BLVD 

CHARLOTTE, NC 28217 

Not reported 

(704) 424-9779 

Private 

Owner 

Not reported 

Not reported 


















No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 





PANEL PRINTS INC. 




Waste code: 

Waste name: 


D001 











Evaluation: 



02/24/2009 


Not reported 

Not reported 

TC02814573.1r Page 70

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

PANEL PRINTS INC. (Continued) 1001198144 


FINDS: 

State 

Registry ID: 

110005209602 








123 SALT LAKE (HUB) AIRWAY FAC SEC PADS 1004605815 

East 2298 WEST 650 NORTH UT5690549139 


1.351 mi. 

7131 ft. 

Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4232 ft. 

PADS: 

EPAID: 


Facility Address: 

Facility country: 

Generator: 

Storer: 

Transporter: 

Disposer: 

Research facility: 

Smelter: 

Facility owner name: 

Contact title: 

Contact name: 

Contact tel: 

Contact extension: 


Mailing country: 

Cert. title: 

Cert. name: 

Cert. date: 

Date received: 

UT5690549139 

SALT LAKE (HUB) AIRWAY FAC SEC 



US 

Yes 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

U.S. GOVERNMENT (FAA) 

Not reported 

BEVAN, STEVE 

(801)524-5180 

Not reported 



US 

Not reported 

Not reported 

12/18/1992 

12/22/1992 

Q124 DELUXE CHECK PRINTERS INC RCRA-NonGen 1010335654 

WSW 4745 AMELIA EARHART, SUITE 480 UTD127169571 


1.352 mi. 

7137 ft. Site 1 of 5 in cluster Q 

Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4225 ft. 

RCRA-NonGen: 



DELUXE CHECK PRINTERS INC 


4745 AMELIA EARHART, SUITE 480 


TC02814573.1r Page 71

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

DELUXE CHECK PRINTERS INC (Continued) 1010335654 

EPA ID: 


Contact: 





EPA Region: 


Description: 

UTD127169571 

AMELIA EARHART, SUITE 480 


BARRY LARSON 

4745 AMELIA EARHART, SUITE 480 


US 

(801) 537-7865 

Not reported 

08 

Non-Generator 







Legal status: 




CORPORATION 



Not reported 

(999) 999-9999 

Private 

Owner 

01/01/0001 

Not reported 


















No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 





DELUXE CHECK PRINTERS INC 




Waste code: 

Waste name: 

F001 







TC02814573.1r Page 72

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

DELUXE CHECK PRINTERS INC (Continued) 1010335654 





Q125 FOODSERVICE SPECIALTY BAKERS FINDS 1004605685 

WSW 4745 AMELIA EARHART DRIVE #460 N/A 


1.352 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4225 ft. 

FINDS: 

Registry ID: 

110001885149 















operations. 

Q126 DELUXE CHECK PRINTERS INC FINDS 1010456222 

WSW 4745 AMELIA EARHART, SUITE 480 N/A 


1.352 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4225 ft. 

FINDS: 

Registry ID: 

110031321013 








TC02814573.1r Page 73

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

Q127 GE OEC MEDICAL SYSTEMS FINDS 1012087496 

WSW 4745 AMELIA EARHART DRIVE N/A 


1.352 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4225 ft. 

FINDS: 

Registry ID: 

110038451519 
















Q128 GE OEC MEDICAL SYSTEMS INC. RCRA-CESQG 1012188944 

WSW 4745 AMELIA EARHART DR. UTR000010181 


1.352 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4225 ft. 

RCRA-CESQG: 



GE OEC MEDICAL SYSTEMS INC. 


4745 AMELIA EARHART DR. 


EPA ID: 

UTR000010181 


WRIGHT BROTHERS DRIVE 


Contact: 

MARY K BARRACO 


AMELIA EARHART DR. 



US 


(801) 536-4906 


MARY.BARRACO@MED.GE.COM 

EPA Region: 

08 



Description: 











TC02814573.1r Page 74

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

GE OEC MEDICAL SYSTEMS INC. (Continued) 1012188944 










Legal status: 








Legal status: 




BRT PROPERTIES LLC 

11111 SANTA MONICA BLVD SUITE 1800 

LOS ANGELES, CA 90025 

US 

(801) 536-4906 

Private 

Owner 

08/14/2003 

Not reported 

GE OEC MEDICAL SYSTEMS, INC. 

AMELIA EARHART DR. 


US 

(801) 536-4906 

Private 

Operator 

05/03/2008 

Not reported 


















No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 



Waste type: 



Waste type: 



Waste type: 



Batteries 

No 

Not reported 

Lamps 

No 

Not reported 

Pesticides 

No 

Not reported 

TC02814573.1r Page 75

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

GE OEC MEDICAL SYSTEMS INC. (Continued) 1012188944 

Waste type: 



Thermostats 

No 

Not reported 


Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 


D001 








D002 








D003 






D035 


F003 










MIXTURES. 

F005 









TC02814573.1r Page 76

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

R129 GE OEC MEDICAL SYSTEMS FINDS 1012087282 

WSW 384 WRIGHT BROTHERS DRIVE N/A 


1.366 mi. 

7212 ft. Site 1 of 5 in cluster R 

Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4225 ft. 

FINDS: 

Registry ID: 

110038451528 










R130 SPILLS S105743065 

WSW 384 WRIGHT BROTHERS DRIVE N/A 


1.366 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4225 ft. 

SPILLS: 




2/12/2003 


2/12/2003 

Responsible Party Name: Unknown 

RP Address: 

Not reported 

RP Phone: 

Not reported 

Highway: 

Not reported 

Milemarker: 

0 

Incident Summary: Noticed odor @ 08:30 and it grew stronger until he called @09:00. 

Wind from SE. Also noticed it last night at 18:00 @ I-80 and I-215 

interchange. Described as petroleum - natural gas with diesel. 

R131 OEC MEDICAL SYSTEMS, INC FINDS 1007839760 

WSW 384 WRIGHT BROTHER DR N/A 


1.366 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4225 ft. 

FINDS: 

Registry ID: 

110020085129 








TC02814573.1r Page 77

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

OEC MEDICAL SYSTEMS, INC (Continued) 1007839760 



operations. 

ICIS (Integrated Compliance Information System) is the Integrated 

Compliance Information System and provides a database that, when 

complete, will contain integrated Enforcement and Compliance 

information across most of EPA’s programs. The vision for ICIS is to 

replace EPA’s independent databases that contain Enforcement data with 

a single repository for that information. Currently, ICIS contains all 

Federal Administrative and Judicial enforcement actions. This 

information is maintained in ICIS by EPA in the Regional offices and 

it Headquarters. A future release of ICIS will replace the Permit 

Compliance System (PCS) which supports the NPDES and will integrate 

that information with Federal actions already in the system. ICIS also 

has the capability to track other activities occurring in the Region 

that support Compliance and Enforcement programs. These include; 

Incident Tracking, Compliance Assistance, and Compliance Monitoring. 

R132 OEC MEDICAL SYSTEMS, INC. RCRA-CESQG 1004788802 

WSW 384 WRIGHT BRO. DRIVE UTD988078747 


1.367 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4225 ft. 

RCRA-CESQG: 



OEC MEDICAL SYSTEMS, INC. 


384 WRIGHT BRO. DRIVE 


EPA ID: 

UTD988078747 


P.O. BOX 25296 


Contact: 

LARRY HAASCH 





US 


(801) 328-9300 


Not reported 

EPA Region: 

08 



Description: 















TC02814573.1r Page 78

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

OEC MEDICAL SYSTEMS, INC. (Continued) 1004788802 






Legal status: 




OEC MEDICAL SYSTEMS INC 



Not reported 

(801) 328-9300 

Private 

Owner 

Not reported 

Not reported 


















No 

Unknown 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 



Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

D000 

Not Defined 

D001 








D035 


F003 










MIXTURES. 

TC02814573.1r Page 79

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

OEC MEDICAL SYSTEMS, INC. (Continued) 1004788802 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 


F005 









R133 NPS OUTSIDE SALES RCRA-LQG 1004789103 

WSW 431 NORTH WRIGHT BROTHERS DRIV FINDS UTR000006247 

> 1 SALT, UT 84116 

1.371 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4225 ft. 

RCRA-LQG: 



NPS OUTSIDE SALES 


431 NORTH WRIGHT BROTHERS DRIV 

SALT LAKE, UT 84116 

EPA ID: 

UTR000006247 


SOUTH EMPIRE ROAD 


Contact: 

LEWIS WALL 


Not reported 

Not reported 


Not reported 


(801) 328-3986 


290 


LWALL@NPSSTORE.COM 

EPA Region: 

08 

Land type: 

Private 



Description: 

Handler: generates 1,000 kg or more of hazardous waste during any 

calendar month; or generates more than 1 kg of acutely hazardous waste 

during any calendar month; or generates more than 100 kg of any 

residue or contaminated soil, waste or other debris resulting from the 

cleanup of a spill, into or on any land or water, of acutely hazardous 

waste during any calendar month; or generates 1 kg or less of acutely 

hazardous waste during any calendar month, and accumulates more than 1 

kg of acutely hazardous waste at any time; or generates 100 kg or less 



hazardous waste during any calendar month, and accumulates more than 

100 kg of that material at any time 






Legal status: 




KELLY N. FARMER 

102 NORTH 900 EAST 

BOUNTIFUL, UT 84010 

Not reported 

(801) 292-0901 

Private 

Owner 

01/01/0001 

Not reported 

TC02814573.1r Page 80

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

NPS OUTSIDE SALES (Continued) 1004789103 





Legal status: 








Legal status: 




NATIONAL PRODUCT SALES, INC. 

SOUTH EMPIRE ROAD 


US 

Not reported 

Private 

Owner 

12/17/1999 

Not reported 

NATIONAL PRODUCT SALES, INC. 

Not reported 

Not reported 

US 

Not reported 

Private 

Operator 

12/17/1999 

Not reported 


















No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 



Waste type: 



Waste type: 



Waste type: 



Waste type: 



Batteries 

No 

Not reported 

Lamps 

No 

Not reported 

Pesticides 

No 

Not reported 

Thermostats 

No 

Not reported 

TC02814573.1r Page 81

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 



















Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

D001 








D002 








D003 






D007 

CHROMIUM 

D008 

LEAD 

U061 

BENZENE, 1,1’-(2,2,2-TRICHLOROETHYLIDENE)BIS[4-CHLORO- 

D001 








TC02814573.1r Page 82

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 


Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

D002 








D004 

ARSENIC 

D005 

BARIUM 

D008 

LEAD 

D009 

MERCURY 

D035 


U002 

ACETONE (I) 

U044 

CHLOROFORM 

U121 

METHANE, TRICHLOROFLUORO- 

U134 

HYDROFLUORIC ACID (C,T) 

U154 

METHANOL (I) 

U160 

2-BUTANONE, PEROXIDE (R,T) 

U188 

PHENOL 

Biennial Reports: 

Last Biennial Reporting Year: 2009 

Annual Waste Handled: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

D001 








TC02814573.1r Page 83

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 


Amount (Lbs): 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Amount (Lbs): 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Amount (Lbs): 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Amount (Lbs): 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Amount (Lbs): 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Amount (Lbs): 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Amount (Lbs): 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Amount (Lbs): 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Amount (Lbs): 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Amount (Lbs): 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Amount (Lbs): 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Amount (Lbs): 

Waste code: 

7029 

D002 








4411 

D003 






19 

D004 

ARSENIC 

112 

D005 

BARIUM 

481 

D008 

LEAD 

155 

D009 

MERCURY 

465 

D035 


1121 

U002 

ACETONE (I) 

386 

U044 

CHLOROFORM 

112 

U121 

METHANE, TRICHLOROFLUORO- 

19 

U134 

HYDROFLUORIC ACID (C,T) 

204 

U154 

TC02814573.1r Page 84

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 


Waste name: 

Amount (Lbs): 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Amount (Lbs): 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Amount (Lbs): 

METHANOL (I) 

33 

U160 

2-BUTANONE, PEROXIDE (R,T) 

116 

U181 

BENZENAMINE, 2-METHYL-5-NITRO- 

70 





Evaluation: 




FINDS: 

11/06/2007 


Not reported 

Not reported 

State 

Registry ID: 

110006453596 








S134 SPILLS S107526093 

WSW 4867 HAROLD GATTY DRIVE N/A 


1.380 mi. 

7287 ft. Site 1 of 3 in cluster S 

Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4228 ft. 

SPILLS: 




12/12/2005 


12/12/2005 


RP Address: 

Not reported 

RP Phone: 

Not reported 

Highway: 

Not reported 

Milemarker: 

0 

Incident Summary: Caller made intial contact to DAQ Air Monitoring Center personnel. 

Caller reports heavy ambient odors of diesel and jet exhaust 

(manifest as an atmospheric plume) outside the facility. Odor has 

been so bad that employees have been getting sick and reporting head 

ache symptoms. Caller stated that in response, they have shut down 

the HVAC to prevent further infusion of ambient air/odor into the 

facility. This type of event has occurred on several occassions over 

past several weeks now. Last week the facility called 911. Hazmat 

TC02814573.1r Page 85

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

(Continued) 

crew dispatched to the facility and administered oxygen to 

individuals. The faciilty is located in the International Center 

complex several hundreds of yards west of the west runway of SL Int’l 

Airport. 

S107526093 

S135 HARLAND CLARKE HOLDING CORPORATION RCRA-CESQG 1010336627 

WSW 4867 HAROLD GATTY DRIVE UTD988078374 


1.380 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4228 ft. 

RCRA-CESQG: 



HARLAND CLARKE HOLDING CORPORATION 


4867 HAROLD GATTY DRIVE 


EPA ID: 

UTD988078374 


HAROLD GATTY DRIVE 


Contact: 

NICK PIRAINO 





US 


(801) 933-4302 


Not reported 

EPA Region: 

08 

Land type: 

Private 



Description: 




















Legal status: 






HARLAND CLARKE HOLDING CORP 

LAUREATE DRIVE 

SAN ANTONIO, TX 78249 

US 

(801) 537-1040 

Private 

Owner 

05/01/2007 

Not reported 

HARLAND CLARKE 



TC02814573.1r Page 86

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

HARLAND CLARKE HOLDING CORPORATION (Continued) 1010336627 



Legal status: 








Legal status: 








Legal status: 




US 

(801) 537-1040 

Private 

Operator 

05/01/2007 

Not reported 

HARLAND CLARKE HOLDING CO. 

LAUREATE DRIVE 


US 

(801) 933-4302 

Private 

Owner 

05/01/2007 

Not reported 

R.M. LEASING ONE NORWEST CENTER 

1700 LINCOLN ST SUITE 3950 

DENVER, CO 80203 

Not reported 

(303) 830-2221 

Private 

Owner 

01/01/0001 

Not reported 


















No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 



Waste type: 



Waste type: 



Waste type: 


Batteries 

No 

Not reported 

Lamps 

No 

Not reported 

Pesticides 

No 

TC02814573.1r Page 87

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

HARLAND CLARKE HOLDING CORPORATION (Continued) 1010336627 


Waste type: 



Not reported 

Thermostats 

No 

Not reported 










Site name: 

JOHN H HARLAND CO 




Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 


D001 








F003 










MIXTURES. 




Evaluation: 




02/24/2009 


Not reported 

Not reported 

State 

S136 JOHN H HARLAND CO FINDS 1010456173 



1.380 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4228 ft. 

FINDS: 

Registry ID: 

110031312611 

TC02814573.1r Page 88

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

JOHN H HARLAND CO (Continued) 1010456173 










operations. 

T137 SALT LAKE JET CENTER FUEL FARM 

LUST U003150435 

ESE APPROX 2280 W 470 N UST N/A 


AST 

1.417 mi. 

7480 ft. Site 1 of 5 in cluster T 

Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4232 ft. 

LUST: 

Facility ID: 

Release Id: 

Closed Date: 


Owner Name: 



Owner State: 

Owner Zip: 



4000913 

JNU 

2/16/2000 

5/31/1996 

SALT LAKE JET CENTER INC 

369 N 2370 W 


UT 

84116 



UST: 

Facility ID: 

Owner Name: 



Owner Phone: 

Total Tanks: 

Closed Tanks: 

4000913 


369 N 2370 W 


(801) 595-6438 

1 

0 

AST: 

Owner Name: 

Facility Id: 

Tank Id: 

Tank Status: 



AST: 

Owner Name: 

Facility Id: 

Tank Id: 

Tank Status: 



AST: 


4000913 

2 


Jet Fuel 

26000 

True 


4000913 

3 


Jet Fuel 

26000 

True 

TC02814573.1r Page 89

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

SALT LAKE JET CENTER FUEL FARM (Continued) 

Owner Name: SALT LAKE JET CENTER INC 

Facility Id: 

4000913 

Tank Id: 

4 

Tank Status: Currently In Use 

Substance Stored: Av Gas 

Tank Capacity: 16900 

AST: 

True 

U003150435 

Owner Name: 

Facility Id: 

Tank Id: 

Tank Status: 



AST: 


4000913 

5 


Av Gas 

16900 

True 

T138 LEHI INDEPENDENT POWER ASSOCIATES FINDS 1006313807 

ESE UNK N/A 

> 1 UNK, UT 99999 

1.423 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4232 ft. 

FINDS: 

Registry ID: 

110012510531 


CAMDBS (Clean Air Markets Division Business System) is a national 

information system that supports the implementation of market-based 

air pollution control programs administered by the Clean Air Markets 

Division, within the Office of Air and Radiation. These programs 

include the Acid Rain Program, established by Title IV of the Clean 

Air Act Amendments of 1990, and regional programs designed reduce the 

transport of ozone. These emissions trading programs allows regulated 

facilities (primarily electric utilities) to adopt the most 

cost-effective strategies to reduce emissions at their units. Units 

that reduce their emissions below the number of allowances they hold 

-- each allowance is equivalent to one ton of sulfur dioxide or 

nitrogen oxides -- may trade allowances with other units in their 

system, sell them to other utilities on the open market or through EPA 

auctions, or bank them to cover emissions in future years. CAMDBS 

functions include registering responsible officials, establishing 

allowance accounts, reporting hourly emissions data, and transferring 

allowances between accounts. 

U139 CEPHALON SALT LAKE CITY OPER. FINDS 1009332068 

SW 4710 WILEY POST WAY N/A 


1.431 mi. 

7554 ft. Site 1 of 9 in cluster U 

Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4228 ft. 

FINDS: 

Registry ID: 

110024547409 

TC02814573.1r Page 90

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

CEPHALON SALT LAKE CITY OPER. (Continued) 1009332068 



















U140 CEPHALON SALT LAKE CITY OPER. RCRA-SQG 1009312485 

SW 4710 WILEY POST WAY UTR000008896 


1.431 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4228 ft. 

RCRA-SQG: 



CEPHALON SALT LAKE CITY OPER. 


4710 WILEY POST WAY 


EPA ID: 

UTR000008896 


WILEY POST WAY 


Contact: 

TIM RHEES 





US 


(801) 401-7552 


Not reported 

EPA Region: 

08 

Land type: 

Private 



Description: 











Legal status: 

CEPHALON INC. 



US 

(801) 401-7552 

Private 

TC02814573.1r Page 91

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 









Legal status: 




Operator 

02/22/2006 

Not reported 

CEPHALON INC. 

MOORES ROAD 

FRAZER, PA 19355 

US 

(801) 401-7552 

Private 

Owner 

02/22/2006 

Not reported 


















No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 



Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

D001 








D002 








D008 

LEAD 

D009 

MERCURY 

TC02814573.1r Page 92

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 


Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 


F002 










F003 










MIXTURES. 

F005 








P075 

NICOTINE, & SALTS 

P098 

POTASSIUM CYANIDE 

U017 

BENZAL CHLORIDE 

U080 

METHANE, DICHLORO- 

U095 

[1,1’-BIPHENYL]-4,4’-DIAMINE, 3,3’-DIMETHYL- 

U097 

CARBAMIC CHLORIDE, DIMETHYL- 




Evaluation: 



12/15/2008 


Not reported 

Not reported 

TC02814573.1r Page 93

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 



State 

T141 MILLION AIR TANK FARM 

AST A100214969 

ESE APPROX 2280 W 470 N N/A 


1.432 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4232 ft. 

AST: 

Owner Name: 

Facility Id: 

Tank Id: 

Tank Status: 



AST: 

KEYSTONE AVIATION LLC 

4002337 

1 


Jet Fuel 

28000 

True 

Owner Name: 

Facility Id: 

Tank Id: 

Tank Status: 



AST: 

Owner Name: 

Facility Id: 

Tank Id: 

Tank Status: 



AST: 

Owner Name: 

Facility Id: 

Tank Id: 

Tank Status: 



AST: 

Owner Name: 

Facility Id: 

Tank Id: 

Tank Status: 



AST: 


4002337 

2 


Jet Fuel 

28000 

True 


4002337 

3 


Av Gas 

16800 

True 


4002337 

4 


Av Gas 

16800 

True 


4002337 

5 


Gasoline 

16800 

True 

TC02814573.1r Page 94

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

V142 US FEDERAL AVIATION ADMIN FMP RCRA-SQG 1000228144 

East 645 NORTH 2265 WEST FINDS UT3690590036 


1.433 mi. 

7564 ft. Site 1 of 3 in cluster V 

Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4232 ft. 

RCRA-SQG: 



US FEDERAL AVIATION ADMIN FMP 




EPA ID: 

UT3690590036 




Contact: 

DARRELL SHAFFER 





US 


(801) 524-4286 


Not reported 

EPA Region: 

08 



Description: 











Legal status: 








Legal status: 




US GOVT SALT LAKE CITY 



Not reported 

(999) 999-9999 

Federal 

Owner 

Not reported 

Not reported 

NAME UNKNOWN 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Federal 

Operator 

Not reported 

Not reported 










No 

Unknown 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

TC02814573.1r Page 95

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

US FEDERAL AVIATION ADMIN FMP (Continued) 1000228144 









No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 



Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 


FINDS: 

F001 









F003 










MIXTURES. 

F004 








Registry ID: 

110005195485 








TC02814573.1r Page 96

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

V143 FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION 

UST U003150364 

East 645 N 2265 W N/A 


1.433 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4232 ft. 

UST: 

Facility ID: 

Owner Name: 



Owner Phone: 

Total Tanks: 

Closed Tanks: 

4000286 




(801) 320-2059 

1 

1 

V144 FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION FINDS 1007676859 

East 645 N 2265 W N/A 


1.433 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4232 ft. 

FINDS: 

Registry ID: 

110020076923 




operations. 

T145 SALT LAKE JET CENTER FINDS 1007840204 

ESE 369 N 2370 W N/A 


1.433 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4232 ft. 

FINDS: 

Registry ID: 

110020089571 















operations. 

TC02814573.1r Page 97

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

T146 BARKEN INTERNATIONAL FINDS 1005797477 

ESE 369 N 2370 W N/A 


1.433 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4232 ft. 

FINDS: 

Registry ID: 

110002155186 




operations. 

W147 US FAA SALT LAKE HUB SECTOR AFS RCRA-SQG 1000227642 

ESE 645 NORTH 2275 WEST FINDS UT4690590043 


1.433 mi. 

7568 ft. Site 1 of 3 in cluster W 

Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4230 ft. 

RCRA-SQG: 



US FAA SALT LAKE HUB SECTOR AFS 




EPA ID: 

UT4690590043 




Contact: 

CHUCK PALUMBO 





US 


(801) 524-5180 


Not reported 

EPA Region: 

08 



Description: 











Legal status: 







NAME UNKNOWN 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Federal 

Operator 

Not reported 

Not reported 

FEDERAL AVIATION ADMIN 



Not reported 

TC02814573.1r Page 98

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

US FAA SALT LAKE HUB SECTOR AFS (Continued) 1000227642 


Legal status: 




(999) 999-9999 

Federal 

Owner 

Not reported 

Not reported 


















No 

Unknown 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 



Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

F001 









F003 










MIXTURES. 

F004 







X002 

TC02814573.1r Page 99

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

US FAA SALT LAKE HUB SECTOR AFS (Continued) 1000227642 

Waste name: 


FINDS: 

Registry ID: 

POLYCHLORINATED BIPHENOLS (PCBs) 


110005195537 








W148 SMITHS FOOD & DRUG FLEET DEPT. RCRA-SQG 1000837375 

ESE 535 NORTH 2300 WEST FINDS UTD988077079 


1.435 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4229 ft. 

RCRA-SQG: 



SMITHS FOOD & DRUG FLEET DEPT. 




EPA ID: 

UTD988077079 




Contact: 

WAYNE NIELSON 





US 


(801) 974-1400 


Not reported 

EPA Region: 

08 



Description: 











Legal status: 




SMITHS FOOD & DRUG 

1550 SOUTH REDWOOD ROAD 


Not reported 

(801) 974-1400 

Private 

Owner 

Not reported 

Not reported 


TC02814573.1r Page 100

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

SMITHS FOOD & DRUG FLEET DEPT. (Continued) 1000837375 

















No 

Unknown 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 



Waste code: 

Waste name: 


FINDS: 

D001 









Registry ID: 

110005206570 








W149 INT’L AIRPORT EASTSIDE FINDS 1010353838 

ESE 350 N 2300 W N/A 


1.449 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4232 ft. 

FINDS: 

Registry ID: 

110030927521 







TC02814573.1r Page 101

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

INT’L AIRPORT EASTSIDE (Continued) 1010353838 




X150 SPILLS S105743070 

ESE 337 NORTH 2370 WEST N/A 


1.460 mi. 

7708 ft. Site 1 of 10 in cluster X 

Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4234 ft. 

SPILLS: 




2/24/2003 


Not reported 

Responsible Party Name: Not reported 

RP Address: 

Not reported 

RP Phone: 

Not reported 

Highway: 

Not reported 

Milemarker: 

0 

Incident Summary: Caller reports strong odors inside the building were observed when 

employees arrived between 07:20 and 08:00 today. The odor dissipated 

after the doors were opened for a period of time. The office is 

closed over the weekend. Caller also reports the odor was strongest 

during the Christmas holidays, however, they have experienced it a 

few times since then. Several employees have reported feeling sick in 

the stomach and/or experienced headaches. The odor is described as 

not quite the same as jet fuel, but more like natural gas or a 

petroleum product. The office is located immediately east of the 

runways and is south of the National Guard office. The NOAA reports 

that at the airport at 07:56 today the wind speed was 5 knots (~ 5 

mph) from the southwest (210 degrees). 

X151 FAA-SALT LAKE CITY ASR 8 & ASR 9 E/G 

UST U003150431 

ESE 337 N 2370 W AST N/A 


1.460 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4234 ft. 

UST: 

Facility ID: 

Owner Name: 



Owner Phone: 

Total Tanks: 

Closed Tanks: 

4001415 




(801) 320-2059 

1 

1 

AST: 

Owner Name: 

Facility Id: 

Tank Id: 

Tank Status: 




4001415 

1 


Diesel 

2500 

TC02814573.1r Page 102

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

FAA-SALT LAKE CITY ASR 8 & ASR 9 E/G (Continued) 

AST: 

True 

U003150431 

X152 NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE FORCAST FINDS 1005794013 

ESE 337 N 2370 W N/A 


1.460 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4234 ft. 

FINDS: 

Registry ID: 

110002291608 




operations. 

X153 FAA SALT LAKE CITY ASR & ASR 9 E G FINDS 1005794753 

ESE 337 N 2370 W N/A 


1.460 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4234 ft. 

FINDS: 

Registry ID: 

110002283840 




operations. 

X154 NAT’L WEATHER SERV. FORECAST 

UST U003150398 

ESE 337 N 2370 W N/A 


1.460 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4234 ft. 

UST: 

Facility ID: 

Owner Name: 



Owner Phone: 

Total Tanks: 

Closed Tanks: 

4000645 

NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE 

125 S STATE 


(801) 524-5120 

1 

1 

TC02814573.1r Page 103

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

U155 CEPHALON (PREV. ANESTA CORP). RCRA-SQG 1004788836 

SW 4745 WILEY POST WAY SUITE 650 FINDS UTR000000281 


1.462 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4226 ft. 

RCRA-SQG: 



CEPHALON (PREV. ANESTA CORP). 


4745 WILEY POST WAY SUITE 650 


EPA ID: 

UTR000000281 


WILEY POST WAY SUITE 650 


Contact: 

BRUCE HIATT 


4745 WILEY POST WAY SUITE 650 



US 


(801) 401-7498 


Not reported 

EPA Region: 

08 

Land type: 

Private 



Description: 











Legal status: 




CEPHALON INCORPORATED 

145 BRANDYWINE PARKWAY 

WEST CHESTER, PA 19380 

Not reported 

(610) 738-6131 

Private 

Owner 

01/01/0001 

Not reported 


















No 

Unknown 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 


TC02814573.1r Page 104

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

CEPHALON (PREV. ANESTA CORP). (Continued) 1004788836 




CEPHALON (PREV. ANESTA CORP). 

Site name: 

CEPHAALON (PREV. ANESTA CORP). 




Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 


D001 








F003 










MIXTURES. 

P034 

2-CYCLOHEXYL-4,6-DINITROPHENOL 

U002 

ACETONE (I) 

U003 

ACETONITRILE (I,T) 

U050 

CHRYSENE 




Evaluation: 




FINDS: 

12/15/2008 


Not reported 

Not reported 

State 

Registry ID: 

110009508461 




TC02814573.1r Page 105

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

CEPHALON (PREV. ANESTA CORP). (Continued) 1004788836 





U156 NEWVECTOR COMMUNICATIONS INC 

LUST U003379137 

SW 4745 WILEY POST WAY STE 600 UST N/A 


SPILLS 

1.462 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4226 ft. 

LUST: 

Facility ID: 

Release Id: 

Closed Date: 


Owner Name: 



Owner State: 

Owner Zip: 



4000655 

KPY 

10/26/1998 

9/9/1998 

NEWVECTOR COMMUNICATIONS INC 

141 E 200 S 


UT 

84111 



UST: 

Facility ID: 

Owner Name: 



Owner Phone: 

Total Tanks: 

Closed Tanks: 

4000655 


141 E 200 S 


(801) 891-0115 

2 

2 

SPILLS: 




7/15/2003 


7/15/2003 

Responsible Party Name: Ceflon Corporation 

RP Address: 

4745 Wiley Post Way SLC 

RP Phone: 

401-7486 

Highway: 

Not reported 

Milemarker: 

0 

Incident Summary: 50 square foot equivelent area of oil released to ashpalt was 

contained with booms and absorbants. An irrigation ditch 200 feet 

away was not impacted. 

TC02814573.1r Page 106

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

U157 NEWVECTOR COMMUNICATIONS INCORPORATED FINDS 1005793957 

SW 4745 WILEY POST WAY STE 600 AST N/A 


1.462 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4226 ft. 

FINDS: 

Registry ID: 

110002292082 




operations. 

AST: 

Owner Name: 

Facility Id: 

Tank Id: 

Tank Status: 



AST: 


4000655 

3 

Permanently Out of Use 

Diesel 

2000 

True 

U158 UTAH SCIENTIFIC RCRA-CESQG 1000455200 

SW 4750 WILEY POST WY SUITE 150 FINDS UTD988066882 


1.467 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4226 ft. 

RCRA-CESQG: 



UTAH SCIENTIFIC 


4750 WILEY POST WY SUITE 150 


EPA ID: 

UTD988066882 


WILEY POST WY SUITE 150 


Contact: 

SUSAN ZOLLINGER 


4750 WILEY POST WY SUITE 150 



US 


(801) 575-3283 


Not reported 

EPA Region: 

08 

Land type: 




Description: 












TC02814573.1r Page 107

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

UTAH SCIENTIFIC (Continued) 1000455200 









Legal status: 




DYNATECH 



Not reported 

(999) 999-9999 

Private 

Owner 

Not reported 

Not reported 


















No 

Unknown 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 



Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 


D001 








F003 










MIXTURES. 


TC02814573.1r Page 108

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

UTAH SCIENTIFIC (Continued) 1000455200 



Evaluation: 




FINDS: 

03/11/2008 


Not reported 

Not reported 

State 

Registry ID: 

110009507747 








U159 WORLD HEART RCRA-CESQG 1010336095 

SW 4750 WEST WILEY POST WAY UTD982586711 


1.467 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4226 ft. 

RCRA-CESQG: 



WORLD HEART 


4750 WEST WILEY POST WAY 


EPA ID: 

UTD982586711 


WEST WILEY POST WAY 


Contact: 

HOLLEY MOSS 


4750 WEST WILEY POST WAY 



US 


(801) 355-6255 


Not reported 

EPA Region: 

08 

Land type: 

Private 



Description: 















TC02814573.1r Page 109

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

WORLD HEART (Continued) 1010336095 






Legal status: 








Legal status: 








Legal status: 








Legal status: 




ASSET MANAGEMENT SERVICES 



US 

(999) 999-9999 

Private 

Owner 

01/01/1989 

Not reported 

ASSET MANAGEMENT SERVICE4S 

WILEY POST PLAZA LLC 


US 

(801) 355-6255 

Private 

Owner 

01/01/1989 

Not reported 

WORLD HEART 



US 

(801) 355-6255 

Private 

Operator 

12/13/1983 

Not reported 

RESEARCH MEDICAL 



US 

(801) 355-6255 

Private 

Operator 

01/01/1989 

Not reported 
















No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

TC02814573.1r Page 110

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

WORLD HEART (Continued) 1010336095 



No 





WORLD HEART 

Site name: 

RESEARCH MEDICAL 




Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 


D001 








D002 








U045 

METHANE, CHLORO- (I, T) 

U056 

BENZENE, HEXAHYDRO- (I) 

U112 

ACETIC ACID ETHYL ESTER (I) 

U159 

2-BUTANONE (I,T) 

U213 

FURAN, TETRAHYDRO-(I) 




Evaluation: 




03/18/2008 


Not reported 

Not reported 

State 

TC02814573.1r Page 111

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

U160 ARTELL VIDEO SYSTEMS INCORPORATED FINDS 1005797531 

SW 4750 WILEY POST WAY N/A 


1.467 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4226 ft. 

FINDS: 

Registry ID: 

110002153954 




operations. 

U161 WORLD HEART FINDS 1010456212 

SW 4750 WEST WILEY POST WAY N/A 


1.467 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4226 ft. 

FINDS: 

Registry ID: 

110031320915 








X162 MILLION AIR 

LUST U003150427 

ESE 303 N 2370 W UST N/A 


1.470 mi. 


Relative: 

Equal 

Actual: 

4236 ft. 

LUST: 

Facility ID: 

Release Id: 

Closed Date: 


Owner Name: 



Owner State: 

Owner Zip: 



4002057 

JGA 

7/11/1996 

11/21/1995 

DAVID K RICHARDS 

303 N 2370 W 


UT 

84116 



UST: 

Facility ID: 

Owner Name: 


4002057 

DAVID K RICHARDS 

303 N 2370 W 

TC02814573.1r Page 112

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

MILLION AIR (Continued) 


Owner Phone: (801) 359-2085 



U003150427 

X163 AMES CONSTRUCTION FINDS 1005517761 



1.470 mi. 


Relative: 

Equal 

Actual: 

4236 ft. 

FINDS: 

Registry ID: 

110002058745 













X164 SPILLS S105223402 



1.470 mi. 


Relative: 

Equal 

Actual: 

4236 ft. 

SPILLS: 




9/27/1999 


9/27/1999 


RP Address: 

Not reported 

RP Phone: 

Not reported 

Highway: 

Not reported 

Milemarker: 

Not reported 

Incident Summary: A pilot opened the wrong valve in his plane resulting in the spillage 

of 100 gallons of Jet A aviation fuel. Some of the fuel flowed into 

the airport drainage system. Salt Lake City Fire Department at the 

airport supervised pumping of the fuel out of the drainage system. 

Impacted soil in the drainage area was also removed. No fuel 

reportedly got off-site. 

TC02814573.1r Page 113

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

X165 KEYSTONE AVIATION FINDS 1007841066 

ESE 303 N 2370 W N/A 


1.470 mi. 


Relative: 

Equal 

Actual: 

4236 ft. 

FINDS: 

Registry ID: 

110020098268 




operations. 

X166 KEYSTONE AVIATION FINDS 1004605683 



1.470 mi. 


Relative: 

Equal 

Actual: 

4236 ft. 

FINDS: 

Registry ID: 

110001884970 















operations. 

167 OLD INTERMOUNTAIN PIPER 

LUST U003150370 

ESE APPROX 400 N 2370 W UST N/A 


1.481 mi. 

7822 ft. 

Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4232 ft. 

LUST: 

Facility ID: 

Release Id: 

Closed Date: 


Owner Name: 



4002126 

JRE 

Not reported 

8/6/1996 


PO BOX 145550 


TC02814573.1r Page 114

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

OLD INTERMOUNTAIN PIPER (Continued) 

Owner State: UT 

Owner Zip: 84114 


Project Manager: Hillary Mason 

U003150370 

UST: 

Facility ID: 

Owner Name: 



Owner Phone: 

Total Tanks: 

Closed Tanks: 

4002126 


PO BOX 145550 


(801) 575-2995 

2 

2 

168 WINTERSTEIGER RCRA-CESQG 1004788743 

SW 217 WRIGHT BROS. DR FINDS UTD988074522 


1.494 mi. 

7889 ft. 

Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4227 ft. 

RCRA-CESQG: 



WINTERSTEIGER 


217 WRIGHT BROS. DR 


EPA ID: 

UTD988074522 


WRIGHT BROS. DR 


Contact: 

STEVE TOMLINSON 


217 WRIGHT BROS. DR 



US 


(801) 355-6550 


Not reported 

EPA Region: 

08 



Description: 




















WINTERSTEIGER GMBH 

PO BOX 204 DIMMELSTRASSEG 

RIED AUSTRIA, UT 99999 

Not reported 

(999) 999-9999 

TC02814573.1r Page 115

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

WINTERSTEIGER (Continued) 1004788743 

Legal status: 




Private 

Owner 

Not reported 

Not reported 


















No 

Unknown 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 



Waste code: 

Waste name: 


FINDS: 

D001 









Registry ID: 

110005206053 








TC02814573.1r Page 116

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

Y169 UTAH AIR NATIONAL GUARD 

SPILLS S105222798 

East 765 NORTH 2200 WEST NPDES N/A 


1.495 mi. 

7894 ft. Site 1 of 8 in cluster Y 

Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4230 ft. 

SPILLS: 




7/24/1999 


7/24/1999 

Responsible Party Name: Utah Air National Guard 

RP Address: 

765 North 2200 West Salt Lake City 

RP Phone: 

595-2122 

Highway: 

Not reported 

Milemarker: 

Not reported 

Incident Summary: Approximately 5 gallons of JP-8 jet fuel was released. Release 

occurred during refueling operation. Not sure if spill resulted from 

combination of tank being topped off and heat of the day caused fuel 

to expand and back-flow out, or if it was due to a defective fuel 

nozzle. All product was cleaned up. No impact to waters. 




11/27/2002 


11/27/2002 

Responsible Party Name: National Guard 

RP Address: 

Not reported 

RP Phone: 

Not reported 

Highway: 

Not reported 

Milemarker: 

0 

Incident Summary: Lines from above ground storage tanks, located at the National Guard 

northwest side of the facility, cross over the City Drain Canal. 

Personnel observed an odor then discovered a release of JP-8 jet fuel 

from a bad seal on a pipe. Leak has been stopped and a contractor has 

been called to mitigate. Booms have been deployed 1/2 mile from the 

point of release, and a canal gate has been closed in the effort to 

contain the release. Volume of release is estimated at 800 to 1000 

gallons. Additional information per NRC report - Sheen on the canal 

is estimated 1/4 mile in length. Canal is approximately 4 feet in 

width. 15:30 SLVHD reports that T.W. Company has been contracted to 

remediate. 

NPDES: 

Facid: 

Not reported 


UTR000436 


Not reported 


MJR CHRIS BUCKNER 


UTAH NATIONAL GUARD BASE 

Facility Operator Contact Person: CPT CHRIS BUCKNER 

Group 1: 

Not reported 

Group 2: 

Not reported 

Group 3: 

Not reported 

Group 4: 

Not reported 

Group 5: 

S 

Issue Date: 

12/3/2007 


3/1/2008 


12/31/2012 

Municipal Operating Storm Sewer System: SALT LAKE CITY 

TC02814573.1r Page 117

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

UTAH AIR NATIONAL GUARD (Continued) 

S105222798 





Amount Paid: 

Inactivated: 

No Exposure: 

Not Received: 




Fac Oper Zip: 


Fac Site Lat: 



Third Sector: 




Permit Name: 


GREAT SALT LAKE 

4581 

S 

COL BRENT E WINGET 

500 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 


SALT LAKE 

UT 

841162999 

8012452122 

0 

0 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

12/3/2007 

12/3/2007 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Facid: 

Not reported 


UTR000436 


Not reported 


Not reported 


Not reported 


Group 1: 

Not reported 

Group 2: 

Not reported 

Group 3: 

Not reported 

Group 4: 

Not reported 

Group 5: 

Not reported 

Issue Date: 

3/1/2008 


3/1/2008 


12/31/2012 



Not reported 


Not reported 


Not reported 


Not reported 

Amount Paid: 

Not reported 

Inactivated: 

Not reported 

No Exposure: 

Not reported 

Not Received: 

Not reported 


Not reported 


Not reported 


Not reported 

Fac Oper Zip: 

Not reported 


8012452122 

Fac Site Lat: 

40.786416 


-111.95378 


Not reported 

Third Sector: 

Not reported 


Not reported 


Not reported 

TC02814573.1r Page 118

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

UTAH AIR NATIONAL GUARD (Continued) 

S105222798 


Permit Name: 


Not reported 

UTAH AIR NATIONAL GUARD BASE 

GREAT SALT LAKE 

Y170 CHEVRON PIPE LINE UANG P/L DELIVERY FACI RCRA-SQG 1000434269 

East 765 N 2200 W FINDS UTD000826396 


1.495 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4230 ft. 

RCRA-SQG: 



CHEVRON PIPE LINE UANG P/L DELIVERY FACI 


765 N 2200 W 


EPA ID: 

UTD000826396 


PO BOX 25117 


Contact: 

DAVID BLACK 


PO BOX 25117 



US 


(801) 322-1511 


Not reported 

EPA Region: 

08 



Description: 























No 

Unknown 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 



Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

D000 

Not Defined 

D001 



TC02814573.1r Page 119

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

CHEVRON PIPE LINE UANG P/L DELIVERY FACI (Continued) 1000434269 







FINDS: 

Registry ID: 


110006364898 








Y171 UTAH AIR NATIONAL GUARD BASE RCRA-CESQG 1000237463 

East 765 NORTH 2200 WEST LUST UT1570090018 


UST 

1.495 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4230 ft. 

RCRA-CESQG: 







EPA ID: 

UT1570090018 




Contact: 

GENE BUCKNER 





US 


(801) 595-2122 


Not reported 

EPA Region: 

08 

Land type: 

Federal 



Description: 















TC02814573.1r Page 120

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

UTAH AIR NATIONAL GUARD BASE (Continued) 1000237463 






Legal status: 








Legal status: 




FEDERAL GOVERNMENT 



Not reported 

(999) 999-9999 

Federal 

Owner 

01/01/0001 

Not reported 

NAME UNKNOWN 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Federal 

Operator 

Not reported 

Not reported 


















No 

Unknown 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 






Site name: 

UTAH AIR NATIONAL GUARD 






Site name: 

UTAH AIR NATL. GUARD 











TC02814573.1r Page 121

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 





Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

D000 

Not Defined 

D001 








D006 

CADMIUM 

D007 

CHROMIUM 

D008 

LEAD 

D009 

MERCURY 

D011 

SILVER 

D018 

BENZENE 

D035 


F001 









F002 










TC02814573.1r Page 122

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 


Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 


F003 










MIXTURES. 

F005 








U031 

1-BUTANOL (I) 

U159 


U220 

BENZENE, METHYL- 

U239 

BENZENE, DIMETHYL- (I,T) 




Evaluation: 




LUST: 

Facility ID: 

Release Id: 

Closed Date: 


Owner Name: 



Owner State: 

Owner Zip: 



08/02/2007 


Not reported 

Not reported 

State 

4001640 

LVC 

Not reported 

2/10/2004 


765 N 2200 W 


UT 

84116 


Melissa Turchi 

Facility ID: 

Release Id: 

4001640 

ICT 

TC02814573.1r Page 123

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 


Closed Date: 


Owner Name: 



Owner State: 

Owner Zip: 



Facility ID: 

Release Id: 

Closed Date: 


Owner Name: 



Owner State: 

Owner Zip: 



Facility ID: 

Release Id: 

Closed Date: 


Owner Name: 



Owner State: 

Owner Zip: 



4/22/1996 

6/7/1993 


765 N 2200 W 


UT 

84116 


[Tamie Call] 

4001640 

IMB 

Not reported 

9/3/1993 


765 N 2200 W 


UT 

84116 



4001640 

MNI 

Not reported 

7/7/2009 


765 N 2200 W 


UT 

84116 



UST: 

Facility ID: 

Owner Name: 



Owner Phone: 

Total Tanks: 

Closed Tanks: 

4001640 


765 N 2200 W 


(801) 595-2157 

11 

8 

Y172 765 NORTH 2200 WEST ERNS 2009910885 

East 765 NORTH 2200 WEST N/A 


1.495 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4230 ft. 



TC02814573.1r Page 124

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

Y173 U.S. AIR FORCE UTAH ANG BASE RANGE FINDS 1011852686 

East 765 N 2200 W N/A 


1.495 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4230 ft. 

FINDS: 

Registry ID: 

110037148556 













US EPA TRIS (Toxics Release Inventory System) contains information 

from facilities on the amounts of over 300 listed toxic chemicals that 

these facilities release directly to air, water, land, or that are 

transported off-site. 

















operations. 

Y174 U.S. DOD USAF UTAH ANG BASE RANGE TRIS 1012010196 

East 765 N 2200 W 84116SRFRC76 


1.495 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4230 ft. 

TC02814573.1r Page 125

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

Y175 765 NORTH 2200 WEST ERNS 2008910885 



1.495 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 



Actual: 

4230 ft. 

Y176 SPILLS S105223022 

East 765 N. 2200 W. BUILDING 208 N/A 


1.497 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4230 ft. 

SPILLS: 




12/3/1994 


12/3/1994 

Responsible Party Name: UTANG 

RP Address: 

765 N. 2200 W.-151 ARG-EM BLDG.1624 

RP Phone: 

(801)-575-2157 

Highway: 

Not reported 

Milemarker: 

Not reported 

Incident Summary: ALARM ON INTERSTITIAL MONITOR LEAK DETECTOR ON USED-OIL UNDERGROUND 

STORAGE TANK IS GOING OFF. NOT CERTAIN WHETHER IT IS AN ACTUAL 

RELEASE OR A DEFECTIVE MONITOR. WILL HAVE TESTED AS SOON AS POSSIBLE 

AND WILL REPORT BACK. IT IS ON A NEW DOUBLE-WALL TANK AND THERE IS NO 

INVENTORY LOSS. 12/4/94 13:10 -- FOLLOW-UP: MONITORING DEVICE ON UST 

WAS DEFECTIVE. DISCONNECTED WIRE CAUSED ALARM. THEY WILL CONTINUE TO 

OBSERVE LEVELS OF PRODUCT IN TANK AND WILL HAVE A TIGHTNESS TEST 

CONDUCTED. THEY WILL FOLLOW UP WITH LUST BRANCH. 

Z177 PLANT# 3 

NPDES S107868895 

East 900 W 2200 NORTH N/A 

> 1 NO SLC, UT 84116 

1.498 mi. 

7910 ft. Site 1 of 2 in cluster Z 

Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4229 ft. 

NPDES: 

Facid: 

Not reported 


UTR000044 


Not reported 


ALEX GILBERT 


Not reported 


Group 1: 

Not reported 

Group 2: 

Not reported 

Group 3: 

Not reported 

Group 4: 

Not reported 

Group 5: 

Not reported 

Issue Date: 

9/29/1992 


10/1/1992 


9/30/1997 



SALT LAKE SEWAGE CANAL 


3273 


Not reported 

TC02814573.1r Page 126

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

PLANT# 3 (Continued) 

S107868895 


Amount Paid: 

Inactivated: 

No Exposure: 

Not Received: 




Fac Oper Zip: 


Fac Site Lat: 



Third Sector: 




Permit Name: 


ALEX GILBERT 

1620 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

0 

0 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

9/12/1999 

9/12/1999 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Z178 PLANT #3 

NPDES S108911696 

East 900 W 2200 N N/A 

> 1 NORTH SALT LAKE CITY, UT 84116 

1.498 mi. 

7910 ft. Site 2 of 2 in cluster Z 

Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4229 ft. 

NPDES: 

Facid: 

Not reported 


UTR000044 


Not reported 


Not reported 


Not reported 


Group 1: 

Not reported 

Group 2: 

Not reported 

Group 3: 

Not reported 

Group 4: 

Not reported 

Group 5: 

Not reported 

Issue Date: 

10/1/1992 


10/1/1992 


9/30/1997 



Not reported 


Not reported 


Not reported 


Not reported 

Amount Paid: 

Not reported 

Inactivated: 

Not reported 

No Exposure: 

Not reported 

Not Received: 

Not reported 


Not reported 


Not reported 


Not reported 

Fac Oper Zip: 

Not reported 


8012664491 

Fac Site Lat: 

40.74947 


111.91660 


Not reported 

TC02814573.1r Page 127

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

PLANT #3 (Continued) 

S108911696 

Third Sector: 




Permit Name: 


Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Concrete Products Company 

Salt Lake Sewage Canal 

AA179 GADDIS INVESTMENTS 

NPDES S109539261 



1.504 mi. 

7941 ft. Site 1 of 6 in cluster AA 

Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4229 ft. 

NPDES: 

Facid: 

490000099394 


UTR000994 


Not reported 


Not reported 


Not reported 


Group 1: 

Not reported 

Group 2: 

Not reported 

Group 3: 

Not reported 

Group 4: 

Not reported 

Group 5: 

Not reported 

Issue Date: 

Not reported 


Not reported 


12/31/2009 11:59:59 PM 



Not reported 


Not reported 


Not reported 


Not reported 

Amount Paid: 

Not reported 

Inactivated: 

Not reported 

No Exposure: 

Not reported 

Not Received: 

Not reported 


Not reported 


Not reported 


Not reported 

Fac Oper Zip: 

Not reported 


Not reported 

Fac Site Lat: 

Not reported 


Not reported 


Not reported 

Third Sector: 

Not reported 


Not reported 


Not reported 


Not reported 

Permit Name: 

Not reported 


Not reported 

TC02814573.1r Page 128

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

AA180 BECTON DICKINSON IMMUNODIAGNOSTICS MLTS 1001206558 

East 810 N. 2200 WEST N/A 


1.504 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4229 ft. 

MLTS: 

License Number: 

First License Date: 

License Date: 

Lic. Expiration Date: 

Contact Name: 

Contact Phone: 

Institution Code: 

Primary Program: 

Department: 

Building: 

States Allowing Use: 

License Use: 

Store Material Use: 

Redistribution Use: 

Incinerate Use: 

Burial Use: 

Last Inspection Date: 

Next Inspection Date: 

Inspector Name: 

Status: 

43-14991-01 

0 

10/23/1986 

11/30/1987 

Not reported 

Not reported 

14991 

Not reported 

AUTOMATED IMMUNCHEMISTRY SYSTEMS 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

No 

No 

No 

No 

10/1983 

11/1111 

Not reported 

Not reported 

AA181 GADDIS INVESTMENT FINDS 1011850584 

East 810 NORTH 2200 WEST NPDES N/A 


1.504 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4229 ft. 

FINDS: 

Registry ID: 

110037102159 










NPDES: 

Facid: 






Group 1: 

Group 2: 

Group 3: 

Not reported 

UTR000994 

Not reported 

Not reported 

THE BOEING COMPANY 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

TC02814573.1r Page 129

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

GADDIS INVESTMENT (Continued) 1011850584 

Group 4: 

Not reported 

Group 5: 

Not reported 

Issue Date: 

4/7/2008 


4/7/2008 


12/31/2009 



Not reported 


Not reported 


Not reported 


Not reported 

Amount Paid: 

Not reported 

Inactivated: 

Not reported 

No Exposure: 

Not reported 

Not Received: 

Not reported 






UT 

Fac Oper Zip: 

84116 


Not reported 

Fac Site Lat: 

Not reported 


Not reported 


Not reported 

Third Sector: 

Not reported 


Not reported 


4/7/2008 


4/7/2008 

Permit Name: 

Not reported 


Not reported 

Facid: 

Not reported 


UTR000994 


Not reported 


Not reported 


Katie Skordal 


Group 1: 

Not reported 

Group 2: 

Not reported 

Group 3: 

Not reported 

Group 4: 

Not reported 

Group 5: 

Not reported 

Issue Date: 

4/7/2008 


4/7/2008 


12/31/2009 



Not reported 


Not reported 


Not reported 


Not reported 

Amount Paid: 

Not reported 

Inactivated: 

Not reported 

No Exposure: 

Not reported 

Not Received: 

Not reported 


Not reported 


Not reported 


Not reported 

Fac Oper Zip: 

Not reported 


Not reported 

TC02814573.1r Page 130

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

GADDIS INVESTMENT (Continued) 1011850584 

Fac Site Lat: 



Third Sector: 




Permit Name: 


40.787 

111.953 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

The Boeing Company 

Surplus Canal/Salt Lake City Storm Water Sewer 

AA182 BECTON-DICKINSON CO INC. FINDS 1010456243 

East 810 N 2200 W N/A 


1.504 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4229 ft. 

FINDS: 

Registry ID: 

110031313335 








AA183 THE BOEING CO., TULSA DIVISION, SLC RCRA-CESQG 1004788895 

East 810 NORTH 2200 WEST FINDS UTR000001792 


1.504 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4229 ft. 

RCRA-CESQG: 



THE BOEING CO., TULSA DIVISION, SLC 




EPA ID: 

UTR000001792 




Contact: 

JUSTIN GARNER 





US 


(801) 537-6488 


Not reported 

EPA Region: 

08 



Description: 






TC02814573.1r Page 131

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

THE BOEING CO., TULSA DIVISION, SLC (Continued) 1004788895 















Legal status: 




GADDIS INVESTMENT 

675 EAST 2100 SOUTH STE 150 


Not reported 

(801) 487-3236 

Private 

Owner 

Not reported 

Not reported 


















No 

Unknown 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 



Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

F002 










F003 





TC02814573.1r Page 132

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 







MIXTURES. 


FINDS: 

Registry ID: 


110005208925 








AA184 BECTON-DICKINSON CO INC. RCRA-NonGen 1010335798 

East 810 N 2200 W UTD980953251 


1.504 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4229 ft. 

RCRA-NonGen: 



BECTON-DICKINSON CO INC. 


810 N 2200 W 


EPA ID: 

UTD980953251 


N 2200 W 


Contact: 

NEAL LANAGERMAN 


810 N 2200 W 



US 


(619) 565-0302 


Not reported 

EPA Region: 

08 


Non-Generator 

Description: 














No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

TC02814573.1r Page 133

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

BECTON-DICKINSON CO INC. (Continued) 1010335798 






No 

No 

No 

No 





BECTON-DICKINSON CO INC. 




Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

D001 








D002 








F002 










F003 










MIXTURES. 

F005 



TC02814573.1r Page 134

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

BECTON-DICKINSON CO INC. (Continued) 1010335798 






Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 


U002 

ACETONE (I) 

U003 

ACETONITRILE (I,T) 

U239 



AB185 INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAMPUS RCRA-CESQG 1004788767 

East 551 NORTH 2200 WEST FINDS UTD988077392 


1.506 mi. 

7951 ft. Site 1 of 12 in cluster AB 

Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4232 ft. 

RCRA-CESQG: 



INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAMPUS 




EPA ID: 

UTD988077392 




Contact: 

RICHARD VAN ALLEN 





US 


(801) 967-4276 


Not reported 

EPA Region: 

08 



Description: 


















SALT LAKE COMMUNITY COLLEGE 

4600 SOUTH REDWOOD ROAD 


TC02814573.1r Page 135

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT CAMPUS (Continued) 1004788767 



Legal status: 




Not reported 

(801) 967-4276 

State 

Owner 

Not reported 

Not reported 


















No 

Unknown 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 



Waste code: 

Waste name: 


FINDS: 

D001 









Registry ID: 

110005206794 








TC02814573.1r Page 136

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

AB186 COUNTRY PRIDE FOODS FINDS 1005794988 

East 501 N 2200 W N/A 


1.506 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4232 ft. 

FINDS: 

Registry ID: 

110002281389 




operations. 

AB187 COUNTRY PRIDE FOODS 

UST U003150646 

East 501 N 2200 W N/A 


1.506 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4232 ft. 

UST: 

Facility ID: 

Owner Name: 



Owner Phone: 

Total Tanks: 

Closed Tanks: 

4001174 

CONAGRA POULTRY COMPANY 

422 N WASHINGTON 

EL DORADO, AR 71731 

(501) 863-1670 

2 

2 

188 SPILLS S107739170 

South I-80 / BANGERTER HIGHWAY N/A 


1.507 mi. 

7959 ft. 

Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4232 ft. 

SPILLS: 




2/7/2006 


2/7/2006 

Responsible Party Name: Watkins Motor Line 

RP Address: 

PO Box 95002 Lakeland FL 33804 

RP Phone: 

800-456-4545 

Highway: 

I-80 & Bangerter Highway 

Milemarker: 

0 

Incident Summary: Truck accident along I-80 westbound and Bangerter Highway ruptured a 

saddle tank and released an estimated 60 gallons of diesel. Two zones 

of contamination will be addressed. An zone with estimated area of 

15ft x 6ft on the asphalt has been mitigated with absorbant, and an 

area 10ft x 10ft on the shoulder will be excavated after utility 

locates are completed. No surface waters have been impacted. TW 

Company has been dispatched and is now on scene to remediate. Fire 

Dept. and Salt Lake Valley Health Dept. are on-scene. 

TC02814573.1r Page 137

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

AB189 UNISYS CORPORATION HAZNET 1001954973 



1.513 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4232 ft. 

HAZNET: 

Gepaid: 

Contact: 

Telephone: 

Facility Addr2: 

Mailing Name: 


Mailing City,St,Zip: 

Gen County: 

TSD EPA ID: 

TSD County: 

Waste Category: 

Disposal Method: 

Tons: 

Facility County: 

UTD009073214 

UNISYS MASTER BLUEBELL TRUST 

8015945035 

Not reported 

Not reported 



99 

CAD009452657 

San Mateo 

Not reported 

Recycler 

.1500 

99 

Gepaid: 

Contact: 

Telephone: 


Mailing Name: 



Gen County: 

TSD EPA ID: 

TSD County: 



Tons: 


Gepaid: 

Contact: 

Telephone: 


Mailing Name: 



Gen County: 

TSD EPA ID: 

TSD County: 



Tons: 


Gepaid: 

Contact: 

Telephone: 


Mailing Name: 



UTD009073214 


8015945035 

Not reported 

Not reported 



99 

CAD050806850 

Los Angeles 

Other inorganic solid waste 

Transfer Station 

.1100 

99 

UTD009073214 


8015945035 

Not reported 

Not reported 



99 

CAD050806850 

Los Angeles 

Not reported 


.0600 

99 

UTD009073214 


8015945035 

Not reported 

Not reported 



TC02814573.1r Page 138

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

UNISYS CORPORATION (Continued) 1001954973 

Gen County: 

TSD EPA ID: 

TSD County: 



Tons: 


Gepaid: 

Contact: 

Telephone: 


Mailing Name: 



Gen County: 

TSD EPA ID: 

TSD County: 



Tons: 


99 

CAD050806850 

Los Angeles 

Unspecified organic liquid mixture 


.0175 

99 

UTD009073214 


8015945035 

Not reported 

Not reported 



99 

CAD050806850 

Los Angeles 

Laboratory waste chemicals 


.0025 

99 


9 additional CA_HAZNET: record(s) in the EDR Site Report. 

AB190 L-3 COMMUNICATIONS-CSW NPDES S107869237 



1.513 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4232 ft. 

NPDES: 

Facid: 

Not reported 


UTR000412 


Not reported 


MIKE BOSKO 


L-3 COMMUNICATIONS-CSW 

Facility Operator Contact Person: DAN MACDONALD 

Group 1: 

Not reported 

Group 2: 

AC 

Group 3: 

Not reported 

Group 4: 

Not reported 

Group 5: 

Not reported 

Issue Date: 

1/5/2005 


1/1/2005 


12/31/2009 



BRIGHTON CANAL 


3679 


AC 


JOHN M. HILL 

Amount Paid: 

500 

Inactivated: 

Not reported 

No Exposure: 

Not reported 

Not Received: 

Not reported 





TC02814573.1r Page 139

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

L-3 COMMUNICATIONS-CSW (Continued) S107869237 


Fac Oper Zip: 


Fac Site Lat: 



Third Sector: 




Permit Name: 


UT 

841160850 

8015942000 

40 46 59 

111 57 57 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

12/22/2004 

12/22/2004 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Facid: 

Not reported 


UTR000412 


Not reported 


Not reported 


Not reported 


Group 1: 

Not reported 

Group 2: 

Not reported 

Group 3: 

Not reported 

Group 4: 

Not reported 

Group 5: 

Not reported 

Issue Date: 

1/1/2005 


1/1/2005 


12/31/2009 



Not reported 


Not reported 


Not reported 


Not reported 

Amount Paid: 

Not reported 

Inactivated: 

Not reported 

No Exposure: 

Not reported 

Not Received: 

Not reported 


Not reported 


Not reported 


Not reported 

Fac Oper Zip: 

Not reported 


8015942027 

Fac Site Lat: 

40.783446 


-111.953318 


Not reported 

Third Sector: 

Not reported 


Not reported 


Not reported 


Not reported 

Permit Name: 

L-3 COMMUNICATIONS - CSW 


BRIGHTON CANAL 

Facid: 






490000098512 

UTR000412 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

TC02814573.1r Page 140

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

L-3 COMMUNICATIONS-CSW (Continued) S107869237 

Group 1: 

Not reported 

Group 2: 

Not reported 

Group 3: 

Not reported 

Group 4: 

Not reported 

Group 5: 

Not reported 

Issue Date: 

Not reported 


Not reported 


12/31/2009 



Not reported 


Not reported 


Not reported 


Not reported 

Amount Paid: 

Not reported 

Inactivated: 

Not reported 

No Exposure: 

Not reported 

Not Received: 

Not reported 


Not reported 


Not reported 


Not reported 

Fac Oper Zip: 

Not reported 


Not reported 

Fac Site Lat: 

Not reported 


Not reported 


Not reported 

Third Sector: 

Not reported 


Not reported 


Not reported 


Not reported 

Permit Name: 

Not reported 


Not reported 

AB191 L-3 COMMUNICATIONS CSW TRIS 1006815865 

East 640 N 2200 W 84116L3CMM64 


1.513 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4232 ft. 

AB192 L-3 COMMUNICATIONS, CS-WEST RCRA-LQG 1001198139 

East 640 NORTH 2200 WEST FINDS UTR000000307 


1.513 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4232 ft. 

RCRA-LQG: 



L-3 COMMUNICATIONS, CS-WEST 


640 N. 2200 WEST 

P.O. BOX 16850 


EPA ID: 

UTR000000307 


N. 2200 WEST 

P. O. BOX 16850 


TC02814573.1r Page 141

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

L-3 COMMUNICATIONS, CS-WEST (Continued) 1001198139 

Contact: 






EPA Region: 

Land type: 


Description: 

MICHAEL A BOSKO 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

(801) 594-2000 

2035 

MICHAEL.A.BOSKO@L-3COM.COM 

08 

Private 



















Legal status: 








Legal status: 





Not reported 

Not reported 

US 

Not reported 

Private 

Operator 

04/29/1997 

Not reported 

BAY BRIDGE REALTY PARTNERS 

ONE EMBARCADERO CENTER SUITE 2405 

SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94111 

US 

Not reported 

Private 

Owner 

12/01/1998 

Not reported 













No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

TC02814573.1r Page 142

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 







No 

No 

No 

No 



Waste type: 



Waste type: 



Waste type: 



Waste type: 



Batteries 

No 

Not reported 

Lamps 

No 

Not reported 

Pesticides 

No 

Not reported 

Thermostats 

No 

Not reported 










Site name: 

L-3 COMMUNICATIONS 






Site name: 

L-3 COMMUNICATIONS INC. 






Site name: 







Site name: 







Site name: 







Site name: 

L-3 COMMUNICATIONS CS-W 

TC02814573.1r Page 143

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 







Site name: 





Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

D001 








D002 








D003 






D004 

ARSENIC 

D005 

BARIUM 

D006 

CADMIUM 

D007 

CHROMIUM 

D008 

LEAD 

D009 

MERCURY 

D010 

SELENIUM 

D011 

SILVER 

TC02814573.1r Page 144

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 


Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

D035 


F003 










MIXTURES. 

F005 








F007 

SPENT CYANIDE PLATING BATH SOLUTIONS FROM ELECTROPLATING OPERATIONS 

F019 

WASTEWATER TREATMENT SLUDGES FROM THE CHEMICAL CONVERSION COATING OF 

ALUMINUM EXCEPT FROM ZIRCONIUM PHOSPHATING IN ALUMINUM CAN WASHING 

WHEN SUCH PHOSPHATING IS AN EXCLUSIVE CONVERSION COATING PROCESS. 

P010 

ARSENIC ACID H3ASO4 

P030 

CYANIDES (SOLUBLE CYANIDE SALTS), NOT OTHERWISE SPECIFIED 

U002 

ACETONE (I) 

U080 

METHANE, DICHLORO- 

U151 

MERCURY 

U154 

METHANOL (I) 

U159 


U161 

METHYL ISOBUTYL KETONE (I) 

U220 

TC02814573.1r Page 145

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 


Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 


U239 





Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Amount (Lbs): 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Amount (Lbs): 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Amount (Lbs): 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Amount (Lbs): 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Amount (Lbs): 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Amount (Lbs): 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Amount (Lbs): 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Amount (Lbs): 

D001 








4807 

D002 








3067 

D003 






7663 

D005 

BARIUM 

7663 

D006 

CADMIUM 

9403 

D007 

CHROMIUM 

32340 

D008 

LEAD 

32749 

D009 

MERCURY 

30 

TC02814573.1r Page 146

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 


Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Amount (Lbs): 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Amount (Lbs): 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Amount (Lbs): 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Amount (Lbs): 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Amount (Lbs): 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Amount (Lbs): 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Amount (Lbs): 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Amount (Lbs): 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

D010 

SELENIUM 

7663 

D035 


13731 

F003 










MIXTURES. 

1740 

F005 








2592 

F006 

WASTEWATER TREATMENT SLUDGES FROM ELECTROPLATING OPERATIONS EXCEPT 

FROM THE FOLLOWING PROCESSES: (1) SULFURIC ACID ANODIZING OF ALUMINUM; 

(2) TIN PLATING ON CARBON STEEL; (3) ZINC PLATING (SEGREGATED BASIS) 

ON CARBON STEEL; (4) ALUMINUM OR ZINC-ALUMINUM PLATING ON CARBON 

STEEL; (5) CLEANING/STRIPPING ASSOCIATED WITH TIN, ZINC AND ALUMINUM 

PLATING ON CARBON STEEL; AND (6) CHEMICAL ETCHING AND MILLING OF 

ALUMINUM. 

97 

F007 


97 

F019 

WASTEWATER TREATMENT SLUDGES FROM THE CHEMICAL CONVERSION COATING OF 

ALUMINUM EXCEPT FROM ZIRCONIUM PHOSPHATING IN ALUMINUM CAN WASHING 

WHEN SUCH PHOSPHATING IS AN EXCLUSIVE CONVERSION COATING PROCESS. 

7663 

P030 

CYANIDES (SOLUBLE CYANIDE SALTS), NOT OTHERWISE SPECIFIED 

3067 

U002 

ACETONE (I) 

TC02814573.1r Page 147

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 


Amount (Lbs): 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Amount (Lbs): 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Amount (Lbs): 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Amount (Lbs): 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Amount (Lbs): 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Amount (Lbs): 

8072 

U154 

METHANOL (I) 

3067 

U159 


8072 

U161 

METHYL ISOBUTYL KETONE (I) 

3067 

U220 


12879 

U239 


11139 


Regulation violated: SR - R315-5.34/R315-7-11.4 
















Evaluation: 




FINDS: 

07/27/2005 



09/16/2005 

State 

Registry ID: 

110001882936 









TC02814573.1r Page 148

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 





























operations. 

AB193 PARAMAX SYSTEMS CORP PARAMAX FINDS 1006079364 

East 640 N. 2200 W. N/A 


1.513 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4232 ft. 

FINDS: 

Registry ID: 

110002136894 






TC02814573.1r Page 149

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

AB194 SPILLS S106053659 

East 640 N 2200 W N/A 


1.513 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4232 ft. 

SPILLS: 




9/19/2003 


9/19/2003 

Responsible Party Name: Dan McDonald/L3 Communications 

RP Address: 

640 N 2200 W 

RP Phone: 

(801) 594-2027 

Highway: 

Not reported 

Milemarker: 

0 

Incident Summary: A chemist in a laboratory dropped a 3 liter beaker containing a 

solution of potassium silver cyanide. Salt Lake HazMat was called in 

a decontaminated 6 people. Over 200 people were evacuated from the 

building. TW Company was called in and cleaned up the liquid from a 4 

square foot area on the floor. TW is conducting air monitoring in the 

building. Duty Officer recommended that L3 call NRC & Report Spill. 

Reportable quantity of potassium silver cyanide is 1 lb. 

AB195 UNISYS CORPORATION CORRACTS 1000390596 

East 640 NORTH 2200 WEST RCRA-NonGen UTD009073214 


1.513 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4232 ft. 

CORRACTS: 

EPA ID: 

EPA Region: 

Area Name: 

Actual Date: 

Action: 

NAICS Code(s): 

Original schedule date: 

Schedule end date: 

UTD009073214 

08 

ENTIRE FACILITY 

09/04/1997 

CA075LO - CA Prioritization, Facility or area was assigned a low 

corrective action priority 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

EPA ID: 

UTD009073214 

EPA Region: 

08 

Area Name: 


Actual Date: 

09/16/1996 

Action: 

CA750NR - Migration of Contaminated Groundwater under Control, 

Effective 2/5/1999 per revised program guidance: This code for No 

release to groundwater should no longer be used 

NAICS Code(s): Not reported 

Original schedule date: Not reported 

Schedule end date: Not reported 

EPA ID: 

EPA Region: 

Area Name: 

Actual Date: 

Action: 

UTD009073214 

08 


09/16/1996 

CA725NC - Current Human Exposures Under Control, Effective 2/5/1999 

per revised program guidance: This code for -No control measures 

TC02814573.1r Page 150

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 





EPA ID: 

EPA Region: 

Area Name: 

Actual Date: 

Action: 




necessary- should no longer be used 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

UTD009073214 

08 


09/16/1996 

CA070NO - RFA Determination Of Need For An RFI, RFI is Not Necessary 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

EPA ID: 

UTD009073214 

EPA Region: 

08 

Area Name: 


Actual Date: 

09/16/1996 

Action: 

CA225NR - Stabilization Measures Evaluation, This facility is, not 

amenable to stabilization activity at the, present time for reasons 

other than (1) it appears to be technically, infeasible or 

inappropriate (NF) or (2) there is a lack of technical, information 

(IN). Reasons for this conclusion may be the status of, closure at the 

facility, the degree of risk, timing considerations, the status of 

corrective action work at the facility, or other, administrative 

considerations 

NAICS Code(s): Not reported 

Original schedule date: Not reported 

Schedule end date: Not reported 

RCRA-NonGen: 



UNISYS CORPORATION 




EPA ID: 

UTD009073214 




Contact: 

MICHAEL BOSKO 





US 


(801) 594-5035 


Not reported 

EPA Region: 

08 

Land type: 

Private 


Non-Generator 

Description: 







Legal status: 


PO BOX 500 

PHILADELPHIA, PA 19424 

Not reported 

(215) 542-6926 

Private 

TC02814573.1r Page 151

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 





Owner 

01/01/0001 

Not reported 


















No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 











Site name: 

UNISYS SLC OPERATIONS 











Site name: 







Site name: 




Corrective Action Summary: 

Event date: 

Event: 

Event date: 

Event: 

09/16/1996 

RFA Determination Of Need For An RFI, RFI is Not Necessary; 

09/16/1996 

Current Human Exposures under Control, Effective 2/5/1999 per revised 

program guidance: This code for ’No control measures necessary’ should 

no longer be used. Previously entered NC status codes should be 

updated, but may remain in the database until they are replaced by 

more recent codes. 

TC02814573.1r Page 152

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 


Event date: 

Event: 

Event date: 

Event: 

Event date: 

Event: 

Event date: 

Event: 

Event date: 

Event: 

09/16/1996 

Stabilization Measures Evaluation,This facility is not amenable to 

stabilization activity at the present time for reasons other than 1- 

it appears to be technically infeasible or inappropriate (NF) or 2- 

there is a lack of technical information (IN). Reasons for this 

conclusion may be the status of closure at the facility, the degree of 

risk, timing considerations, the status of corrective action work at 

the facility, or other administrative considerations. 

09/16/1996 

CA077L 

09/16/1996 

Igration of Contaminated Groundwater under Control, Effective 2/5/1999 

per revised program guidance: This code for ’No release to 

groundwater’ should no longer be used. Previously entered NR status 

codes should be updated, but may remain in the database until they are 

replaced by more recent codes. 

09/16/1996 

CA076L 

09/04/1997 

CA Prioritization, Facility or area was assigned a low corrective 

action priority. 


Regulation violated: Not reported 


LDR - General 



Violation lead agency: EPA 

Enforcement action: Not reported 

Enforcement action date: Not reported 



Enforcement lead agency: Not reported 

















Not reported 


12/05/1985 

06/04/1986 

State 


04/14/1986 

Not reported 

Not reported 

State 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 


TC02814573.1r Page 153

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 



Evaluation: 





Evaluation: 





Evaluation: 




10/21/1988 

NON-FINANCIAL RECORD REVIEW 

LDR - General 

11/25/1988 

EPA 

09/01/1988 


Not reported 

Not reported 

State 

12/05/1985 



06/04/1986 

State 

AB196 ELECTRONICS MANUFACTURING FACILITY FINDS 1005795674 

East 640 N 2200 W N/A 


1.513 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4232 ft. 

FINDS: 

Registry ID: 

110002273307 




operations. 

AB197 640 N 2200 W ERNS 2003700137 

East 640 N 2200 W N/A 


1.513 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 



Actual: 

4232 ft. 

AC198 WESTERN SPRAY PAINTING RCRA-NonGen 1001091745 

WSW 563 NORTH NEIL ARMSTRONG WAY FINDS UTR000001321 


1.518 mi. 

8014 ft. Site 1 of 4 in cluster AC 

Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4227 ft. 

RCRA-NonGen: 



WESTERN SPRAY PAINTING 


563 NORTH NEIL ARMSTRONG WAY 


EPA ID: 

UTR000001321 


NORTH NEIL ARMSTRONG WAY 

TC02814573.1r Page 154

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

WESTERN SPRAY PAINTING (Continued) 1001091745 

Contact: 





EPA Region: 

Land type: 


Description: 


MARILYN PANCO 



US 

(801) XXX-XXXX 

Not reported 

08 

Private 

Non-Generator 







Legal status: 








Legal status: 






SALT LAKE CITY, U8 4116 

Not reported 

(801) 99-9999 

Private 

Owner 

01/01/0001 

Not reported 



SALT LAKE CITY, U8 4116 

Not reported 

(801) 99-9999 

Private 

Owner 

Not reported 

Not reported 


















Unknown 

Unknown 

No 

No 

No 

No 

Unknown 

Unknown 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 








TC02814573.1r Page 155

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 



Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

D001 








D035 


F003 










MIXTURES. 

F005 








D001 








D035 


F003 










MIXTURES. 

TC02814573.1r Page 156

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 


Waste code: 

Waste name: 


F005 











Evaluation: 




FINDS: 

11/14/1996 


Not reported 

Not reported 

State 

Registry ID: 

110001884774 



















AC199 HOYT USA FINDS 1005797675 

WSW 543 N NEIL ARMSTRONG DRIVE N/A 


1.521 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4227 ft. 

FINDS: 

Registry ID: 

110002264950 






TC02814573.1r Page 157

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

HOYT USA (Continued) 1005797675 










operations. 

AD200 BEEHIVE INTERNATIONAL# RCRA-NonGen 1010335356 

WSW 4910 AMELIA EARHART DR UTD041311069 


1.525 mi. 

8051 ft. Site 1 of 2 in cluster AD 

Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4228 ft. 

RCRA-NonGen: 



BEEHIVE INTERNATIONAL# 


4910 AMELIA EARHART DR 


EPA ID: 

UTD041311069 


PO BOX 25668 


Contact: 

GEORGE VILLEPONTEAUX 


PO BOX 25668 



US 


(801) 355-6000 


Not reported 

EPA Region: 

08 


Non-Generator 

Description: 



















No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 




TC02814573.1r Page 158

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

BEEHIVE INTERNATIONAL# (Continued) 1010335356 



BEEHIVE INTERNATIONAL# 



Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 


F001 









F002 











AD201 BEEHIVE INTERNATIONAL# FINDS 1000242225 

WSW 4910 AMELIA EARHART DR N/A 


1.525 mi. 

8051 ft. Site 2 of 2 in cluster AD 

Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4228 ft. 

FINDS: 

Registry ID: 

110005197018 


NCDB (National Compliance Data Base) supports implementation of the 

Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) and the 

Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA). The system tracks inspections in 

regions and states with cooperative agreements, enforcement actions, 

and settlements. 







TC02814573.1r Page 159

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

AC202 FINISHING SHOP FOR METAL & PLASTIC PARTS FINDS 1005773952 

WSW 505 N NEIL ARMSTRONG RD N/A 


1.527 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4227 ft. 

FINDS: 

Registry ID: 

110002275190 




operations. 

AC203 HOYT USA RCRA-SQG 1000472422 

WSW 475 NORTH NEIL ARMSTRONG RD FINDS UTD988069860 


1.533 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4227 ft. 

RCRA-SQG: 



HOYT ARCHERY COMPANY 


543 NORTH NEIL ARMSTRONG ROAD 


EPA ID: 

UTD988069860 


NEIL ARMSTRONG ROAD 


Contact: 

TERRY BENSON 


475 NORTH NEIL ARMSTRONG RD 



US 


(801) 363-2990 


4282 


Not reported 

EPA Region: 

08 

Land type: 

Private 



Description: 











Legal status: 






PROLOGIS 



US 

(801) 363-2990 

Private 

Owner 

01/01/1984 

Not reported 



TC02814573.1r Page 160

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 




Legal status: 








Legal status: 





US 

(801) 363-2990 

Private 

Operator 

01/01/1984 

Not reported 

JAS D. EASTON INC 



Not reported 

(999) 999-9999 

Private 

Owner 

Not reported 

Not reported 


















No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 



Waste type: 



Waste type: 



Waste type: 



Waste type: 



Batteries 

No 

Not reported 

Lamps 

No 

Not reported 

Pesticides 

No 

Not reported 

Thermostats 

No 

Not reported 





TC02814573.1r Page 161

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 


Site name: 


HOYT USA 



Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 


D001 








D018 

BENZENE 

D035 


D039 

TETRACHLOROETHYLENE 

F003 










MIXTURES. 

F005 











Evaluation: 





Evaluation: 



10/28/2009 


Not reported 

Not reported 

State 

02/24/2009 


Not reported 

Not reported 

TC02814573.1r Page 162

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 



FINDS: 

State 

Registry ID: 

110005204199 








204 BARKEN INTRNL RCRA-NonGen 1000268685 

NE SALT LAKE CITY INTL AIRPORT 



1.536 mi. 

8111 ft. 

Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4232 ft. 

RCRA-NonGen: 



BARKEN INTRNL 


SALT LAKE CITY INTL AIRPORT 


EPA ID: 

UTD981548068 


BOX 22269 AMF 


Contact: 

ROBERT ELLER 


BOX 22269 AMF 



US 


(801) 539-7700 


Not reported 

EPA Region: 

08 

Land type: 



Non-Generator 

Description: 







Legal status: 




KEN HEPNER 



Not reported 

(999) 999-9999 

Private 

Owner 

Not reported 

Not reported 







No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

TC02814573.1r Page 163

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

BARKEN INTRNL (Continued) 1000268685 












No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 





BARKEN INTRNL 




Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 


D000 

Not Defined 

D001 








F002 










F004 










Evaluation: 



10/01/2009 


Not reported 

Not reported 

TC02814573.1r Page 164

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

BARKEN INTRNL (Continued) 1000268685 


FINDS: 

State 

Registry ID: 

110008176151 








AE205 TREASURE CHEST ADVERTISING FINDS 1012105051 

WSW 430 NORTH NEIL ARMSTRONG WAY N/A 


1.538 mi. 

8119 ft. Site 1 of 4 in cluster AE 

Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4227 ft. 

FINDS: 

Registry ID: 

110038771031 













AE206 SALT LAKE INTERNATIONAL CENTER FINDS 1005795572 

WSW 430 NEIL ARMSTRONG RD N/A 


1.538 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4227 ft. 

FINDS: 

Registry ID: 

110002274690 




operations. 

TC02814573.1r Page 165

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

AE207 UNITED PARCEL SERVICE RCRA-CESQG 1004789125 

WSW 439 NORTH NEIL ARMSTRONG RD. FINDS UTR000006460 


1.539 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4227 ft. 

RCRA-CESQG: 





439 NORTH NEIL ARMSTRONG RD. 


EPA ID: 

UTR000006460 


NORTH NEIL ARMSTRONG RD. 


Contact: 

ROBERT PELLICER 





US 


(801) 322-2042 


Not reported 

EPA Region: 

08 



Description: 




















Legal status: 







Not reported 

(801) 322-2042 

Private 

Owner 

01/01/0001 

Not reported 











No 

Unknown 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

TC02814573.1r Page 166

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 









No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 



Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 


FINDS: 

U019 

BENZENE (I,T) 

U044 

CHLOROFORM 

U147 

2,5-FURANDIONE 

U239 



Registry ID: 

110005212162 








AF208 THE BOEING COMPANY RCRA-LQG 1000339304 

ENE 1215 NORTH SPERRY WY FINDS UTD981550858 


1.542 mi. 

8141 ft. Site 1 of 4 in cluster AF 

Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4229 ft. 

RCRA-LQG: 







EPA ID: 

UTD981550858 




Contact: 

KATHERINE J SKORDAL 


Not reported 

Not reported 


Not reported 


(801) 537-5951 


KATHERINE.SKORDAL@BOEING.COM 

EPA Region: 

08 

Land type: 

Municipal 

TC02814573.1r Page 167

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

THE BOEING COMPANY (Continued) 1000339304 


Description: 



















Legal status: 








Legal status: 





NORTH RIVERSIDE 

CHICAGO, IL 60606 

US 

Not reported 

Municipal 

Owner 

08/13/1998 

Not reported 


Not reported 

Not reported 

US 

Not reported 

Municipal 

Operator 

08/13/1998 

Not reported 


















No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 



Waste type: 


Batteries 

Yes 

TC02814573.1r Page 168

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 



Waste type: 



Waste type: 



Waste type: 



Not reported 

Lamps 

Yes 

Not reported 

Pesticides 

No 

Not reported 

Thermostats 

Yes 

Not reported 





Site name: 

THE BOEING COMPANY - SALT LAKE CITY UTAH 






Site name: 

THE BOEING COMPANY - SALT LAKE CITY 






Site name: 

THE BOEING COMPANY-- SALT LAKE 











Site name: 

THE BOEING COMPANY, DAPD 






Site name: 

DOUGLAS AIRCRAFT CO. 






Site name: 

MCDONNELL DOUGLAS CORPORATION 






Site name: 

MCDONNELL DOUGLAS CORP. 






Site name: 

MCDONNELL DOUGLAS CORP. 

TC02814573.1r Page 169

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 







Site name: 





Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

D001 








D002 








D007 

CHROMIUM 

D008 

LEAD 

D009 

MERCURY 

D035 


F002 










F003 








TC02814573.1r Page 170

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 




MIXTURES. 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

F005 











Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Amount (Lbs): 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Amount (Lbs): 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Amount (Lbs): 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Amount (Lbs): 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Amount (Lbs): 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Amount (Lbs): 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

D001 








11522.1 

D002 








7636.4 

D007 

CHROMIUM 

48476.3 

D008 

LEAD 

1050 

D009 

MERCURY 

45 

D035 


11522.1 

F002 




TC02814573.1r Page 171

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 


Amount (Lbs): 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Amount (Lbs): 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Amount (Lbs): 







1387 

F003 










MIXTURES. 

39804.1 

F005 








41191.1 




TSD IS-Contingency Plan and Emergency Procedures 














Evaluation: 





Evaluation: 

08/07/2007 


TSD IS-Contingency Plan and Emergency Procedures 

09/24/2007 

State 

02/27/2001 


TC02814573.1r Page 172

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 






Evaluation: 




FINDS: 

Not reported 

Not reported 

State 

05/10/1995 


Not reported 

Not reported 

State 

Registry ID: 

110001881287 





































operations. 

TC02814573.1r Page 173

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

AF209 THE BOEING COMPANY 

NPDES S107869023 

ENE 1215 NORTH 2200 WEST N/A 


1.542 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4229 ft. 

NPDES: 

Facid: 

Not reported 


UTR000187 


Not reported 


BLAKE IZATT 



Facility Operator Contact Person: JUSTIN GARNER 

Group 1: 

Not reported 

Group 2: 

AB 

Group 3: 

Not reported 

Group 4: 

Not reported 

Group 5: 

Not reported 

Issue Date: 

1/30/2010 


1/1/2010 


12/31/2014 



DRAINAGE CANAL NORTH OF PLANT 


3728 


AB 


TODD SILVA 

Amount Paid: 

500 

Inactivated: 

Not reported 

No Exposure: 

Not reported 

Not Received: 

Not reported 




SLC 


UT 

Fac Oper Zip: 

84116 


8015376488 

Fac Site Lat: 

40 57 46 


111 57 17 


Not reported 

Third Sector: 

Not reported 


Not reported 


11/16/2009 


11/16/2009 

Permit Name: 

Not reported 


Not reported 

Facid: 






Group 1: 

Group 2: 

Group 3: 

Group 4: 

Group 5: 

Issue Date: 



Not reported 

UTR000187 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

1/1/2005 

1/1/2005 

12/31/2009 

TC02814573.1r Page 174

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

THE BOEING COMPANY (Continued) 



Not reported 


Not reported 


Not reported 


Not reported 

Amount Paid: 

Not reported 

Inactivated: 

Not reported 

No Exposure: 

Not reported 

Not Received: 

Not reported 


Not reported 


Not reported 


Not reported 

Fac Oper Zip: 

Not reported 


8015376400 

Fac Site Lat: 

40.77079 


111.95346 


Not reported 

Third Sector: 

Not reported 


Not reported 


Not reported 


Not reported 

Permit Name: 



CITY DRAIN SURPLUS CANAL 

S107869023 

Facid: 

490000098382 


UTR000187 


Not reported 


Not reported 


Not reported 


Group 1: 

Not reported 

Group 2: 

Not reported 

Group 3: 

Not reported 

Group 4: 

Not reported 

Group 5: 

Not reported 

Issue Date: 

Not reported 


Not reported 


12/31/2009 



Not reported 


Not reported 


Not reported 


Not reported 

Amount Paid: 

Not reported 

Inactivated: 

Not reported 

No Exposure: 

Not reported 

Not Received: 

Not reported 


Not reported 


Not reported 


Not reported 

Fac Oper Zip: 

Not reported 


Not reported 

Fac Site Lat: 

Not reported 


Not reported 


Not reported 

Third Sector: 

Not reported 


Not reported 

TC02814573.1r Page 175

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

THE BOEING COMPANY (Continued) 

S107869023 



Permit Name: 


Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

AF210 MCDONNELL DOUGLAS CORP, DOUGLAS AIRCRAFT FTTS 1009517984 

ENE 1215 NORTH 2200 WEST HIST FTTS N/A 


1.542 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4229 ft. 

FTTS INSP: 

Inspection Number: 

Region: 

Inspection Date: 

Inspector: 

Violation occurred: 

Investigation Type: 

Investigation Reason: 

Legislation Code: 

Facility Function: 

1996081512798 1 

08 

08/15/96 

K. ATENCIO 

No 

EPCRA, Enforcement, Federal Conducted 

Neutral Scheme, Region 

EPCRA 

User 

HIST FTTS INSP: 


Region: 


Inspector: 






1996081512798 1 

08 

Not reported 

K. ATENCIO 

No 

EPCRA, Enforcement, Federal Conducted 

Neutral Scheme, Region 

EPCRA 

User 

AF211 CEMENT PLANT FINDS 1006323072 

ENE 1100 W 2200 N N/A 


1.546 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4230 ft. 

FINDS: 

Registry ID: 

110012627489 





TC02814573.1r Page 176

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

AG212 UNISYS RCRA-CESQG 1006811798 

ESE 480 NORTH 2200 WEST UTR000007369 


1.547 mi. 

8170 ft. Site 1 of 2 in cluster AG 

Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4229 ft. 

RCRA-CESQG: 



UNISYS 




EPA ID: 

UTR000007369 

Contact: 

IRENE SIMONS 





US 


(801) 594-5060 


Not reported 

EPA Region: 

08 



Description: 




















Legal status: 








Legal status: 




C.B. RICHARD ELLIS 



US 

(801) 594-5060 

Private 

Operator 

12/17/1998 

Not reported 

BAY BRIDGE CORPORATE, LLC 



US 

(801) 594-5060 

Private 

Owner 

12/17/1998 

Not reported 



No 

TC02814573.1r Page 177

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

UNISYS (Continued) 1006811798 
















No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 



Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

D001 








D002 








F002 










F003 










MIXTURES. 

TC02814573.1r Page 178

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 


Waste code: 

Waste name: 


F005 









AE213 SET SURFACE ENGINEERING TECH RCRA-CESQG 1004789138 

WSW 425 NEIL ARMSTRONG FINDS UTR000006593 


1.548 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4228 ft. 

RCRA-CESQG: 



SET SURFACE ENGINEERING TECH 


425 NEIL ARMSTRONG 


EPA ID: 

UTR000006593 


NEIL ARMSTRONG 


Contact: 

GEM OSAKI 





US 


(801) 350-3681 


Not reported 

EPA Region: 

08 



Description: 




















Legal status: 




BIO SURFACE ENGINEERING TECH 



Not reported 

(801) 350-3681 

Private 

Owner 

01/01/0001 

Not reported 

TC02814573.1r Page 179

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

SET SURFACE ENGINEERING TECH (Continued) 1004789138 


















No 

Unknown 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 



Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 


FINDS: 

D001 








D002 









Registry ID: 

110009450245 








TC02814573.1r Page 180

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

AH214 FAA AIR TRAFFIC CONTROL CENTER FINDS 1005794792 

East 2150 W 700 N N/A 


1.550 mi. 

8184 ft. Site 1 of 4 in cluster AH 

Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4230 ft. 

FINDS: 

Registry ID: 

110002283181 




operations. 

AG215 WATERLINE BREAK FINDS 1010353549 

ESE 470 N 2200 W N/A 


1.551 mi. 

8187 ft. Site 2 of 2 in cluster AG 

Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4229 ft. 

FINDS: 

Registry ID: 

110030927095 










AH216 FAA - AIR TRAFFIC CONTROL CENTER 

LUST U003150462 

East 2150 W 700 N UST N/A 


1.557 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4230 ft. 

LUST: 

Facility ID: 

Release Id: 

Closed Date: 


Owner Name: 



Owner State: 

Owner Zip: 



4000287 

HYE 

7/2/1993 

12/18/1992 




UT 

84116 


[Dale Urban] 

Facility ID: 

Release Id: 

4000287 

IKG 

TC02814573.1r Page 181

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

FAA - AIR TRAFFIC CONTROL CENTER (Continued) 

Closed Date: 3/4/2002 

Notification Date: 12/16/1993 

Owner Name: FAA SALT LAKE SMO SAFETY OFFICE 

Owner Address: 2150 W 700 N BUILDING 1 

Owner City: SALT LAKE CITY 

Owner State: UT 



Project Manager: Melissa Turchi 

U003150462 

UST: 

Facility ID: 

Owner Name: 



Owner Phone: 

Total Tanks: 

Closed Tanks: 

4000287 




(801) 320-2059 

9 

5 

AH217 US FED AVIATION ADMIN SLC ARTCC FINDS 1010454123 

East 2150 WEST 700 NORTH N/A 


1.557 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4230 ft. 

FINDS: 

Registry ID: 

110031304238 








AH218 US FED AVIATION ADMIN SLC ARTCC RCRA-NonGen 1010335003 

East 2150 WEST 700 NORTH UT8690590056 


1.557 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4230 ft. 

RCRA-NonGen: 



US FED AVIATION ADMIN SLC ARTCC 




EPA ID: 

UT8690590056 


WEST 700 NORTH 


Contact: 

GEORGE-A HAWKINS 





US 

TC02814573.1r Page 182

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

US FED AVIATION ADMIN SLC ARTCC (Continued) 1010335003 



EPA Region: 


Description: 

(801) 539-3153 

Not reported 

08 

Non-Generator 







Legal status: 








Legal status: 




FED AVIATION ADMIN SLC ARTCC 



Not reported 

(801) 539-3250 

Federal 

Owner 

01/01/0001 

Not reported 

NAME UNKNOWN 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Federal 

Operator 

01/01/0001 

Not reported 


















No 

Unknown 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 



Waste code: 

Waste name: 

F003 










TC02814573.1r Page 183

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

US FED AVIATION ADMIN SLC ARTCC (Continued) 1010335003 

MIXTURES. 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 


U133 

HYDRAZINE (R,T) 


AI219 SERVISAIR TANK FARM 

LAST S106560704 



1.564 mi. 

8259 ft. Site 1 of 3 in cluster AI 

Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4232 ft. 

LAST: 

Facility ID: 

Release ID: 

Site Type: 


Date Closed: 

4002356 

LVM 

AST w/RP Lead 

False 

2004-03-31 00:00:00 

AI220 SERVISAIR TANK FARM 

AST A100251615 



1.564 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4232 ft. 

AST: 

Owner Name: 

Facility Id: 

Tank Id: 

Tank Status: 



AST: 

SERVISAIR 

4002356 

11 


Jet Fuel 

100000 

True 

Owner Name: 

Facility Id: 

Tank Id: 

Tank Status: 



AST: 

Owner Name: 

Facility Id: 

Tank Id: 

Tank Status: 



AST: 

Owner Name: 

Facility Id: 

Tank Id: 

Tank Status: 



SERVISAIR 

4002356 

12 


Jet Fuel 

150000 

True 

SERVISAIR 

4002356 

13 


Gasoline 

16000 

True 

SERVISAIR 

4002356 

14 


Diesel 

8000 

TC02814573.1r Page 184

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

SERVISAIR TANK FARM (Continued) 

A100251615 

AST: 

True 

AJ221 TUBING MANUFACTURING FACILITY ICIS 1011605326 

WSW 5040 HAROLD GATTY DRIVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 841162860 N/A 


1.567 mi. 

8272 ft. Site 1 of 4 in cluster AJ 

Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4228 ft. 

ICIS: 

Enforcement Action ID: 

FRS ID: 

Program ID: 

Action Name: 

Facility Name: 


Enforcement Action Type: 


EPA Region #: 

08-2000-0323 

110010797218 

NET 490350093 

EASTON TECHNICAL PRODUCTS 

TUBING MANUFACTURING FACILITY 

5040 HAROLD GATTY DRIVE SALT LAKE CITY UT 841162860 

SALT LAKE CITY, Utah 841162860 

EPCRA 325 Action For Penalty 


9 


FRS ID: 

Program ID: 

Action Name: 





EPA Region #: 


FRS ID: 

Program ID: 

Action Name: 





EPA Region #: 


FRS ID: 

Program ID: 

Action Name: 





EPA Region #: 


FRS ID: 

Program ID: 

Action Name: 


08-2000-0323 

110010797218 

CIM 490000000669 







9 

08-2000-0323 

110010797218 

NEI NTIUT10365 







9 

08-2000-0323 

110010797218 

NEI NEI42047 


Not reported 





9 

08-2000-0323 

110010797218 

NEI NEIUT10365 


Not reported 

TC02814573.1r Page 185

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

TUBING MANUFACTURING FACILITY (Continued) 1011605326 




EPA Region #: 


FRS ID: 

Program ID: 

Action Name: 





EPA Region #: 


FRS ID: 

Program ID: 

Action Name: 





EPA Region #: 


FRS ID: 

Program ID: 

Action Name: 





EPA Region #: 


FRS ID: 

Program ID: 

Action Name: 





EPA Region #: 


FRS ID: 

Program ID: 

Action Name: 







9 

08-2000-0323 

110010797218 

FRS 110010797218 


EASTON TECHNICAL PRODUCTS, INCORPORATED 





9 

08-2000-0323 

110010797218 

TRIS 84116STNLM5040W 


EASTON TECHNICAL PRODS. 





9 

08-2000-0323 

110010797218 

AIRS/AFS 4903500093 







9 

08-2000-0323 

110010797218 

NEI NTI42047 







9 

08-2000-0323 

110010797218 

RCRAINFO UTD039862792 


EASTON TECHNICAL PRODUCTS, INC. 



TC02814573.1r Page 186

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 




EPA Region #: 


FRS ID: 

Program ID: 

Action Name: 





EPA Region #: 



9 

08-2000-0323 

110010797218 

NTI NTI42047 


EASTON TECHNICAL TUBING 





9 

Program ID: 


Address: 

Tribal Indicator: 

Fed Facility: 

NAIC Code: 

SIC Code: 

Program ID: 


Address: 


Fed Facility: 

NAIC Code: 

SIC Code: 

Program ID: 


Address: 


Fed Facility: 

NAIC Code: 

SIC Code: 

Program ID: 


Address: 


Fed Facility: 

NAIC Code: 

SIC Code: 

Program ID: 


Address: 


Fed Facility: 

NAIC Code: 

SIC Code: 

Program ID: 

AIRS/AFS 4903500093 



N 

No 

Not reported 

3949 

CIM 490000000669 



N 

No 

Not reported 

3949 

FRS 110010797218 



N 

No 

Not reported 

3949 

NEI NEI42047 



N 

No 

Not reported 

3949 

NEI NEIUT10365 



N 

No 

Not reported 

3949 

NEI NTI42047 

TC02814573.1r Page 187

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 



Address: 


Fed Facility: 

NAIC Code: 

SIC Code: 

Program ID: 


Address: 


Fed Facility: 

NAIC Code: 

SIC Code: 

Program ID: 


Address: 


Fed Facility: 

NAIC Code: 

SIC Code: 

Program ID: 


Address: 


Fed Facility: 

NAIC Code: 

SIC Code: 

Program ID: 


Address: 


Fed Facility: 

NAIC Code: 

SIC Code: 

Program ID: 


Address: 


Fed Facility: 

NAIC Code: 

SIC Code: 



N 

No 

Not reported 

3949 

NEI NTIUT10365 



N 

No 

Not reported 

3949 

NET 490350093 



N 

No 

Not reported 

3949 

NTI NTI42047 



N 

No 

Not reported 

3949 




N 

No 

Not reported 

3949 

TRIS 84116STNLM5040W 



N 

No 

Not reported 

3949 

AI222 UNISYS FINDS 1012100185 



1.567 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4232 ft. 

FINDS: 

Registry ID: 

110038783046 


TC02814573.1r Page 188

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 













AJ223 EASTON TECHNICAL PRODUCTS, INC. CORRACTS 1000417244 

WSW 5040 W. HAROLD GATTY DR. RCRA-LQG 84116STNLM50 


TRIS 

1.567 mi. LUST 


UST 

Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4228 ft. 

CORRACTS: 

EPA ID: 

EPA Region: 

Area Name: 

Actual Date: 

Action: 




UTD039862792 

08 


09/04/1997 

CA075LO - CA Prioritization, Facility or area was assigned a low 

corrective action priority 

33992 

Sporting and Athletic Goods Manufacturing 

Not reported 

Not reported 

EPA ID: 

EPA Region: 

Area Name: 

Actual Date: 

Action: 




EPA ID: 

EPA Region: 

Area Name: 

Actual Date: 

Action: 




EPA ID: 

EPA Region: 

Area Name: 

UTD039862792 

08 


09/15/1997 

CA750IN - Migration of Contaminated Groundwater under Control, More 

information is needed to make a determination 

33992 


Not reported 

Not reported 

UTD039862792 

08 


09/15/1997 

CA725IN - Current Human Exposures Under Control, More information is 

needed to make a determination 

33992 


Not reported 

Not reported 

UTD039862792 

08 


TC02814573.1r Page 189

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

EASTON TECHNICAL PRODUCTS, INC. (Continued) 1000417244 

Actual Date: 

Action: 




EPA ID: 

EPA Region: 

Area Name: 

Actual Date: 

Action: 




09/16/1996 

CA070YE - RFA Determination Of Need For An RFI, RFI is Necessary 

33992 


Not reported 

Not reported 

UTD039862792 

08 


10/06/1989 

CA100 - RFI Imposition 

33992 


Not reported 

Not reported 

RCRA-LQG: 





5040 WEST HAROLD GATTY DR. 


EPA ID: 

UTD039862792 


WEST HAROLD GATTY DR. 


Contact: 

DAVID G DUKE 


Not reported 

Not reported 


Not reported 


(801) 526-6213 


DGD@EASTONTP.COM 

EPA Region: 

08 

Land type: 

Private 



Description: 


















Legal status: 



GREG EASTON 

Not reported 

Not reported 

US 

Not reported 

Private 

Operator 

12/01/2001 

TC02814573.1r Page 190

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 







Legal status: 




Not reported 

JAMES L. EASTON 

HASKELL AVENUE SUITE 350 

VAN NUYS, CA 91406 

US 

Not reported 

Private 

Owner 

02/01/1980 

Not reported 


















No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 



Waste type: 



Waste type: 



Waste type: 



Waste type: 



Batteries 

No 

Not reported 

Lamps 

No 

Not reported 

Pesticides 

No 

Not reported 

Thermostats 

No 

Not reported 





Site name: 







Site name: 


TC02814573.1r Page 191

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 







Site name: 







Site name: 







Site name: 

EASTON TECHNICAL PRODUCTS INC. 






Site name: 

EASTON ALUMINUM, INC. 






Site name: 

EASTON ALUMINUM INC 






Site name: 







Site name: 










Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

D001 








D007 

CHROMIUM 

D018 

BENZENE 

TC02814573.1r Page 192

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 


Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

D035 


F002 










F003 










MIXTURES. 

F005 











Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Amount (Lbs): 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Amount (Lbs): 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Amount (Lbs): 

D001 








27135 

D007 

CHROMIUM 

114 

D018 

BENZENE 

13840 

TC02814573.1r Page 193

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 


Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Amount (Lbs): 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Amount (Lbs): 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Amount (Lbs): 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Amount (Lbs): 

D035 


15468 

F002 










15468 

F003 










MIXTURES. 

15468 

F005 








15468 

Corrective Action Summary: 

Event date: 

Event: 

Event date: 

Event: 

Event date: 

Event: 

Event date: 

Event: 

Event date: 

Event: 

10/06/1989 

RFI Imposition 

09/16/1996 

RFA Determination Of Need For An RFI, RFI is Necessary; 

09/04/1997 

CA076LO 

09/04/1997 

CA Prioritization, Facility or area was assigned a low corrective 

action priority. 

09/04/1997 

CA077LO 

TC02814573.1r Page 194

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 


Event date: 

Event: 

Event date: 

Event: 

09/15/1997 

Igration of Contaminated Groundwater under Control, More information 

is needed to make a determination. 

09/15/1997 

Current Human Exposures under Control, More information is needed to 

make a determination. 


Regulation violated: SR - r315-5-2 








































Not reported 


02/11/1988 

06/10/1988 

State 


05/05/1988 

Not reported 

Not reported 

State 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 


02/11/1988 

06/10/1988 

State 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 



Evaluation: 



09/17/2008 


Not reported 

Not reported 

TC02814573.1r Page 195

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 




Evaluation: 





Evaluation: 





Evaluation: 





Evaluation: 




State 

08/14/2002 



09/28/2002 

State 

08/24/1994 


Not reported 

Not reported 

State 

08/08/1988 


Not reported 

Not reported 

State 

02/11/1988 


Not reported 

Not reported 

State 


Evaluation: 




LUST: 

Facility ID: 

Release Id: 

Closed Date: 


Owner Name: 



Owner State: 

Owner Zip: 



02/11/1988 



06/10/1988 

State 

4001306 

GGX 

5/1/1992 

11/5/1990 

EASTON TECHNICAL PRODUCTS INC 

5040 W HAROLD GATTY DR 


UT 

84116 


[Paul Zahn] 

Facility ID: 

Release Id: 

Closed Date: 


Owner Name: 



Owner State: 

Owner Zip: 



4001306 

LPA 

9/25/2002 

7/30/2002 




UT 

84116 



TC02814573.1r Page 196

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 


UST: 

Facility ID: 

Owner Name: 



Owner Phone: 

Total Tanks: 

Closed Tanks: 

4001306 




(801) 539-1400 

1 

0 

AJ224 EASTON TECHINICAL PRODUCTS 

NPDES S107868662 

WSW 5040 WEST HAROLD GATTY DRIVE N/A 


1.567 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4228 ft. 

NPDES: 

Facid: 

Not reported 


UTR000149 


Not reported 


Not reported 


TODD M. ROBINSON 


Group 1: 

Not reported 

Group 2: 

Not reported 

Group 3: 

Not reported 

Group 4: 

Not reported 

Group 5: 

Not reported 

Issue Date: 

1/1/2007 


1/1/2007 


12/31/2011 



Not reported 


9999 


Not reported 


Not reported 

Amount Paid: 

Not reported 

Inactivated: 

Not reported 

No Exposure: 

Not reported 

Not Received: 

Not reported 


5040 WEST HAROLD GATTY 




UT 

Fac Oper Zip: 

841162897 


Not reported 

Fac Site Lat: 

+40.781944 


-112.011111 


Not reported 

Third Sector: 

Not reported 


Not reported 


Not reported 


Not reported 

Permit Name: 

EASTON TECHINICAL PRODUCTS 


GOGGIN DRAIN 

Facid: 



490000098751 

UTR000149 

Not reported 

TC02814573.1r Page 197

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

EASTON TECHINICAL PRODUCTS (Continued) 


Not reported 


Not reported 


Group 1: 

Not reported 

Group 2: 

Not reported 

Group 3: 

Not reported 

Group 4: 

Not reported 

Group 5: 

Not reported 

Issue Date: 

Not reported 


Not reported 


12/31/2011 



Not reported 


Not reported 


Not reported 


Not reported 

Amount Paid: 

Not reported 

Inactivated: 

Not reported 

No Exposure: 

Not reported 

Not Received: 

Not reported 


Not reported 


Not reported 


Not reported 

Fac Oper Zip: 

Not reported 


Not reported 

Fac Site Lat: 

Not reported 


Not reported 


Not reported 

Third Sector: 

Not reported 


Not reported 


Not reported 


Not reported 

Permit Name: 

Not reported 


Not reported 

S107868662 

Facid: 

Not reported 


UTR000149 


Not reported 





Facility Operator Contact Person: STEWART HOGAN 

Group 1: 

Not reported 

Group 2: 

Not reported 

Group 3: 

Not reported 

Group 4: 

F 

Group 5: 

Not reported 

Issue Date: 

1/1/2007 


1/1/2007 


12/31/2011 



GOGGIN DRAIN 


3949 


F 



Amount Paid: 

500 

Inactivated: 

Not reported 

No Exposure: 

Not reported 

TC02814573.1r Page 198

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

EASTON TECHINICAL PRODUCTS (Continued) 

Not Received: 

Not reported 


5040 WEST HAROLD GATTY DRIVE 




UT 

Fac Oper Zip: 

84116-2897 


(801) 539-1400 

Fac Site Lat: 

40 46 55 


112 00 40 


Not reported 

Third Sector: 

Not reported 


Not reported 


11/13/2006 


11/13/2006 

Permit Name: 

Not reported 


Not reported 

S107868662 

AJ225 EASTON TECHNICAL PRODUCTS, INCORPORATED FINDS 1005831358 



1.567 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4228 ft. 

FINDS: 

Registry ID: 

110010797218 





























TC02814573.1r Page 199

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

EASTON TECHNICAL PRODUCTS, INCORPORATED (Continued) 1005831358 








operations. 















PCS (Permit Compliance System) is a computerized management 

information system that contains data on National Pollutant Discharge 

Elimination System (NPDES) permit holding facilities. PCS tracks the 

permit, compliance, and enforcement status of NPDES facilities. 

AK226 HMIRS 91040015 

SE 470 NO 2400 W N/A 


1.572 mi. 

8298 ft. Site 1 of 12 in cluster AK 

Relative: 

Lower 



Actual: 

4229 ft. 

AK227 JET FUEL FINDS 1010509007 

SE 470 N 2400 W N/A 


1.572 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4229 ft. 

FINDS: 

Registry ID: 

110032608462 








TC02814573.1r Page 200

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

JET FUEL (Continued) 1010509007 



AK228 SPILLS S109345684 

SE 470 NORTH 2400 WEST N/A 


1.572 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4229 ft. 

SPILLS: 




3/24/1997 


3/24/1997 

Responsible Party Name: D & D Aviation 

RP Address: 

470 North 2400 West SLC UT 84116 

RP Phone: 

Not reported 

Highway: 

Not reported 

Milemarker: 

Not reported 

Incident Summary: Pilots transferring fuel from one tank to another. Accidently left 

transfer valve open. Fuel started venting out of the wing and spilled 

approx. 25 gallons. Jet-A fuel. Clean up Absorb-all absorbent, then 

placed into 55 drums. Spill completely contained on Tarmac. 




8/1/2008 


8/1/2008 

Responsible Party Name: Service Air 

RP Address: 

Not reported 

RP Phone: 

8015608312 

Highway: 

Not reported 

Milemarker: 

0 

Incident Summary: Caller reported the release of 25 gallons Jet-A fuel. Release 

occurred due to mechanical failure while refueling a tanker truck in 

the tank farm area. Jet fuel released to the concrete surface around 

the tank farm with a small quantity entering a nearby storm drain. 

SLC Airport (Ken Pratt) and Fire Dept. were notified at the time of 

the release. RESPONSE: A vac-truck was used to remove fuel from 

inside the storm drain and booms deployed in downgradient storm 

drains within the system to contain the release. No sheen was 

observed in the oil/water separator indicating that the release had 

not left the airport property. Service Air will continue to monitor 

booms. 

AK229 HUDSON GENERAL LLC FINDS 1005795732 

SE 470 N 2400 W N/A 


1.572 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4229 ft. 

FINDS: 

Registry ID: 

110002272512 

TC02814573.1r Page 201

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

HUDSON GENERAL LLC (Continued) 1005795732 




operations. 

AK230 SERVISAIR & SHELL/GLOBEGROUND/HUDSON. FINDS 1012105049 



1.572 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4229 ft. 

FINDS: 

Registry ID: 

110038770960 













AK231 470 N 2400 WEST ERNS 91207310 

SE 470 N 2400 WEST N/A 


1.572 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 



Actual: 

4229 ft. 

232 SCHENKERS INT’L FORWARDERS INC FINDS 1004606238 



1.582 mi. 

8352 ft. 

Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4228 ft. 

FINDS: 

Registry ID: 

110011612077 







TC02814573.1r Page 202

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

233 END OF RUNWAY DEICE PROGRAM 

NPDES S109608959 

SE 2800 WEST NORTH TEMPLE N/A 


1.589 mi. 

8391 ft. 

Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4232 ft. 

NPDES: 

Facid: 

490000102189 


UTR316557 


Not reported 


Not reported 


Not reported 


Group 1: 

Not reported 

Group 2: 

Not reported 

Group 3: 

Not reported 

Group 4: 

Not reported 

Group 5: 

Not reported 

Issue Date: 

Not reported 


Not reported 


9/1/2010 



Not reported 


Not reported 


Not reported 


Not reported 

Amount Paid: 

Not reported 

Inactivated: 

Not reported 

No Exposure: 

Not reported 

Not Received: 

Not reported 


Not reported 


Not reported 


Not reported 

Fac Oper Zip: 

Not reported 


Not reported 

Fac Site Lat: 

Not reported 


Not reported 


Not reported 

Third Sector: 

Not reported 


Not reported 


Not reported 


Not reported 

Permit Name: 

Not reported 


Not reported 

AK234 SPILLS S105223356 

SE 235 N. 2400 W. N/A 


1.594 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4229 ft. 

SPILLS: 






RP Address: 

RP Phone: 

Highway: 

3085 

99030 

1/24/1999 

1/24/1999 

Million Air 

Salt Lake City Corporate Airport 

(801)359-2085 

Not reported 

TC02814573.1r Page 203

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

(Continued) 

Milemarker: 


Not reported 

Towing a plane and the tow bar broke. Plane rolled and punched the 

fuel tank. Approximately 300 gallons of fuel were spilled into a 

canal known as the City Drain. Salt Lake City Fire Department, Salt 

Lake County Health, and Airport Emergency Response responded. Much of 

the spill appeared to have been contained by an oil/water separator 

at the edge of airport property. DEQ on-site assistance was 

requested. Staff responded and provided sorbent booms until the 

cleanup contractor could take over. 

S105223356 

AK235 COMPANY HANGAR AIRCRAFT OPERATIONS 

LUST U003150363 

SE 171 N 2400 W UST N/A 


1.601 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4229 ft. 

LUST: 

Facility ID: 

Release Id: 

Closed Date: 


Owner Name: 



Owner State: 

Owner Zip: 



4001670 

IMQ 

4/4/1995 

3/3/1994 

AMERICAN STORES CO C/O ALBERTSONS INC 

PO BOX 20 

BOISE 

ID 

83726 

BOISE, ID 83726 

[Jim Martin] 

UST: 

Facility ID: 

Owner Name: 



Owner Phone: 

Total Tanks: 

Closed Tanks: 

4001670 


PO BOX 20 


(208) 395-5245 

2 

2 

AK236 COMPANY HANGER AIRCRAFT OPERATIONS FINDS 1005794902 

SE 171 N 2400 W N/A 


1.601 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4229 ft. 

FINDS: 

Registry ID: 

110002281959 




operations. 

TC02814573.1r Page 204

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

AK237 SOUTHWEST AIRLINES RCRA-CESQG 1004788848 

SE 171 NORTH 2400 WEST FINDS UTR000000612 


1.601 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4229 ft. 

RCRA-CESQG: 



SOUTHWEST AIRLINES 




EPA ID: 

UTR000000612 




Contact: 

RANDY GILLESPIE 


P.O. BOX 36611 HDQ 4GC 

DALLAS, TX 75235 


US 


(214) 904-4479 


Not reported 

EPA Region: 

08 



Description: 




















Legal status: 




SALT LAKE CITY AUTHORITY 

776 NO.TERMINAL DR. TUI RM 213 


Not reported 

(801) 575-2400 

Municipal 

Owner 

Not reported 

Not reported 











No 

Unknown 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

TC02814573.1r Page 205

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

SOUTHWEST AIRLINES (Continued) 1004788848 








No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 



Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 


FINDS: 

D000 

Not Defined 

D001 








D006 

CADMIUM 

D007 

CHROMIUM 

D035 


F005 









Registry ID: 

110005208202 








TC02814573.1r Page 206

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

AL238 INFLABLOC PHARMACEUTICALS RCRA-CESQG 1010568288 

ENE 2150 WEST DAUNTLESS AVE. SUITE UTR000009597 


1.601 mi. 

8454 ft. Site 1 of 2 in cluster AL 

Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4233 ft. 

RCRA-CESQG: 



INFLABLOC PHARMACEUTICALS 


2150 WEST DAUNTLESS AVE. SUITE 


EPA ID: 

UTR000009597 


DAUNTLESS AVE. SUITE 101 


Contact: 

BONNIE J ARCHER 


DAUNTLESS AVE. SUITE 101 



US 


(801) 303-1876 


Not reported 

EPA Region: 

08 



Description: 




















Legal status: 








Legal status: 




INFLABLOC PHARMACEUTICALS 

DAUNTLESS AVE STE 101 


US 

(801) 303-1876 

Private 

Operator 

01/01/1994 

Not reported 

HCPI/UTAH, LLC - HEALTH CARE PROP. 

KILROY AIRPORT WAY STE 300 

LONG BEACH, CA 90806 

US 

(801) 303-1876 

Private 

Owner 

01/01/1994 

Not reported 

TC02814573.1r Page 207

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

INFLABLOC PHARMACEUTICALS (Continued) 1010568288 


















No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 



Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 


D003 






F003 










MIXTURES. 


AL239 INFLABLOC PHARMACEUTICALS FINDS 1010498461 

ENE 2150 WEST DAUNTLESS AVE. SUITE 101 N/A 


1.601 mi. 

8454 ft. Site 2 of 2 in cluster AL 

Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4233 ft. 

FINDS: 

Registry ID: 

110032662134 








TC02814573.1r Page 208

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

AK240 MAJESTIC AIRLINES FINDS 1010455627 



1.601 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4229 ft. 

FINDS: 

Registry ID: 

110031311621 








AK241 MAJESTIC AIRLINES RCRA-NonGen 1010336645 

SE 180 NORTH 2400 WEST UTD988078754 


1.601 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4229 ft. 

RCRA-NonGen: 



MAJESTIC AIRLINES 




EPA ID: 

UTD988078754 


AMF PO BOX 22242 


Contact: 

GORDON MCINTOSH 





US 


(801) 539-0612 


Not reported 

EPA Region: 

08 


Non-Generator 

Description: 







Legal status: 




MAJESTIC HOLDING CO. 



Not reported 

(801) 539-0612 

Private 

Owner 

01/01/0001 

Not reported 






No 

No 

No 

No 

TC02814573.1r Page 209

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

MAJESTIC AIRLINES (Continued) 1010336645 













No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 





MAJESTIC AIRLINES 




Waste code: 

Waste name: 


D001 









AM242 UDOT AIR HANGAR 

LUST U003733135 

SE 105 NORTH 2400 WEST UST N/A 


1.608 mi. 

8489 ft. Site 1 of 3 in cluster AM 

Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4229 ft. 

LUST: 

Facility ID: 

Release Id: 

Closed Date: 


Owner Name: 



Owner State: 

Owner Zip: 



4002262 

LSW 

3/30/2004 

6/12/2003 


PO BOX 145550 


UT 

84114 



Facility ID: 

Release Id: 

Closed Date: 


Owner Name: 



Owner State: 

Owner Zip: 

4002262 

LEP 

6/6/2002 

4/27/2000 


PO BOX 145550 


UT 

84114 

TC02814573.1r Page 210

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

UDOT AIR HANGAR (Continued) 


Project Manager: Melissa Turchi 

U003733135 

UST: 

Facility ID: 

Owner Name: 



Owner Phone: 

Total Tanks: 

Closed Tanks: 

4002262 


PO BOX 145550 


(801) 575-2995 

3 

3 

243 CEMENT PLANT NUMBER 3 FINDS 1005795809 

ENE 1100 N 2200 W N/A 


1.613 mi. 

8518 ft. 

Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4229 ft. 

FINDS: 

Registry ID: 

110002271489 




operations. 

AN244 SPILLS S109033970 

ESE 322 N. 2200 WEST N/A 


1.626 mi. 

8587 ft. Site 1 of 5 in cluster AN 

Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4232 ft. 

SPILLS: 




4/2/2008 


4/2/2008 

Responsible Party Name: STI Trucking 

RP Address: 

Not reported 

RP Phone: 

Not reported 

Highway: 

Not reported 

Milemarker: 

Not reported 

Incident Summary: Caller reported that an engine breakdown in a semi-truck caused the 

release of an unknown quantity (caller estimated 2-10 gallons of used 

oil) to the parking lot at L3 Communications. Caller stated that some 

of the used oil entered into a ditch adjacent to the parking lot. 

Ditch did have standing water. Lincoln Environmental was contracted 

to provide spill cleanup services. Absorbants were used in the 

parking lot and the ditch to contain the spill. UPDATE#1 4/2/2008 

17:00: Information from Rusty Grover (Lincoln Environmental). Rusty 

stated spill was estimated at 8-10 gallons. Driver was apparently 

unaware of the release and drove along the parking lot heading north 

leaving a trail of used oil behind. Driver eventually became aware of 

the problem and stopped the truck over a storm drain in the parking 

TC02814573.1r Page 211

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

(Continued) 

lot. Only a residual amount of oil reportedly entered the storm 

drain. Booms were placed along the adjacent ditch where the storm 

drain discharges and microbe solution was inserted into the storm 

drain to break down the oil. No evidence of oil was observed in the 

ditch. Kevin Okleberry (SLVHD) had visited the scene. 

S109033970 

AN245 L-3 COMMUNICATION RCRA-LQG 1000368898 

ESE 322 NORTH 2200 WEST FINDS UTT500010152 


UST 

1.626 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4232 ft. 

RCRA-LQG: 



L-3 COMMUNICATION 




EPA ID: 

UTT500010152 




Contact: 






US 


(999) 999-9999 


Not reported 

EPA Region: 

08 

Land type: 

Private 



Description: 


















Legal status: 










US 

(999) 999-9999 

Private 

Operator 

01/01/1996 

Not reported 




US 

TC02814573.1r Page 212

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

L-3 COMMUNICATION (Continued) 1000368898 


Legal status: 








Legal status: 




(999) 999-9999 

Private 

Owner 

01/01/1996 

Not reported 

CB RICHARD ELLIS 



Not reported 

(801) 594-5060 

Private 

Owner 

03/11/2002 

Not reported 


















No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 






Site name: 







Site name: 





Regulation violated: SR - R315-5.34/R315-7-16.4 











TC02814573.1r Page 213

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 































Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 


03/12/1986 

03/17/1986 

State 


03/17/1986 

Not reported 

Not reported 

State 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 


01/31/1985 

03/07/1985 

State 


02/15/1985 

Not reported 

Not reported 

State 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 



Evaluation: 





Evaluation: 





Evaluation: 




FINDS: 

07/27/2005 



09/16/2005 

State 

03/12/1986 



03/17/1986 

State 

01/31/1985 



03/07/1985 

State 

Registry ID: 

110002303187 



TC02814573.1r Page 214

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 







UST: 

Facility ID: 

Owner Name: 



Owner Phone: 

Total Tanks: 

Closed Tanks: 

4000957 

SPERRY CORPORATION 

322 N 2200 W 


(801) 539-5253 

3 

3 

AN246 322 NORTH 2200 WEST ERNS 90172723 



1.626 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 



Actual: 

4232 ft. 

AN247 UNISYS CORPORATION CERC-NFRAP 1003877308 

ESE 322 NORTH SPERRY WAY (2200 WEST) UTD137400040 


1.626 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4232 ft. 

CERC-NFRAP: 

Site ID: 


NPL Status: 


0800027 

Not a Federal Facility 


NFRAP 

CERCLIS-NFRAP Site Contact Name(s): 


Site Assessment Manager 

Contact Name: 

Gwen Christiansen 

Contact Tel: 

(303) 312-6463 


Contact Name: 

Contact Tel: 


Contact Name: 

Contact Tel: 

IMC 

Dianna Lim 

(303) 312-7830 

Summer Intern 

Margaret Williams 

(303) 312-6943 

CERCLIS-NFRAP Assessment History: 

Action: 

DISCOVERY 

Date Started: 

Not reported 


05/27/1987 


Not reported 

TC02814573.1r Page 215

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 


Action: 

Date Started: 



Action: 

Date Started: 



PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT 

Not reported 

02/21/1989 

NFRAP: No further Remedial Action planned 

ARCHIVE SITE 

Not reported 

02/21/1989 

Not reported 

AN248 UNISYS CORPORATION FINDS 1007841601 

ESE 322 N 2200 W N/A 


1.626 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4232 ft. 

FINDS: 

Registry ID: 

110020103680 




operations. 

AM249 ADVANTAGE RENT-A-CAR 

LUST U003150392 

SE 2375 W NORTH TEMPLE UST N/A 


AST 

1.629 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4229 ft. 

LUST: 

Facility ID: 

Release Id: 

Closed Date: 


Owner Name: 



Owner State: 

Owner Zip: 



4000325 

MGI 

4/18/2007 

4/13/2007 

WALKER SOUTHWEST PROPERTIES LLC 

PO BOX 17967 

SAN ANTONIO 

TX 

78217 


UST 

UST: 

Facility ID: 

Owner Name: 



Owner Phone: 

Total Tanks: 

Closed Tanks: 

4000325 

WALKER SOUTHWEST PROPERTIES LLC 

PO BOX 17967 


(210) 541-0618 

5 

5 

AST: 

TC02814573.1r Page 216

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

ADVANTAGE RENT-A-CAR (Continued) 

Owner Name: WALKER SOUTHWEST PROPERTIES LLC 

Facility Id: 

4000325 

Tank Id: 

5 

Tank Status: Permanently Out of Use 

Substance Stored: Gasoline 

Tank Capacity: 2000 

AST: 

True 

U003150392 

AM250 ADVANTAGE RENT A CAR FINDS 1005795469 

SE 2375 W NORTH TEMPLE N/A 


1.629 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4229 ft. 

FINDS: 

Registry ID: 

110002275797 




operations. 

AO251 SPILLS S105223455 



1.656 mi. 

8745 ft. Site 1 of 3 in cluster AO 

Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4229 ft. 

SPILLS: 




8/9/2000 


8/9/2000 

Responsible Party Name: Dan Ryan (Airport Inn) 

RP Address: 

2333 West North Temple, Salt Lake City 

RP Phone: 

801-539-0438 

Highway: 

Not reported 

Milemarker: 

0 

Incident Summary: Randy Erickson is a maintenance employee for the Airport Inn, Dan 

Ryan is the manager. Over the past month or so, Mr. Erickson has 

replaced several air conditioners and refrigerators in the motel and 

stock piled them in the parking lot. Mr. Ryan told him to send the 

units to a scrap yard to get them out of the parking lot. Each unit 

is self-contained and still has freon in it. Mr. Erickson explained 

that they would need to have the freon evacuated prior to sending 

them off for scrap. Upon some investigation, they (Mr. Ryan & Mr. 

Erickson) found that it would cost approximately $100 per unit to 

have the freon evacuated. On the afternoon of August 9, when Mr. 

Erickson was not on the property, Mr. Ryan took a hack saw and cut 

the copper tubing on 20 ac units and 6 refrigerators, allowed the 

freon to escape to the atmosphere. When Mr. Ericksen returned to the 

property, he called Haz Mat and was immediately fired by Mr. Ryan for 

doing so. Haz Mat found no material on the site (it had all escaped 

to the atmosphere) but they did call in SLC Police. Officer Chad 

TC02814573.1r Page 217

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

(Continued) 

Lambourne was the officer on site (799-3104) and he collected 

criminal evidence. SLCPD case #00149-660. Mr. Ryan is claiming that 

he did not know that his actions were criminal and Mr. Erickson is 

claiming that he was not sure of the severity of the situation but 

was aware that some regulations applied to freon and had informed Mr. 

Ryan of this prior to Mr. Ryan’s actions. Attempts to reach the 

Attorney Generals Office were futile. All other notifications made by 

e-mail. 

S105223455 

AO252 AIRPORT INN AND SUITES FINDS 1005694673 

SE 2333 W N TEMPLE N/A 


1.656 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4229 ft. 

FINDS: 

Registry ID: 

110010675849 



























TC02814573.1r Page 218

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

AO253 2333 WEST NORTH TEMPLE ERNS 2000538201 



1.656 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 



Actual: 

4229 ft. 

AP254 SPILLS S105743063 

SE 2445 WEST JETWAY AVENUE N/A 


1.665 mi. 

8790 ft. Site 1 of 5 in cluster AP 

Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4229 ft. 

SPILLS: 




2/9/2003 


2/9/2003 


RP Address: 

Not reported 

RP Phone: 

Not reported 

Highway: 

Not reported 

Milemarker: 

0 

Incident Summary: The "smell" that has been ongoing was reported. They called 

immediately upon noticing this smell. Winds were calm & smell was 

very strong. 

AP255 CONTINENTAL AIRLINES FINDS 1005796803 

SE 2445 JETWAY AVE N/A 


1.665 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4229 ft. 

FINDS: 

Registry ID: 

110002164773 




operations. 

AP256 CONTINENTAL AIRLINES 

LUST U003544844 

SE 2445 W JETWAY AVE UST N/A 


1.665 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4229 ft. 

LUST: 

Facility ID: 

Release Id: 

Closed Date: 


Owner Name: 

4000267 

HHP 

11/4/1998 

12/31/1991 

CONTINENTAL AIRLINES 

TC02814573.1r Page 219

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

CONTINENTAL AIRLINES (Continued) 

Owner Address: 15333 JOHN F KENNEDY BLVD STE 420 

Owner City: HOUSTON 

Owner State: TX 


Owner City,St,Zip: HOUSTON, TX 77032 

Project Manager: [Victor Scherer] 

U003544844 

UST: 

Facility ID: 

Owner Name: 



Owner Phone: 

Total Tanks: 

Closed Tanks: 

4000267 

CONTINENTAL AIRLINES 

15333 JOHN F KENNEDY BLVD STE 420 

HOUSTON, TX 77032 

(713) 985-1519 

1 

1 

257 BECKS SPUR LAND FILL (2200 NORTH) CERC-NFRAP 1001201255 

ENE 1300 WEST 2200 NORTH FINDS UT0001909415 


1.666 mi. 

8795 ft. 

Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4229 ft. 

CERC-NFRAP: 

Site ID: 


NPL Status: 


0801599 



NFRAP 

CERCLIS-NFRAP Site Contact Name(s): 


Site Assessment Manager 

Contact Name: 

Gwen Christiansen 

Contact Tel: 

(303) 312-6463 


Contact Name: 

Contact Tel: 


Contact Name: 

Contact Tel: 

IMC 

Dianna Lim 

(303) 312-7830 

Summer Intern 

Margaret Williams 

(303) 312-6943 

CERCLIS-NFRAP Site Alias Name(s): 

Alias Name: 

BECKS SPUR LAND FILL (2200 NORTH) 




CERCLIS-NFRAP Assessment History: 

Action: 

DISCOVERY 

Date Started: 

Not reported 


04/30/1997 


Not reported 

Action: 

Date Started: 




Not reported 

02/07/2000 

Low priority for further assessment 

TC02814573.1r Page 220

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

BECKS SPUR LAND FILL (2200 NORTH) (Continued) 1001201255 

Action: 

Date Started: 



Action: 

Date Started: 



SITE INSPECTION 

11/07/2001 

05/13/2004 

NFRAP: No further Remedial Action planned 

ARCHIVE SITE 

Not reported 

02/15/2007 

Not reported 

FINDS: 

Registry ID: 

110009314330 




operations. 

AP258 ENTERPRISE RENT A CAR 

AST A100277374 



1.668 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4229 ft. 

AST: 

Owner Name: 

Facility Id: 

Tank Id: 

Tank Status: 



AST: 

ENTERPRISE RENT A CAR 

4002367 

1 


Gasoline 

3000 

True 

AP259 HMIRS 91090069 



1.668 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 



Actual: 

4229 ft. 

260 SPRINGHILL SUITES MARRIOTT 

NPDES S108911798 

WSW 4955 WILEY POST WAY N/A 


1.674 mi. 

8840 ft. 

Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4228 ft. 

NPDES: 

Facid: 




490000098101 

UTR109280 

Not reported 

Not reported 

TC02814573.1r Page 221

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

SPRINGHILL SUITES MARRIOTT (Continued) 


Not reported 


Group 1: 

Not reported 

Group 2: 

Not reported 

Group 3: 

Not reported 

Group 4: 

Not reported 

Group 5: 

Not reported 

Issue Date: 

Not reported 


Not reported 


1/3/2009 



Not reported 


Not reported 


Not reported 


Not reported 

Amount Paid: 

Not reported 

Inactivated: 

Not reported 

No Exposure: 

Not reported 

Not Received: 

Not reported 


Not reported 


Not reported 


Not reported 

Fac Oper Zip: 

Not reported 


Not reported 

Fac Site Lat: 

Not reported 


Not reported 


Not reported 

Third Sector: 

Not reported 


Not reported 


Not reported 


Not reported 

Permit Name: 

Not reported 


Not reported 

S108911798 

AQ261 SPILLS S105222923 



1.683 mi. 

8889 ft. Site 1 of 10 in cluster AQ 

Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4232 ft. 

SPILLS: 




6/15/1992 


6/22/1992 

Responsible Party Name: Mag Corp 

RP Address: 

238 North 2200 West, SLC 

RP Phone: 

(801)-532-2043 

Highway: 

Not reported 

Milemarker: 

Not reported 

Incident Summary: Equipment breakdown Chlorine 63 Tons 

TC02814573.1r Page 222

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

AQ262 238 NORTH 2200 WEST ERNS 2003642855 



1.683 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 



Actual: 

4232 ft. 

AQ263 MAGNESIUM CORPORATION AMERICA MAGCORP FINDS 1006301169 



1.683 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4232 ft. 

FINDS: 

Registry ID: 

110012360337 





















SSTS (Section Seven Tracking System ) evolved from the FIFRA and TSCA 

Enforcement System (FATES). SSTS tracks the registration of all 

pesticide-producing establishments and tracks annually the types and 

amounts of pesticides, active ingredients, and related devices that 

are produced, sold, or distributed each year. 

AQ264 US MAGNESIUM, LLC SSTS 1009307741 

ESE 238 NO. 2200 W N/A 


1.683 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4232 ft. 

SSTS: 

Product: 

Contact: 

Status: 

Registration Number: 

CHLORINE 

Not reported 

Not reported 

063802UT001 

TC02814573.1r Page 223

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

US MAGNESIUM, LLC (Continued) 1009307741 

Report Year: 

Permit: 

Product Number: 

Product Type: 

Product Class: 

Product Use: 

UOM: 

Market: 

Region: 

Zero product: 

Pesticide RUP report: 

Product: 

Contact: 

Status: 


Report Year: 

Permit: 


Product Type: 


Product Use: 

UOM: 

Market: 

Region: 

Zero product: 


Product: 

Contact: 

Status: 


Report Year: 

Permit: 


Product Type: 


Product Use: 

UOM: 

Market: 

Region: 

Zero product: 


Product: 

Contact: 

Status: 


Report Year: 

Permit: 


Product Type: 


Product Use: 

UOM: 

Market: 

Region: 

2001 

Registered 

06380200001 

End-use blend, formulation, or concentrate 

Water Purifier - Point of Use 

All other products 

Not reported 

Marketed in the United States 

08 

Not reported 

Not reported 

CHLORINE 

Not reported 

Not reported 

063802UT001 

2002 

Registered 

06390200001 



Restricted use only 

Not reported 


08 

Not reported 

Not reported 

CHLORINE 

Not reported 

Not reported 

063802UT001 

2003 

Registered 

06390200001 




Not reported 


08 

Not reported 

Not reported 

CHLORINE 

Not reported 

Not reported 

063802UT001 

2004 

Not reported 

106390200001 




Not reported 


Not reported 

TC02814573.1r Page 224

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 


Zero product: 


Product: 

Contact: 

Status: 


Report Year: 

Permit: 


Product Type: 


Product Use: 

UOM: 

Market: 

Region: 

Zero product: 


Product: 

Contact: 

Status: 


Report Year: 

Permit: 


Product Type: 


Product Use: 

UOM: 

Market: 

Region: 

Zero product: 


Product: 

Contact: 

Status: 


Report Year: 

Permit: 


Product Type: 


Product Use: 

UOM: 

Market: 

Region: 

Zero product: 


Product: 

Contact: 

Status: 


Report Year: 

Permit: 

Not reported 

Not reported 

CHLORINE 

Not reported 

Not reported 

063802UT001 

2005 

Not reported 

06390200001 




Not reported 


Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

CHLORINE 

Not reported 

Not reported 

063802-UT-001 

2006 

Not reported 

063902-00001 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

CHLORINE 

Not reported 

Not reported 

063802UT001 

2007 

Registered 

06390200001 




Not reported 


08 

Not reported 

Not reported 

CHLORINE 

G. THOMAS TRIPP ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGER P: 801-532-1522 

Not reported 

063802-UT-001 

2008 

Not reported 

TC02814573.1r Page 225

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 



Product Type: 


Product Use: 

UOM: 

Market: 

Region: 

Zero product: 


63902-1 


Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 


8 

No 

1 

AQ265 THE BOEING CO., TULSA DIVISION, SLC RCRA-NonGen 1010336578 

ESE 236 NORTH 2200 WEST UTD988077103 


1.685 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4232 ft. 

RCRA-NonGen: 







EPA ID: 

UTD988077103 




Contact: 

JUSTIN GARNER 





US 


(801) 537-6488 


Not reported 

EPA Region: 

08 


Non-Generator 

Description: 







Legal status: 




JACOBSEN INVESTMENT COMPANY 

265 EAST 100 SOUTH SUITE 265 


Not reported 

(801) 531-6587 

State 

Owner 

01/01/0001 

Not reported 













No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

TC02814573.1r Page 226

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 







No 

No 

No 

No 









Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 


D007 

CHROMIUM 

D008 

LEAD 

F001 









F003 










MIXTURES. 

F005 









TC02814573.1r Page 227

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

AQ266 MCDONNELL DOUGLAS 

NPDES S107869024 

ESE 236 N 2200 W N/A 


1.685 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4232 ft. 

NPDES: 

Facid: 

Not reported 


UTR000188 


Not reported 


Not reported 


MCDONNELL DOUGLAS CORP 


Group 1: 

P 

Group 2: 

Not reported 

Group 3: 

Not reported 

Group 4: 

Not reported 

Group 5: 

Not reported 

Issue Date: 

2/8/1993 


Not reported 


2/7/1998 

Municipal Operating Storm Sewer System: SALT LAKE CITY SEWER 


Not reported 


3721 


Not reported 


Not reported 

Amount Paid: 

270 

Inactivated: 

Not reported 

No Exposure: 

Not reported 

Not Received: 

Not reported 


1215 N 2200 W 




UT 

Fac Oper Zip: 

84116- 


(801) 537-6488 

Fac Site Lat: 

Not reported 


Not reported 


Not reported 

Third Sector: 

Not reported 


Not reported 


2/16/1993 


Not reported 

Permit Name: 

Not reported 


Not reported 

AQ267 MCDONNELL DOUGLAS 

NPDES S108911591 

ESE 236 N 2200 WEST N/A 


1.685 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4232 ft. 

NPDES: 

Facid: 






Group 1: 

Group 2: 

Not reported 

UTR000188 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

TC02814573.1r Page 228

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

MCDONNELL DOUGLAS (Continued) 

Group 3: 

Not reported 

Group 4: 

Not reported 

Group 5: 

Not reported 

Issue Date: 

2/8/1993 


2/8/1993 


2/7/1998 



Not reported 


Not reported 


Not reported 


Not reported 

Amount Paid: 

Not reported 

Inactivated: 

Not reported 

No Exposure: 

Not reported 

Not Received: 

Not reported 


Not reported 


Not reported 


Not reported 

Fac Oper Zip: 

Not reported 


Not reported 

Fac Site Lat: 

40.774466 


-111.953318 


Not reported 

Third Sector: 

Not reported 


Not reported 


Not reported 


Not reported 

Permit Name: 

MCDONNEL DOUGLAS CORP 


SALT LAKE COUNTY SEWER 

S108911591 

AQ268 MCDONNELL DOUGLAS FINDS 1010507945 

ESE 236 N 2200 WEST N/A 


1.685 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4232 ft. 

FINDS: 

Registry ID: 

110032605697 










TC02814573.1r Page 229

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

AQ269 THE BOEING CO., TULSA DIVISION, SLC FINDS 1010455551 



1.685 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4232 ft. 

FINDS: 

Registry ID: 

110031314959 








AR270 TSA AT SALT LAKE CITY INTERNATIONAL FINDS 1007451786 

ESE TERMINAL 2 PARKING STRUCTURE LEVEL 3 N/A 


1.693 mi. 

8942 ft. Site 1 of 4 in cluster AR 

Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4229 ft. 

FINDS: 

Registry ID: 

110017866932 








AR271 TSA AT SALT LAKE CITY INTERNATIONAL RCRA-SQG 1007371765 

ESE 2284 WEST 160 NORTH UTR000007955 


1.694 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4229 ft. 

RCRA-SQG: 



TSA AT SALT LAKE CITY INTERNATIONAL 


TERMINAL 2 PARKING STRUCTURE 

ROOM 400 


EPA ID: 

UTR000007955 


WEST 160 NORTH 


Contact: 

DODD L CLARK 


2 PARKING STRUCTURE LEVEL 3 ROOM 400 



US 


(801) 524-5178 

TC02814573.1r Page 230

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

TSA AT SALT LAKE CITY INTERNATIONAL (Continued) 1007371765 


EPA Region: 


Description: 

DODD.CLARK@DHS.GOV 

08 












Legal status: 








Legal status: 








Legal status: 








Legal status: 




TSA 



US 

(801) 631-2613 

Federal 

Operator 

09/01/2001 

Not reported 


CITY & COUNTY BUILDING 


US 

(801) 524-5178 

Other 

Owner 

01/01/1930 

Not reported 


CITY AND COUNTY BLDG 


US 

(801) 631-2613 

Federal 

Owner 

01/01/1920 

Not reported 

TRANSPORTATION SECURITY ADMINISTRATION 

PARKING STRUCTION, LEVEL 3 ROOM 400 


US 

(801) 524-5178 

Federal 

Operator 

10/19/2007 

Not reported 







No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

TC02814573.1r Page 231

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

TSA AT SALT LAKE CITY INTERNATIONAL (Continued) 1007371765 












No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 





TSA AT SALT LAKE CITY INTERNATIONAL 




Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 


D001 








D002 








D003 







AR272 KEYSTONE AVIATION HANGAR 5 

UST U003150438 

ESE 2284 W 160 N N/A 


1.694 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4229 ft. 

UST: 

Facility ID: 

Owner Name: 



Owner Phone: 

Total Tanks: 

4001953 


303 N 2370 W 


(801) 359-2085 

2 

TC02814573.1r Page 232

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

KEYSTONE AVIATION HANGAR 5 (Continued) 

Closed Tanks: 

0 

U003150438 

AQ273 HMIRS 20018666 



1.695 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 



Actual: 

4232 ft. 

AR274 AMERICAN STORES COMPANY HANGAR FINDS 1005795455 

ESE 2280 W 160 N N/A 


1.697 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4229 ft. 

FINDS: 

Registry ID: 

110002276171 




operations. 

AS275 238 N 2200W ERNS 93341025 

ESE 238 N 2200W N/A 


1.706 mi. 

9009 ft. Site 1 of 2 in cluster AS 

Relative: 

Lower 



Actual: 

4232 ft. 

AT276 ALAMO RENT A CAR FINDS 1005795452 

SE 37 N 2400 W N/A 


1.713 mi. 

9045 ft. Site 1 of 2 in cluster AT 

Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4229 ft. 

FINDS: 

Registry ID: 

110002276144 




operations. 

TC02814573.1r Page 233

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

AT277 ALAMO RENT A CAR 

LUST U003150372 

SE 37 N 2400 W UST N/A 


1.713 mi. 

9045 ft. Site 2 of 2 in cluster AT 

Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4229 ft. 

LUST: 

Facility ID: 

Release Id: 

Closed Date: 


Owner Name: 



Owner State: 

Owner Zip: 



4000012 

FYS 

9/15/1992 

7/27/1990 

ALAMO RENT A CAR INC 

110 S E 6TH ST MAIL BOX 409 

FORT LAUDERDALE 

FL 

33301 

FORT LAUDERDALE, FL 33301 

[Rocky Stonestreet] 

Facility ID: 

Release Id: 

Closed Date: 


Owner Name: 



Owner State: 

Owner Zip: 



4000012 

IOO 

6/8/2009 

5/10/1994 



FORT LAUDERDALE 

FL 

33301 



UST: 

Facility ID: 

Owner Name: 



Owner Phone: 

Total Tanks: 

Closed Tanks: 

4000012 




(305) 527-6516 

1 

1 

AU278 CARDIOPULMONICS INC RCRA-CESQG 1004788677 

WSW 5060 WEST AMELIA EARHART DR FINDS UTD988069878 


1.717 mi. 

9068 ft. Site 1 of 4 in cluster AU 

Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4228 ft. 

RCRA-CESQG: 



CARDIOPULMONICS INC 


5060 WEST AMELIA EARHART DR 


EPA ID: 

UTD988069878 


WEST AMELIA EARHART DR 


Contact: 

RICK GAYKOWSKI 





US 


(801) 350-3600 

TC02814573.1r Page 234

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

CARDIOPULMONICS INC (Continued) 1004788677 


EPA Region: 


Description: 

Not reported 

08 





















Legal status: 




CARDIOPULMONICS CAPITAL FIRMS 



Not reported 

(999) 999-9999 

Private 

Owner 

Not reported 

Not reported 


















No 

Unknown 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 



Waste code: 

Waste name: 

D001 








TC02814573.1r Page 235

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 


Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 


FINDS: 

Registry ID: 

D002 








D003 






F001 









F003 










MIXTURES. 

F005 









110005204206 






TC02814573.1r Page 236

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 




AU279 HMIRS 95070989 



1.722 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 



Actual: 

4228 ft. 

AU280 HMIRS 95090078 



1.722 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 



Actual: 

4228 ft. 

AS281 SPILLS S106053662 



1.724 mi. 

9104 ft. Site 2 of 2 in cluster AS 

Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4230 ft. 

SPILLS: 




9/23/2003 


9/22/2003 

Responsible Party Name: H M G Management 

RP Address: 

176 North 2200 West, Salt Lake City, Utah 

RP Phone: 

322-2505 

Highway: 

Not reported 

Milemarker: 

0 

Incident Summary: Maintenance workers in this building noticed the reservoirs for 

hydraulic fluid for the elevators were less than half full, meaning 

that at least 15 - 20 gallons of hydraulic fluid had leaked into the 

floor of the elevator shaft. Upon inspection, it was observed the 

leak was more like 55 gallons. Response: Nova Consulting was brought 

in and has been in contact with DSHW. They plan to dispose the oil, 

the contaminated concrete in the shaft, and any contaminated soil in 

appropriate landfill (probably ET Technology landfill). 

TC02814573.1r Page 237

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

AV282 UTAH PIPE TRADES EDUCATION PROGRAM 

NPDES S109992748 

West 640 NORTH BILLY MITCHELL ROAD N/A 


1.729 mi. 

9131 ft. Site 1 of 10 in cluster AV 

Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4228 ft. 

NPDES: 

Facid: 

490000102814 


UTR322712 


Not reported 


Not reported 


Not reported 


Group 1: 

Not reported 

Group 2: 

Not reported 

Group 3: 

Not reported 

Group 4: 

Not reported 

Group 5: 

Not reported 

Issue Date: 

Not reported 


Not reported 


8/15/2010 



Not reported 


Not reported 


Not reported 


Not reported 

Amount Paid: 

Not reported 

Inactivated: 

Not reported 

No Exposure: 

Not reported 

Not Received: 

Not reported 


Not reported 


Not reported 


Not reported 

Fac Oper Zip: 

Not reported 


Not reported 

Fac Site Lat: 

Not reported 


Not reported 


Not reported 

Third Sector: 

Not reported 


Not reported 


Not reported 


Not reported 

Permit Name: 

Not reported 


Not reported 

AV283 VIKTRON LIKA UTAH RCRA-NonGen 1000143374 

West 594 NORTH BILLY MITCHELL RD FINDS UTD980954168 


1.732 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4228 ft. 

RCRA-NonGen: 



VIKTRON LIKA UTAH 


594 NORTH BILLY MITCHELL RD 


EPA ID: 

UTD980954168 


NORTH BILLY MITCHELL RD 


Contact: 

GARY MEYER 

TC02814573.1r Page 238

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

VIKTRON LIKA UTAH (Continued) 1000143374 





EPA Region: 

Land type: 


Description: 

594 NORTH BILLY MITCHELL RD 


US 

(801) 596-1024 

Not reported 

08 


Non-Generator 







Legal status: 




VIKTRON LP 

343 ST PAUL BLVD 

CAROL STREAM, IL 60188 

Not reported 

(708) 668-3900 

Private 

Owner 

01/01/0001 

Not reported 


















No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 











Site name: 

VIKTRON UTAH 






Site name: 

VIKTRON UTAH 






TC02814573.1r Page 239

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 












Site name: 

LIKA - UTAH 






Site name: 

LIKA - UTAH 






Site name: 

LIKA UTAH AKA JR UTAH 






































Not reported 


08/14/1987 

01/26/1988 

State 


11/02/1987 

Not reported 

Not reported 

State 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 


08/28/1986 

10/31/1986 

State 

Not reported 

Not reported 

TC02814573.1r Page 240

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 















































Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 


08/28/1986 

10/31/1986 

State 


09/25/1986 

Not reported 

Not reported 

State 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 


08/28/1986 

10/31/1986 

State 


09/25/1986 

Not reported 

Not reported 

State 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 


03/12/1986 

03/19/1986 

State 


03/17/1986 

Not reported 

Not reported 

State 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 



Evaluation: 





03/25/2008 


Not reported 

Not reported 

State 

02/03/1999 

TC02814573.1r Page 241

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 


Evaluation: 





Evaluation: 





Evaluation: 





Evaluation: 





Evaluation: 





Evaluation: 





Evaluation: 




FINDS: 


Not reported 

Not reported 

State 

08/14/1987 



01/26/1988 

State 

08/28/1986 



10/31/1986 

State 

08/28/1986 


Not reported 

Not reported 

State 

03/12/1986 



03/19/1986 

State 

12/03/1985 


Not reported 

Not reported 

State 

06/05/1985 


Not reported 

Not reported 

State 

Registry ID: 

110000469500 













TC02814573.1r Page 242

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 


























AV284 SPILLS S105222897 

West 594 N. BILLY MITCHELL ROAD N/A 


1.732 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4228 ft. 

SPILLS: 




11/18/1991 


11/15/1991 


RP Address: 

594 N. BILLY MITCHELL ROAD 

RP Phone: 

(801)-596-1024 

Highway: 

Not reported 

Milemarker: 

Not reported 

Incident Summary: SODIUM HYDROXIDE SPI SODIUM HYROXIDE 750 LBS 

AV285 VIKTRON UTAH 

NPDES S107868943 

West 594 NORTH BILLY MITCHELL ROAD N/A 


1.732 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4228 ft. 

NPDES: 

Facid: 



Not reported 

UTR000096 

Not reported 

TC02814573.1r Page 243

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

VIKTRON UTAH (Continued) 


BRIAN ST. CLAIR 


VIKTRON UTAH 

Facility Operator Contact Person: BRIAN ST. CLAIR 

Group 1: 

Not reported 

Group 2: 

AC 

Group 3: 

Not reported 

Group 4: 

Not reported 

Group 5: 

Not reported 

Issue Date: 

3/5/1998 


3/5/1998 


12/31/1999 



GOGGIN CANAL 


3672 


AC 


DAVE STEINERT 

Amount Paid: 

200 

Inactivated: 

Not reported 

No Exposure: 

Not reported 

Not Received: 

Not reported 


594 NORTH BILLY MITCHELL ROAD 




UT 

Fac Oper Zip: 

84116 


8015961024 

Fac Site Lat: 

404648 


1120051 


Not reported 

Third Sector: 

Not reported 


Not reported 


10/29/1997 


10/29/1997 

Permit Name: 

Not reported 


Not reported 

S107868943 

AV286 VIKTRON UTAH 

HAZNET S104584246 

West 594 N BILLY MITCHELL RD N/A 


1.732 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4228 ft. 

HAZNET: 

Gepaid: 

Contact: 

Telephone: 


Mailing Name: 



Gen County: 

TSD EPA ID: 

TSD County: 



Tons: 

UTD980954168 

VIKTRON UTAH 

0000000000 

Not reported 

Not reported 

594 BILLY MITCHELL RD 


99 

CAD008488025 

Los Angeles 

Aqueous solution with metals (restricted levels and Alkaline solution 

(pH 12.5) with metals (antimony, arsenic, barium, beryllium, 

cadmium, chromium, cobalt, copper, lead, mercury, molybdenum, nickel, 

selenium, silver, thallium, vanadium, and zinc) ) 

Not reported 

20.0160 

TC02814573.1r Page 244

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 


S104584246 


99 

Gepaid: 

Contact: 

Telephone: 


Mailing Name: 



Gen County: 

TSD EPA ID: 

TSD County: 



Tons: 


Gepaid: 

Contact: 

Telephone: 


Mailing Name: 



Gen County: 

TSD EPA ID: 

TSD County: 



Tons: 


Gepaid: 

Contact: 

Telephone: 


Mailing Name: 



Gen County: 

TSD EPA ID: 

TSD County: 



Tons: 


Gepaid: 

Contact: 

Telephone: 


Mailing Name: 



UTD980954168 

VIKTRON UTAH 

0000000000 

Not reported 

Not reported 



99 

CAD008488025 

Los Angeles 

Aqueous solution with metals (restricted levels and Alkaline solution 

(pH 12.5) with metals (antimony, arsenic, barium, beryllium, 

cadmium, chromium, cobalt, copper, lead, mercury, molybdenum, nickel, 

selenium, silver, thallium, vanadium, and zinc) ) 

Treatment, Tank 

181.8120 

99 

UTD980954168 

VIKTRON UTAH 

0000000000 

Not reported 

Not reported 



99 

CAD009452657 

San Mateo 

Off-specification, aged, or surplus organics 

Not reported 

.0000 

99 

UTD980954168 

VIKTRON UTAH 

0000000000 

Not reported 

Not reported 



99 

CAD009452657 

San Mateo 

Other inorganic solid waste 

Recycler 

.2125 

99 

UTD980954168 

VIKTRON UTAH 

0000000000 

Not reported 

Not reported 



TC02814573.1r Page 245

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 


Gen County: 99 

TSD EPA ID: CAD009452657 

TSD County: San Mateo 

Waste Category: Off-specification, aged, or surplus organics 

Disposal Method: Treatment, Incineration 

Tons: 

.0500 

Facility County: 99 

S104584246 


37 additional CA_HAZNET: record(s) in the EDR Site Report. 

AV287 PHOTO IMAGABLE SOLDER MASK PROCESS FINDS 1005773995 

West 594 BILLY MITCHELL RD N/A 


1.732 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4228 ft. 

FINDS: 

Registry ID: 

110002275038 







operations. 

AV288 594 N. BILLY MITCHELL RD ERNS 91237856 

West 594 N. BILLY MITCHELL RD N/A 


1.732 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 



Actual: 

4228 ft. 

AV289 VIKTRON LIKA UTAH ICIS 1011623913 

West 594 NORTH BILLY MITCHELL ROAD SALT LAKE CITY UT 8411628 N/A 


1.737 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4228 ft. 

ICIS: 


FRS ID: 

Program ID: 

Action Name: 




08-2000-0325 

110000469500 


VIKTRON, LIMITED 


594 NORTH BILLY MITCHELL ROAD SALT LAKE CITY UT 841162856 



TC02814573.1r Page 246

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 



EPA Region #: 


FRS ID: 

Program ID: 

Action Name: 





EPA Region #: 


FRS ID: 

Program ID: 

Action Name: 





EPA Region #: 


FRS ID: 

Program ID: 

Action Name: 





EPA Region #: 


9 

08-2000-0325 

110000469500 

AIRS/AFS 4903500260 


LIKA-UTAH 





9 

08-2000-0325 

110000469500 

TRIS 84116LKTH 594NB 


VIKTRON UTAH 





9 

08-2000-0325 

110000469500 

FRS 110000469500 


VIKTRON UTAH 





9 

Program ID: 


Address: 


Fed Facility: 

NAIC Code: 

SIC Code: 

Program ID: 


Address: 


Fed Facility: 

NAIC Code: 

SIC Code: 

Program ID: 


Address: 


AIRS/AFS 4903500260 

VIKTRON UTAH 


N 

No 

Not reported 

Not reported 

FRS 110000469500 

VIKTRON UTAH 


N 

No 

Not reported 

Not reported 


VIKTRON UTAH 


N 

TC02814573.1r Page 247

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 


Fed Facility: 

NAIC Code: 

SIC Code: 

Program ID: 


Address: 


Fed Facility: 

NAIC Code: 

SIC Code: 

No 

Not reported 

Not reported 

TRIS 84116LKTH 594NB 

VIKTRON UTAH 


N 

No 

Not reported 

Not reported 

AW290 TRANS WEST AIR SERVICE INC. 

UST U003367110 



1.742 mi. 

9196 ft. Site 1 of 5 in cluster AW 

Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4229 ft. 

UST: 

Facility ID: 

Owner Name: 



Owner Phone: 

Total Tanks: 

Closed Tanks: 

4002187 

TRANS WEST AIR SERVICE INC 

2282 W NORTH TEMPLE 


(801) 261-4400 

2 

0 

AW291 TRANS WEST AIR SERVICE INCORPORATED FINDS 1005793231 



1.742 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4229 ft. 

FINDS: 

Registry ID: 

110002300590 




operations. 

AV292 ACETO CORPORATION RCRA-SQG 1006817860 

West 5185 HAROLD GATTY DRIVE UTR000007526 


1.742 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4228 ft. 

RCRA-SQG: 



ACETO CORPORATION 




EPA ID: 

UTR000007526 

TC02814573.1r Page 248

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

ACETO CORPORATION (Continued) 1006817860 


Contact: 





EPA Region: 


Description: 

ONE HOLLOW LANE 

LAKE SUCCESS, NY 11042 

ISABELLA LAMORTE 

ONE HOLLOW LANE 

LAKE SUCCESS, NY 11042 

Not reported 

(516) 627-6000 

Not reported 

08 












Legal status: 








Legal status: 




AMERICAN DISTRIBUTION CENTER 



Not reported 

(516) 627-6000 

Private 

Operator 

06/17/2003 

Not reported 

ACETO CORPORATION 



Not reported 

(516) 627-6000 

Private 

Owner 

06/17/2003 

Not reported 


















No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 


TC02814573.1r Page 249

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

ACETO CORPORATION (Continued) 1006817860 


Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 


D001 








D002 








D003 






D004 

ARSENIC 

D005 

BARIUM 

D006 

CADMIUM 

D007 

CHROMIUM 

D008 

LEAD 

D009 

MERCURY 

D010 

SELENIUM 

D011 

SILVER 

U002 

ACETONE (I) 

U004 

ACETOPHENONE 


TC02814573.1r Page 250

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

AV293 ACETO CORPORATION FINDS 1007056738 

West 5185 HAROLD GATTY DRIVE N/A 


1.742 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4228 ft. 

FINDS: 

Registry ID: 

110015321908 








AX294 EDO CORPORATION FIBER SCIENCE DIVISION RCRA-SQG 1000109268 

WSW 506 NORTH BILLY MITCHELL ROAD FINDS UTD045231396 


1.743 mi. 

9204 ft. Site 1 of 2 in cluster AX 

Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4228 ft. 

RCRA-SQG: 



EDO CORPORATION FIBER SCIENCE 




EPA ID: 

UTD045231396 


NORTH BILLY MITCHELL ROAD 


Contact: 

WILLIAM A NIX 





US 


(801) 486-7481 


Not reported 

EPA Region: 

08 

Land type: 

Private 



Description: 











Legal status: 




EDO CORPORATION 



US 

(801) 486-7481 

Private 

Operator 

01/02/1983 

Not reported 

TC02814573.1r Page 251

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

EDO CORPORATION FIBER SCIENCE DIVISION (Continued) 1000109268 





Legal status: 




CERRITOS ASSOCIATES 

506 NO. BILLY MITCHELL RD 


US 

(801) 486-7481 

Private 

Owner 

01/01/1970 

Not reported 


















No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 






Site name: 

EDO CORP-FIBER SCIENCE DIV 






Site name: 

EDO CORP.-FIBER SCIENCE DIV. 






Site name: 

EDO CORPORATION, FIBER SCIENCE DIV. 






Site name: 

EDO CORP-FIBER SCIENCE DIV 




Waste code: 

Waste name: 

D001 






TC02814573.1r Page 252

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 




Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

D002 








F003 










MIXTURES. 

F005 








U019 

BENZENE (I,T) 

U105 

BENZENE, 1-METHYL-2,4-DINITRO- 

U159 


U220 



Regulation violated: SR - r315-5 












TC02814573.1r Page 253

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 























































Not reported 

Not reported 

SR - R315-5 


09/21/2000 

12/01/2000 

State 


09/21/2000 

Not reported 

Not reported 

State 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 


02/07/1989 

07/17/1989 

State 


06/27/1989 

Not reported 

Not reported 

State 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 


01/29/1985 

09/05/1985 

State 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 


01/29/1985 

09/05/1985 

State 


02/25/1985 

Not reported 

Not reported 

State 

Not reported 

Not reported 

TC02814573.1r Page 254

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 
















Not reported 

Not reported 


01/29/1985 

09/05/1985 

State 


02/25/1985 

Not reported 

Not reported 

State 

5000 

5000 

Not reported 



Evaluation: 





Evaluation: 





Evaluation: 




FINDS: 

09/21/2000 



12/01/2000 

State 

02/07/1989 



07/17/1989 

State 

01/29/1985 



09/05/1985 

State 

Registry ID: 

110000896754 

















TC02814573.1r Page 255

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 





















operations. 















AX295 EDO FIBER SCIENCE 

NPDES S107869095 

WSW 506 NORTH BILLY MITCHELL DRIVE N/A 


1.743 mi. 

9204 ft. Site 2 of 2 in cluster AX 

Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4228 ft. 

NPDES: 

Facid: 






Group 1: 

Group 2: 

Group 3: 

Group 4: 

Group 5: 

Not reported 

UTR000261 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

TC02814573.1r Page 256

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

EDO FIBER SCIENCE (Continued) 

Issue Date: 

3/1/2008 


3/1/2008 


12/31/2012 



Not reported 


Not reported 


Not reported 


Not reported 

Amount Paid: 

Not reported 

Inactivated: 

Not reported 

No Exposure: 

Not reported 

Not Received: 

Not reported 


Not reported 


Not reported 


Not reported 

Fac Oper Zip: 

Not reported 


8015371800 

Fac Site Lat: 

40.77984 


112.01462 


Not reported 

Third Sector: 

Not reported 


Not reported 


Not reported 


Not reported 

Permit Name: 

EDO FIBER SCIENCE 


JORDAN RIVER 

S107869095 

Facid: 

Not reported 


UTR000261 


Not reported 


DIANA CLICH 


EDO FIBER SCIENCE 

Facility Operator Contact Person: BILL NIX 

Group 1: 

Not reported 

Group 2: 

Not reported 

Group 3: 

Not reported 

Group 4: 

Not reported 

Group 5: 

Y 

Issue Date: 

12/21/2007 


3/1/2008 


12/31/2012 



JORDAN RIVER 


3296 


Y 


MICHAEL THERSON 

Amount Paid: 

500 

Inactivated: 

Not reported 

No Exposure: 

Not reported 

Not Received: 

Not reported 


506 NORTH BILLY MITCHELL DRIVE 


SALT LAKE 


UT 

Fac Oper Zip: 

84116 


8015371800 

Fac Site Lat: 

0 


0 

TC02814573.1r Page 257

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

EDO FIBER SCIENCE (Continued) 

S107869095 


Third Sector: 




Permit Name: 


Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

12/21/2007 

12/21/2007 

Not reported 

Not reported 

296 WELLS FARGO CENTRAL OP. BLDG 

UST U003229698 

WSW 260 NORTH CHARLES LINDBERGH DR N/A 


1.750 mi. 

9240 ft. 

Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4228 ft. 

UST: 

Facility ID: 

Owner Name: 



Owner Phone: 

Total Tanks: 

Closed Tanks: 

4000298 

WELLS FARGO 

5201 W AMELIA EARHART DR 


(801) 246-6114 

2 

2 

AU297 CARGO-LINK INTERNATIONAL FINDS 1004606236 



1.754 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4228 ft. 

FINDS: 

Registry ID: 

110011612095 







298 BROKEN ARROW ENVIRONMENTAL INC. RCRA-NonGen 1000842647 

WSW 8960 N HWY 40 PADS UTD980635890 

> 1 LAKEPOINT, UT 84074 

MANIFEST 

1.757 mi. 

9280 ft. 

Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4228 ft. 

RCRA-NonGen: 



BROKEN ARROW ENVIRONMENTAL INC. 


8960 NORTH HIGHWAY 40 

LAKEPOINT, UT 84074 

EPA ID: 

UTD980635890 


P.O. BOX 580 

TOOELE, UT 84074 

TC02814573.1r Page 258

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

BROKEN ARROW ENVIRONMENTAL INC. (Continued) 1000842647 

Contact: 





EPA Region: 

Land type: 


Description: 

DAN OWEN 

P.O. BOX 580 


US 

(801) 355-0527 

Not reported 

08 

Private 

Non-Generator 







Legal status: 








Legal status: 








Legal status: 




USPCI INC 

P.O. BOX 210799 

COLUMBIA, SC 29221 

Not reported 

(801) 252-2000 

Private 

Owner 

Not reported 

Not reported 

US POLLUTION CONTROL INC 

PO BOX 210799 

COLUMBIA, SC 29221 

Not reported 

(803) 551-4313 

Private 

Owner 

Not reported 

Not reported 

GROSCOST & BUNN INVESTMENT INC. 

P.O. BOX 580 


Not reported 

(801) 355-0527 

Private 

Owner 

01/01/0001 

Not reported 















No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

TC02814573.1r Page 259

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 





No 

No 





















Site name: 

EDO CORP. FIBER SCIENCE DIV. 






Site name: 

SALT LAKE CIRCUITS 




Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 


NONE 

None 

D001 








D003 









Evaluation: 




08/08/2007 


Not reported 

Not reported 

State 

TC02814573.1r Page 260

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 



Evaluation: 




PADS: 

EPAID: 



Facility country: 

Generator: 

Storer: 

Transporter: 

Disposer: 

Research facility: 

Smelter: 

Facility owner name: 

Contact title: 

Contact name: 

Contact tel: 

Contact extension: 


Mailing country: 

Cert. title: 

Cert. name: 

Cert. date: 

Date received: 

01/17/1989 


Not reported 

Not reported 

State 

UTD980635890 

USPCI TRANS DIV 

8960 N HWY 40 


US 

No 

No 

Yes 

No 

No 

No 

USPCI 

Not reported 

WARNER JAY 

(801)252-2000 

Not reported 

8960 N HWY 40 


US 

Not reported 

Not reported 

10/21/1988 

3/21/1990 

MANIFEST: 

GEN Cert Date: 

Transporter Recpt Date: 

Number Of Containers: 


Waste Code1: 

Waste Code2: 

Waste Code3: 

Comment: 

Fee Exempt Code: 

TSDF Name: 

TSDF ID: 

TSDF Date: 

Date Imported: 

Transporter 2 Name: 

Transporter 2 ID: 

Manifest Docket Number: 

Waste Description: 

Quantity: 

WT/Vol Units: 

Item Number: 

Transporter Name: 

Transporter EPA ID: 

GEN Cert Date: 

Transporter Recpt Date: 

Transporter 2 Recpt Date: 

9/30/1996 

Not reported 

0 

Not reported 

R007 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

PPM, INC. 

PAD981113749 

Not reported 

4/4/1997 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

TC02814573.1r Page 261

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 


TSDF Recpt Date: 

EPA ID: 

Transporter 2 ID: 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

299 TEXTILE CARE SERVICES RCRA-CESQG 1004788654 

WSW 5120 WEST AMELIA EARHART DR FINDS UTD982590887 


1.765 mi. 

9320 ft. 

Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4228 ft. 

RCRA-CESQG: 



TEXTILE CARE SERVICES 




EPA ID: 

UTD982590887 


WEST AMELIA EARHART DR 


Contact: 

JIM-D PORRETT 





US 


(801) 537-1045 


Not reported 

EPA Region: 

08 



Description: 




















Legal status: 




TEXTILE CARE SERVICES INC 



Not reported 

(999) 999-9999 

Private 

Owner 

Not reported 

Not reported 





No 

Unknown 

No 

TC02814573.1r Page 262

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

TEXTILE CARE SERVICES (Continued) 1004788654 














No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 



Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 


FINDS: 

F001 









F002 











Registry ID: 

110005202388 








TC02814573.1r Page 263

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

AW300 NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE, WRH FINDS 1012105047 



1.772 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4229 ft. 

FINDS: 

Registry ID: 

110038770942 













AW301 SPILLS S105743052 



1.772 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4229 ft. 

SPILLS: 




12/23/2002 


12/23/2002 


RP Address: 

Not reported 

RP Phone: 

Not reported 

Highway: 

Not reported 

Milemarker: 

0 

Incident Summary: 12/23/02 17:00 DEQ Public Relations personnel Dave Allison at DEQ 

APE-Bldg 2 contacted the duty officer regarding an odor similar to 

natural gas(?) in their 2nd floor office. DERR contacted the Salt 

Lake City Fire Dept. dispatch (FD-Dispatch). FD-Dispatch informed 

DERR that they ve been receiving calls all day. Crews had been 

dispatched in an effort to determine a source. Questar had also been 

contacted and dispatched. No source had yet been identified, but the 

Lake Affect had been offered as one possible source. The duty officer 

informed the DEQ PIO and associates of these developments. 18:18 Salt 

Lake Valley Health (SLVHD) Steve Beach contacted DERR to report a 

possible chemical plume release, noted at 17:00 in the area of 210 

North 2200 West in Salt Lake City. FD-Dispatch and SLVHD dispatched 

to the National Weather Service (NWS) facility located at 2242 West 

North Temple near Salt Lake Int l Airport. SLVHD reported to DERR of 

several individuals reported symptons illness as a result of the 

plume. Per NWS personnel, winds were from the south, hence the odor 

appears to originate from the south. 19:50 DERR spoke again with 

SLVHD to inform of a containment vessel located at the manufacturing 

facility at 2200 West North Temple as a possible source of natural 

gas or propane - the duty officer commented that actual material 

TC02814573.1r Page 264

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

(Continued) 

content of the vessel had not been identified. SLVHD stated knowledge 

of a facility within the industrial zone south of the airport 

(adjacent to the city impound lot) that allegedly employs an odorous 

bovine enzyme solution to process spent X-ray film. 12/24/02 21:45 

NWS (Mike 524-4377) contacted DERR to report that the odor like a 

sulfide smell had returned in force for a third time since yesterday 

(1) yesterday at 17:00, (2) last night at 22:00, and now. The NWS was 

specific to state that winds were from the Southwest at 2-3 knots as 

of 21:40. The caller stated that individuals at the facility reported 

symptoms including: burning throats and lungs, nausea, and headache. 

The caller stated that several also noted symptoms that were 

recognized in recollection: the caller stated that they observed 

difficulty writing as noted by a change in the hand writing. The 

caller and others that had worked last night (12/23) reviewed 

hand-writing of log entries, and in recollection, made the 

observation that it had been difficult to write and offered the 

change in writing attributable to a loss of motor control. The caller 

related brief instances of possible symptoms of exposure among other 

individuals: one co-worker, whom is pregnant, had passed out while 

another man went home and later suffered a stroke(?). The caller 

stated that the latter consulted with his physician, and related the 

events of the plume. The physician then offered that the symptoms may 

be the result of a chemical exposure rather than those of a stroke. 

Finally, the NWS stated that one individual while traveling westbound 

home last night (12/23) made the following observations: the 

traveler, with window down, noted that the odor extended from 2200 

West to the junction where North Temple splits off, north into the 

airport, and south to I-80 and Bangerter Highway. The traveler 

observed a distinct and dramatic boundary as he passed from odor to 

fresh air at this latter junction. The NWS caller stated that winds 

last night were also from the southwest at ~ 4mph. 22:30 DERR uable 

to contact the SLVHD duty officer, contacted FD-Dispatch, whom 

notified DERR of their recent contact with SLVHD. FD-Dispatch stated 

that SLVHD was currently engaged with another incident but had been 

notified and would respond to this event. 22:50 SLVHD related to DERR 

of Fire Dept. deployment of monitoring equipment and detection tubes 

etc., with minimal detection. DERR offered to coordinate with DEQ 

Div. of Air Quality regarding the possibility to deploy, with 

training to operate, air sample collection devices, e.g. SUMA 

canister, to the NWS facility. SLVHD would call back to NWS personnel 

to inform them of the support structure - availability of Dept. of 

Health epidemiology personnel etc., if any individuals, potentially 

impacted by the plume, wished to discuss health issues, etc. SLVHD 

will continue to coordinate with the Fire Dept. in an effort to 

locate the source. 12/26/02 16:35 Call received by our administrative 

staff from Mr. Dave Herman associated with Salt Lake City Int l 

Airport Emergency Management. 12/27/02 12:10 DERR spoke with Mr. 

Herman. He reports that the natural gas odor has been an on-going 

issue since Monday 12/23/02. The airport Fire Dept. dispatch center 

has been receiving complaint calls daily, with a max of 15 in one 

day, since Monday from airport tenants. The airport Fire Dept. crews 

have been dispatched 2-5 times daily in response to this issue. Main 

dispatch number is 575-2401. Airport Environmental Manager is Tim 

Gwynette 575-2995. The issue of the airport glycol retention ponds as 

a possible source (of the odor) was raised in discussion. Given that 

the plume appears more of a petroleum-base odor, glycol does not seem 

the appropriate source. DERR informed airport personnel of all prior 

S105743052 

TC02814573.1r Page 265

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

(Continued) 

efforts to date (as noted above). Mr. Herman stated that they would 

like to resolve the issue asap since it is causing an impact not only 

on airport personnel but also merchants and customers. Mr. Herman 

requested that we please keep them informed. 

S105743052 

AW302 EMERGENCY GENERATOR FINDS 1005795702 



1.772 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4229 ft. 

FINDS: 

Registry ID: 

110002273101 




operations. 

AY303 SKAGGS ALPHA BETA FINDS 1010456242 

WSW 369 BILLY MITCHELL WY N/A 


1.784 mi. 

9419 ft. Site 1 of 2 in cluster AY 

Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4228 ft. 

FINDS: 

Registry ID: 

110031313317 








AY304 SKAGGS ALPHA BETA RCRA-NonGen 1010335687 

WSW 369 BILLY MITCHELL WY UTD149864878 


1.784 mi. 

9419 ft. Site 2 of 2 in cluster AY 

Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4228 ft. 

RCRA-NonGen: 



SKAGGS ALPHA BETA 


369 BILLY MITCHELL WY 


EPA ID: 

UTD149864878 


PO BOX 30658 


Contact: 

MARGIE LONG 

TC02814573.1r Page 266

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

SKAGGS ALPHA BETA (Continued) 1010335687 





EPA Region: 


Description: 

PO BOX 30658 


US 

(801) 537-3002 

Not reported 

08 

Non-Generator 







Legal status: 







Not reported 

(999) 999-9999 

Private 

Owner 

01/01/0001 

Not reported 


















No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 









Waste code: 

Waste name: 


F005 









TC02814573.1r Page 267

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

AZ305 THRIFTY CAR RENTAL FINDS 1005793145 

SE 15 S 2400 W N/A 


1.786 mi. 

9427 ft. Site 1 of 3 in cluster AZ 

Relative: 

Equal 

Actual: 

4236 ft. 

FINDS: 

Registry ID: 

110002301205 




operations. 

AZ306 THRIFTY CAR RENTAL 

UST U003150443 

SE 15 S 2400 W N/A 


1.786 mi. 


Relative: 

Equal 

Actual: 

4236 ft. 

UST: 

Facility ID: 

Owner Name: 



Owner Phone: 

Total Tanks: 

Closed Tanks: 

4001812 

LEWIS TRANSPORTATION GROUP LLC 

15 S 2400 W 


(801) 595-6677 

2 

0 

AZ307 FORMER PRECISION AIR 

LUST U003711914 

SE 20 SOUTH 2400 WEST UST N/A 


1.786 mi. 


Relative: 

Equal 

Actual: 

4236 ft. 

LUST: 

Facility ID: 

Release Id: 

Closed Date: 


Owner Name: 



Owner State: 

Owner Zip: 



4002258 

LCJ 

4/20/2000 

12/8/1999 


PO BOX 145550 


UT 

84114 



Facility ID: 

Release Id: 

Closed Date: 


Owner Name: 



Owner State: 

4002258 

LGH 

10/26/2000 

8/8/2000 


PO BOX 145550 


UT 

TC02814573.1r Page 268

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

FORMER PRECISION AIR (Continued) 



Project Manager: [Robin Jenkins] 

U003711914 

UST: 

Facility ID: 

Owner Name: 



Owner Phone: 

Total Tanks: 

Closed Tanks: 

4002258 


PO BOX 145550 


(801) 575-2995 

2 

2 

BA308 NORTHROP GRUMMAN GUIDANCE AND ELECTRONIC RCRA-LQG 1000417245 

SE 2211 WEST NORTH TEMPLE FINDS UTD073095804 


MANIFEST 

1.794 mi. 

9471 ft. Site 1 of 5 in cluster BA 

Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4230 ft. 

RCRA-LQG: 



NORTHROP GRUMMAN GUIDANCE AND ELECTRONIC 

Site name: 

NORTHROP GRUMMAN GUIDANCE AND ELECTRONICS 


2211 WEST NORTH TEMPLE 


EPA ID: 

UTD073095804 


WEST NORTH TEMPLE 


Contact: 

ALICE D ZAMORA 


Not reported 

Not reported 


Not reported 


3236587 


ALICE.ZAMORA@NGC.COM 

EPA Region: 

08 

Land type: 

Private 



Description: 


















Legal status: 

NORTHROP GRUMMAN GUIDANCE ELECTRONICS 

CENTURY PARK 

CENTURY CITY, CA 90067 

US 

Not reported 

Private 

TC02814573.1r Page 269

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

NORTHROP GRUMMAN GUIDANCE AND ELECTRONIC (Continued) 1000417245 








Legal status: 




Owner 

06/30/1957 

Not reported 

NOTHROP GRUMMAN GUIDANCE 

Not reported 

Not reported 

US 

Not reported 

Private 

Operator 

06/30/1957 

Not reported 


















No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 



Waste type: 



Waste type: 



Waste type: 



Waste type: 



Batteries 

Yes 

Not reported 

Lamps 

Yes 

Not reported 

Pesticides 

No 

Not reported 

Thermostats 

No 

Not reported 





Site name: 

NORTHROP GRUMMAN GUIDANCE AND ELECTRONICS COMPANY, INC. 




TC02814573.1r Page 270

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 



Site name: 



LITTON SYSTEMS, INC. 





Site name: 

LITTON SYSTEMS, INC. 






Site name: 

LITTON SYSTEMS INC 






Site name: 







Site name: 







Site name: 

GUIDANCE AND CONTROL, LITTON SYSTEM 






Site name: 

GUIDANCE AND CONTROL, LITTON SYSTEMS 






Site name: 

LITTON GUIDANCE & CONTROL SYSTEMS 






Site name: 

LITTON SYSTEMS 






Site name: 







Site name: 







Site name: 


TC02814573.1r Page 271

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 







Site name: 





Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

D001 








D002 








D003 






D005 

BARIUM 

D006 

CADMIUM 

D007 

CHROMIUM 

D008 

LEAD 

D009 

MERCURY 

D011 

SILVER 

D021 

CHLOROBENZENE 

D022 

CHLOROFORM 

TC02814573.1r Page 272

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 


Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

D028 

1,2-DICHLOROETHANE 

D029 

1,1-DICHLOROETHYLENE 

D035 


D040 

TRICHLOROETHYLENE 

F001 









F002 










F003 










MIXTURES. 

F005 








F006 



TC02814573.1r Page 273

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 






ALUMINUM. 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

LABP 

LAB PACK 

P015 

BERYLLIUM 

P098 


U228 

ETHENE, TRICHLORO- 




Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Amount (Lbs): 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Amount (Lbs): 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Amount (Lbs): 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Amount (Lbs): 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Amount (Lbs): 

D001 








21275 

D002 








5845 

D003 






3643 

D006 

CADMIUM 

3643 

D007 

CHROMIUM 

6780 

TC02814573.1r Page 274

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 


Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Amount (Lbs): 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Amount (Lbs): 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Amount (Lbs): 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Amount (Lbs): 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Amount (Lbs): 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Amount (Lbs): 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Amount (Lbs): 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Amount (Lbs): 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Amount (Lbs): 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

D008 

LEAD 

2919 

D009 

MERCURY 

3679 

D011 

SILVER 

3643 

D022 

CHLOROFORM 

1548 

D028 

1,2-DICHLOROETHANE 

1548 

D029 

1,1-DICHLOROETHYLENE 

1548 

D035 


16714 

F001 









11963 

F002 










11963 

F003 






TC02814573.1r Page 275

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 


Amount (Lbs): 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Amount (Lbs): 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Amount (Lbs): 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Amount (Lbs): 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Amount (Lbs): 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Amount (Lbs): 

Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Amount (Lbs): 





MIXTURES. 

13442 

F005 








13071 

F006 







ALUMINUM. 

370 

F007 


174 

P098 


174 

U002 

ACETONE (I) 

890 

U228 

ETHENE, TRICHLORO- 

3643 















TC02814573.1r Page 276

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 





























Not reported 

Not reported 


03/20/1986 

11/18/1986 

State 


09/26/1986 

Not reported 

Not reported 

State 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 


03/12/1985 

05/06/1985 

State 


04/11/1985 

Not reported 

Not reported 

State 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 



Evaluation: 





Evaluation: 





Evaluation: 





Evaluation: 




FINDS: 

02/07/2006 


Not reported 

Not reported 

State 

06/02/1999 


Not reported 

Not reported 

State 

03/20/1986 



11/18/1986 

State 

03/12/1985 



05/06/1985 

State 

TC02814573.1r Page 277

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 


Registry ID: 

110000896772 




































operations. 

NY MANIFEST: 

EPA ID: 

Country: 

Mailing Name: 

Mailing Contact: 


Mailing Address 2: 

Mailing City: 

Mailing State: 

Mailing Zip: 

Mailing Zip4: 

Mailing Country: 

UTD073095804 

USA 


CURT BARRETT 


Not reported 


UT 

84116 

Not reported 

USA 

TC02814573.1r Page 278

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 


Mailing Phone: 

801-323-6566 

Document ID: 













TSDF ID: 

Waste Code: 

Quantity: 

Units: 





Year: 


Import Ind: 

Export Ind: 










NYB8494371 

Completed after the designated time period for a TSDF to get a copy to the DEC 

11278PNY 

Not reported 

970731 

970731 

Not reported 

970811 

Not reported 

970826 

UTD073095804 

NYD980769947 

Not reported 

NYD000632372 

D001 - NON-LISTED IGNITABLE WASTES 

00001 

P - Pounds 

001 

CF - Fiber or plastic boxes, cartons 

T Chemical, physical, or biological treatment. 

100 

97 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

BA309 NORTHROP GRUMMAN BUILDING ADDITION 

NPDES S110295469 



1.794 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4230 ft. 

NPDES: 

Facid: 






Group 1: 

Group 2: 

Group 3: 

Group 4: 

Group 5: 

Issue Date: 


490000103902 

UTR333810 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

TC02814573.1r Page 279

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

NORTHROP GRUMMAN BUILDING ADDITION (Continued) 


1/12/2011 



Not reported 


Not reported 


Not reported 


Not reported 

Amount Paid: 

Not reported 

Inactivated: 

Not reported 

No Exposure: 

Not reported 

Not Received: 

Not reported 


Not reported 


Not reported 


Not reported 

Fac Oper Zip: 

Not reported 


Not reported 

Fac Site Lat: 

Not reported 


Not reported 


Not reported 

Third Sector: 

Not reported 


Not reported 


Not reported 


Not reported 

Permit Name: 

Not reported 


Not reported 

S110295469 

Facid: 

Not reported 


UTR333810 


Not reported 


Not reported 


JASON KIRHAM 


Group 1: 

Not reported 

Group 2: 

Not reported 

Group 3: 

Not reported 

Group 4: 

Not reported 

Group 5: 

Not reported 

Issue Date: 

1/12/2010 


1/12/2010 


1/12/2011 



Not reported 


Not reported 


Not reported 


Not reported 

Amount Paid: 

Not reported 

Inactivated: 

Not reported 

No Exposure: 

Not reported 

Not Received: 

Not reported 


Not reported 


Not reported 


Not reported 

Fac Oper Zip: 

Not reported 


Not reported 

Fac Site Lat: 

Not reported 


Not reported 


Not reported 

Third Sector: 

Not reported 

TC02814573.1r Page 280

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

NORTHROP GRUMMAN BUILDING ADDITION (Continued) 


Not reported 


Not reported 


Not reported 

Permit Name: 

SIRQ, Inc 


JORDAN RIVER 

S110295469 

BA310 LITTON SYSTEMS 

NPDES S107868966 



1.794 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4230 ft. 

NPDES: 

Facid: 

Not reported 


UTR000124 


Not reported 


Not reported 


Not reported 


Group 1: 

Not reported 

Group 2: 

Not reported 

Group 3: 

Not reported 

Group 4: 

Not reported 

Group 5: 

Not reported 

Issue Date: 

10/1/1992 


10/1/1992 


9/30/1997 



Not reported 


Not reported 


Not reported 


Not reported 

Amount Paid: 

Not reported 

Inactivated: 

Not reported 

No Exposure: 

Not reported 

Not Received: 

Not reported 


Not reported 


Not reported 


Not reported 

Fac Oper Zip: 

Not reported 


Not reported 

Fac Site Lat: 

40.77149 


111.95383 


Not reported 

Third Sector: 

Not reported 


Not reported 


Not reported 


Not reported 

Permit Name: 

Northrop Grumman 


City Drain West Branch 

Facid: 






Group 1: 

Not reported 

UTR000124 

Not reported 

Not reported 


Not reported 

Not reported 

TC02814573.1r Page 281

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

LITTON SYSTEMS (Continued) 

Group 2: 

Not reported 

Group 3: 

Not reported 

Group 4: 

Not reported 

Group 5: 

Not reported 

Issue Date: 

10/1/1992 


10/1/1992 


9/30/1997 



CITY DRAIN WEST BRANCH 


3812 


Not reported 


Not reported 

Amount Paid: 

270 

Inactivated: 

Not reported 

No Exposure: 

03/28/2010 

Not Received: 

Not reported 




SALT LAKE 


UT 

Fac Oper Zip: 

84116- 


(801) 539-1200 

Fac Site Lat: 

Not reported 


Not reported 


Not reported 

Third Sector: 

Not reported 


Not reported 


Not reported 


Not reported 

Permit Name: 

Not reported 


Not reported 

S107868966 

311 NORTHWEST OIL DRAIN CERCLIS 1000197937 

East ROSE PARK TO 1000 N 



1.827 mi. 

9647 ft. 

Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4229 ft. 

CERCLIS: 

Site ID: 


NPL Status: 


0800677 



Referred to Removal - NFRAP 

CERCLIS Site Contact Name(s): 

Contact Name: 

Nancy Mueller 

Contact Tel: 

(303) 312-6602 


Community Involvement Coordinator 

Contact Name: 

Contact Tel: 


Kathryn Hernandez 

(303) 312-6101 

Remedial Project Manager (RPM) 

CERCLIS Site Alias Name(s): 

Alias Name: 

ROSE PARK CANALS 


ROSE PARK TO 1000 N 


Site Description: DRAINAGE CANALS FOR SEWAGE AND INDUSTRIAL WASTE WERE FILLED IN. PRP SEARCH IS 

TC02814573.1r Page 282

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

NORTHWEST OIL DRAIN (Continued) 1000197937 

COMMENCING. 

CERCLIS Assessment History: 

Action: 

Date Started: 



DISCOVERY 

Not reported 

10/01/80 

Not reported 

Action: 

Date Started: 



Action: 

Date Started: 



Action: 

Date Started: 



Action: 

Date Started: 



Action: 

Date Started: 



Action: 

Date Started: 



Action: 

Date Started: 



Action: 

Date Started: 



Action: 

Date Started: 



Action: 

Date Started: 




Not reported 

11/01/80 



Not reported 

09/29/87 


SITE INSPECTION 

Not reported 

08/19/91 

Referred to Removal, no further Rmdl Asmt 

NON-NATIONAL PRIORITIES LIST POTENTIALLY RESPONSIBLE PARTY SEARCH 

09/03/92 

06/02/93 

Not reported 

NON-NATIONAL PRIORITIES LIST POTENTIALLY RESPONSIBLE PARTY SEARCH 

04/06/98 

10/21/99 

Search Complete, Viable PRPs 

COMBINED REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION/FEASIBILITY STUDY 

05/12/98 

03/01/01 

Not reported 

ISSUE REQUEST LETTERS (104E) 

Not reported 

05/08/01 

Not reported 


Not reported 

10/31/01 

Not reported 


Not reported 

03/01/02 

Not reported 


Not reported 

04/15/02 

Not reported 

TC02814573.1r Page 283

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 


Action: 

Date Started: 



Action: 

Date Started: 



Action: 

Date Started: 



Action: 

Date Started: 



Action: 

Date Started: 



Action: 

Date Started: 



POTENTIALLY RESPONSIBLE PARTY REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION/FEASIBILITY 

STUDY 

03/01/01 

08/22/02 

Not reported 

ENGINEERING EVALUATION/COST ANALYSIS 

08/22/02 

04/29/03 

Not reported 

ADMINISTRATIVE ORDER ON CONSENT 

Not reported 

09/18/03 

Not reported 

ADMINISTRATIVE ORDER ON CONSENT 

Not reported 

04/15/04 

Not reported 

TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE 

12/02/08 

01/20/09 

Not reported 

POTENTIALLY RESPONSIBLE PARTY REMOVAL 

01/19/04 

Not reported 

Cleaned up 

FINDS: 

Registry ID: 

110008533998 


CERCLIS (Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and 

Liability Information System) is the Superfund database that is used 

to support management in all phases of the Superfund program. The 

system contains information on all aspects of hazardous waste sites, 

including an inventory of sites, planned and actual site activities, 

and financial information. 



operations. 










TC02814573.1r Page 284

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 







BA312 RADISSON AIRPORT INN 

LUST S106152177 

ESE 2177 W NORTH TEMPLE N/A 


1.829 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4230 ft. 

LUST: 

Facility ID: 

Release Id: 

Closed Date: 


Owner Name: 



Owner State: 

Owner Zip: 



4002158 

KAG 

5/12/1997 

4/24/1997 

RADISSON AIRPORT INN 



UT 

84116 



BA313 RADISON AIRPORT INN FINDS 1005793563 

ESE 2177 W NORTH TEMPLE N/A 


1.829 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4230 ft. 

FINDS: 

Registry ID: 

110002296355 




operations. 

314 TEXSCAN MSI RCRA-CESQG 1004788720 

WSW 124 NORTH CHARLES LINDBERGH DR FINDS UTD988072377 


1.842 mi. 

9727 ft. 

Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4229 ft. 

RCRA-CESQG: 



TEXSCAN MSI 


124 NORTH CHARLES LINDBERGH DR 


EPA ID: 

UTD988072377 


NORTH CHARLES LINDBERGH DR 

TC02814573.1r Page 285

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

TEXSCAN MSI (Continued) 1004788720 

Contact: 





EPA Region: 


Description: 


DEVON JENSEN 

124 NORTH CHARLES LINDBERGH DR 


US 

(801) 359-0077 

Not reported 

08 





















Legal status: 




WENDOVER INVESTMENTS INC 



Not reported 

(999) 999-9999 

Private 

Owner 

Not reported 

Not reported 


















No 

Unknown 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 



Waste code: 

Waste name: 

D001 


TC02814573.1r Page 286

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

TEXSCAN MSI (Continued) 1004788720 







Waste code: 

Waste name: 


FINDS: 

Registry ID: 

D008 

LEAD 


110005205492 








315 SANITATION PLANT FINDS 1005795738 

West 5275 W HAROLD GATTY DR N/A 


1.849 mi. 

9760 ft. 

Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4228 ft. 

FINDS: 

Registry ID: 

110002272282 




operations. 

316 HMIRS 9998020798 



1.850 mi. 

9769 ft. 

Relative: 

Higher 

Actual: 

4245 ft. 



TC02814573.1r Page 287

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

BB317 SKY WEST PROJECT 

NPDES S109539727 

NE 1440 NORTH 2200 WEST N/A 


1.859 mi. 

9817 ft. Site 1 of 2 in cluster BB 

Relative: 

Higher 

Actual: 

4239 ft. 

NPDES: 

Facid: 

490000099862 


UTR110367 


Not reported 


Not reported 


Not reported 


Group 1: 

Not reported 

Group 2: 

Not reported 

Group 3: 

Not reported 

Group 4: 

Not reported 

Group 5: 

Not reported 

Issue Date: 

Not reported 


Not reported 


5/27/2009 



Not reported 


Not reported 


Not reported 


Not reported 

Amount Paid: 

Not reported 

Inactivated: 

Not reported 

No Exposure: 

Not reported 

Not Received: 

Not reported 


Not reported 


Not reported 


Not reported 

Fac Oper Zip: 

Not reported 


Not reported 

Fac Site Lat: 

Not reported 


Not reported 


Not reported 

Third Sector: 

Not reported 


Not reported 


Not reported 


Not reported 

Permit Name: 

Not reported 


Not reported 

BC318 C-STORE INC. RCRA-CESQG 1004788748 

ESE 2198 WEST NORTH TEMPLE FINDS UTD988076162 


1.860 mi. 

9823 ft. Site 1 of 2 in cluster BC 

Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4230 ft. 

RCRA-CESQG: 



C-STORE INC. 




EPA ID: 

UTD988076162 


WEST NORTH TEMPLE 


Contact: 

MICHAEL AULT 

TC02814573.1r Page 288

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

C-STORE INC. (Continued) 1004788748 





EPA Region: 


Description: 



US 

(801) 364-8061 

Not reported 

08 





















Legal status: 




MICHAEL AULT 



Not reported 

(801) 364-8061 

Private 

Owner 

Not reported 

Not reported 


















No 

Unknown 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 



Waste code: 

Waste name: 

Waste code: 

D000 

Not Defined 

D001 

TC02814573.1r Page 289

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

C-STORE INC. (Continued) 1004788748 

Waste name: 


FINDS: 

Registry ID: 









110002279445 










operations. 

BC319 C STORE LUST 1000837338 

ESE 2198 W NORTH TEMPLE UST N/A 


1.860 mi. 

9823 ft. Site 2 of 2 in cluster BC 

Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4230 ft. 

LUST: 

Facility ID: 

Release Id: 

Closed Date: 


Owner Name: 



Owner State: 

Owner Zip: 



4000117 

JWZ 

1/29/1997 

5/10/1994 

C STORE INC MICHAEL AULT 



UT 

84116 



Facility ID: 

Release Id: 

Closed Date: 


Owner Name: 



Owner State: 

Owner Zip: 



4000117 

GRO 

1/29/1997 

4/1/1991 




UT 

84116 



TC02814573.1r Page 290

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

C STORE (Continued) 1000837338 

UST: 

Facility ID: 

Owner Name: 



Owner Phone: 

Total Tanks: 

Closed Tanks: 

4000117 




(801) 364-8061 

6 

6 

BB320 20TH CENTURY LITES FINDS 1005797090 

NE 1560 W 2200 N N/A 


1.875 mi. 

9898 ft. Site 2 of 2 in cluster BB 

Relative: 

Higher 

Actual: 

4240 ft. 

FINDS: 

Registry ID: 

110002161570 




operations. 

BD321 SKAGGS ALPHA BETA INCORPORATED FINDS 1005793379 



1.875 mi. 

9900 ft. Site 1 of 3 in cluster BD 

Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4229 ft. 

FINDS: 

Registry ID: 

110002298291 




operations. 

BD322 SKAGG’S ALPHA BETA, INC. 

LUST U000813453 

WSW 5201 AMELIA EARHART DR UST N/A 


1.875 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4229 ft. 

LUST: 

Facility ID: 

Release Id: 

Closed Date: 


Owner Name: 


4000944 

HLN 

12/9/1992 

3/30/1992 


PO BOX 20 

TC02814573.1r Page 291

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

SKAGG’S ALPHA BETA, INC. (Continued) 

U000813453 


Owner State: 

Owner Zip: 



BOISE 

ID 

83726 


[Matt Sullivan] 

UST: 

Facility ID: 

Owner Name: 



Owner Phone: 

Total Tanks: 

Closed Tanks: 

4000944 


PO BOX 20 


(208) 395-5245 

2 

2 

BD323 AT&T UNIVERSAL CARD SERVICES FINDS 1005490097 



1.875 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4229 ft. 

FINDS: 

Registry ID: 

110001885595 















operations. 

BE324 BINGHAM ENVIRONMENTAL INC. MLTS 1006335683 



1.908 mi. 

10073 ft. Site 1 of 4 in cluster BE 

Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4230 ft. 

MLTS: 



License Date: 


Contact Name: 


SUA-1556 

06/21/1993 

02/08/1994 

01/03/1994 

DAVID CLINE 

801-532-2230 

TC02814573.1r Page 292

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

BINGHAM ENVIRONMENTAL INC. (Continued) 1006335683 



Department: 

Building: 


License Use: 




Burial Use: 




Status: 

19575 

Not reported 

Not reported 

100 LINDBERGH PLAZA 2 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

0 

0 

Not reported 

Not reported 

BE325 BINGHAM ENVIRONMENTAL, INCORPORATED FINDS 1005623165 



1.908 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4230 ft. 

FINDS: 

Registry ID: 

110011788342 







BE326 BINGHAM ENVIRONMENTAL, INC. FTTS 1007270519 

WSW 5160 WILEY POST ROAD HIST FTTS N/A 


1.908 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4230 ft. 

FTTS INSP: 


Region: 


Inspector: 






199403158563 1 

02 

03/15/94 

D. BUXBAUM 

No 

Good Laboratory Practices 

Neutral Scheme, Headquarters 

FIFRA 

Laboratory 

HIST FTTS INSP: 


Region: 


Inspector: 

199403158563 1 

02 

Not reported 

D. BUXBAUM 

TC02814573.1r Page 293

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

BINGHAM ENVIRONMENTAL, INC. (Continued) 1007270519 






No 

Good Laboratory Practices 

Neutral Scheme, Headquarters 

FIFRA 

Laboratory 

BE327 BINGHAM ENVIRONMENTAL, INCORPORATED MLTS 1006287338 



1.908 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4230 ft. 

MLTS: 



License Date: 


Contact Name: 




Department: 

Building: 


License Use: 




Burial Use: 




Status: 

43-19575-01 

01/30/1987 

10/19/1995 

01/31/1998 

ALAN B. TAYLOR 

801-532-2520 

19575 

Not reported 

Not reported 

100 LINDBERG PLAZA 2 

Not reported 

Not reported 

No 

No 

No 

No 

11/1993 

11/1998 

MLM 

Not reported 

BF328 SPILLS S106053645 

ESE 2110 WEST NORTH TEMPLE N/A 


1.908 mi. 

10074 ft. Site 1 of 2 in cluster BF 

Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4232 ft. 

SPILLS: 




8/8/2003 


Not reported 


RP Address: 

Not reported 

RP Phone: 

Not reported 

Highway: 

Not reported 

Milemarker: 

0 

Incident Summary: A single abandoned drum was called in by Salt Lake City last April. 

Location is in a back yard of an empty building at 2110 West North 

Temple ("Evan’s Welding"), about one block west of DEQ. Analysis 

showed the contents of the barrel was just oil. Steve will send the 

property owner a notice to remove the drum within 10 days. 

TC02814573.1r Page 294

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

329 MODERN DISPLAY SERVICES INC. RCRA-CESQG 1004789124 

South 3370 WEST 500 SOUTH FINDS UTR000006452 


1.932 mi. 

10199 ft. 

Relative: 

Equal 

Actual: 

4236 ft. 

RCRA-CESQG: 



MODERN DISPLAY SERVICES INC. 


3370 WEST 500 SOUTH 


EPA ID: 

UTR000006452 


SOUTH 700 EAST 


Contact: 

BONNIE LABRUM 


424 SOUTH 700 EAST 



US 


(801) 908-6076 


Not reported 

EPA Region: 

08 



Description: 




















Legal status: 




MODERN DISPLAY SERVICES, INC. 

424 SOUTH 700 EAST 


Not reported 

(801) 355-7427 

Private 

Owner 

01/01/0001 

Not reported 











No 

Unknown 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

TC02814573.1r Page 295

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

MODERN DISPLAY SERVICES INC. (Continued) 1004789124 








No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 



Waste code: 

Waste name: 


FINDS: 

D001 









Registry ID: 

110005212153 








BG330 METAL MANAGEMENT WEST, INC. FINDS 1005517764 

South 3260 WEST 500 SOUTH N/A 


1.936 mi. 

10223 ft. Site 1 of 4 in cluster BG 

Relative: 

Equal 

Actual: 

4236 ft. 

FINDS: 

Registry ID: 

110001885915 















TC02814573.1r Page 296

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

METAL MANAGEMENT WEST, INC. (Continued) 1005517764 



























BG331 METAL MANAGEMENT WEST, INC. ICIS 1011574853 

South 3260 WEST 500 SOUTH SALT LAKE CITY UT 84116 N/A 


1.937 mi. 


Relative: 

Equal 

Actual: 

4236 ft. 

ICIS: 


FRS ID: 

Program ID: 

Action Name: 





EPA Region #: 

08-2007-0115 

110001885915 

FRS 110001885915 

METAL MANAGEMENT WEST 

METAL MANAGEMENT WEST, INC. 

3260 WEST 500 SOUTH SALT LAKE CITY UT 84116 


CAA 113A Admin Compliance Order (Non-Penalty) 


9 


FRS ID: 

Program ID: 

Action Name: 





EPA Region #: 

08-2007-0115 

110001885915 

AIRS/AFS 4903500491 


METAL MANAGEMENT WEST/NEWELL RECYCLING 





9 

TC02814573.1r Page 297

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

METAL MANAGEMENT WEST, INC. (Continued) 1011574853 


FRS ID: 

Program ID: 

Action Name: 





EPA Region #: 

08-2007-0115 

110001885915 

RCRAINFO UTR000008730 







9 

Program ID: 


Address: 


Fed Facility: 

NAIC Code: 

SIC Code: 

Program ID: 


Address: 


Fed Facility: 

NAIC Code: 

SIC Code: 

Program ID: 


Address: 


Fed Facility: 

NAIC Code: 

SIC Code: 

AIRS/AFS 4903500491 



N 

Not reported 

Not reported 

5093 

FRS 110001885915 



N 

Not reported 

Not reported 

5093 

RCRAINFO UTR000008730 



N 

Not reported 

Not reported 

5093 

BH332 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT LLC FINDS 1008941020 

East 683 NORTH MORTEN DRIVE N/A 


1.939 mi. 

10236 ft. Site 1 of 2 in cluster BH 

Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4229 ft. 

FINDS: 

Registry ID: 

110023057859 








TC02814573.1r Page 298

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

BH333 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT LLC RCRA-NonGen 1008892495 

East 683 NORTH MORTEN DRIVE UTR000008763 


1.939 mi. 

10236 ft. Site 2 of 2 in cluster BH 

Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4229 ft. 

RCRA-NonGen: 



ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT LLC 


683 NORTH MORTEN DRIVE 


EPA ID: 

UTR000008763 


P.O. BOX 165003 


Contact: 

LESTER J BROOKS 


P.O. BOX 165003 



US 


(801) 699-6529 


Not reported 

EPA Region: 

08 

Land type: 

Private 


Non-Generator 

Description: 







Legal status: 








Legal status: 




LESTER J. BROOKS 

NORTH MORTEN DRIVE 


US 

(801) 699-6529 

Private 

Operator 

11/13/2001 

Not reported 

LESTER J. BROOKS 

P.O. BOX 165003 


US 

(801) 699-6529 

Private 

Owner 

11/13/2001 

Not reported 













No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

No 

TC02814573.1r Page 299

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT LLC (Continued) 1008892495 






No 

No 

No 

No 





ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT LLC 







Evaluation: 




05/17/2007 


Not reported 

Not reported 

State 

BG334 WASTE MANAGEMENT SALT LAKE C/D TRANSFER STATION 

SWF/LF S109700475 



1.941 mi. 


Relative: 

Equal 

Actual: 

4236 ft. 

SWF/LF: 

Facility Phone: 

Municipal Cubic Yards: 

Ownership public: 

Ownership private: 

Ownership other: 

Owner Type: 

Owner Name: 

Owner Contact Name: 


Owner Address 2: 

Owner City/State/Zip: 

Owner Phone: 

Owner Title: 

Contact Name: 


Contact Address: 

Contact City,St,Zip: 

Contact Phone Number: 

Operator name: 

Operator Title: 

Operator Address: 

Operator Address 2: 

Operator City/State/Zip: 

Operator Phone Number: 

Permit number: 

Permit date: 

Perm size < 20 tons/day: 

Perm size > 20 tons/day: 

Liner type: 

Monitoring SW: 

Monitoring leachate: 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Private 

Waste Management of Utah 

Lance Allen 

8652 South 4000 west 

Not reported 

West Jordan, Utah 84088 

(801) 282-8200 

Senior District Manager 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Lance Allen 

Senior District Manager 

8652 South 4000 west 

Not reported 

West Jordan, Utah 84088 

(801) 282-8200 

Not reported 

5 /17/2002 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

TC02814573.1r Page 300

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

WASTE MANAGEMENT SALT LAKE C/D TRANSFER STATION (Continued) 

Leachate collection: 

Not reported 

Leachate recirculation: 

Not reported 

Gas Collection: 

Not reported 

Assigned To: 

Phil Burns 

Facility Type: 


Landfill Class: 

NA 

Facility Status: 

Open 

Lat/Long (dms): 

40 45 26 / 111 58 47 

Facility Capacity Other: Not reported 

Facility Area(acres): 

0 

Gw Monitoring Required: Not reported 

Gw Variance Comments: Not reported 

Liner Variance Comments: Not reported 

Gas Mon. variance Comments: Not reported 

Tons: 

0 

Open Date: 

2000 

Range 1: 

1 W 

QQ Section: 

Not reported 

Q Section: 

Not reported 

Baseline: 

Not reported 

Will Close: 

Not reported 

Cubic Yards: 

0 

Tons Per Day: 

Not reported 

Years: 

Not reported 

Accepting Waste: 

Not reported 

Alternatives Approved: 

Not reported 

Township: 

1 S 

Section: 

5 

Alternative Liner Description: Not reported 

Alternative Final Cover Desc: Not reported 

Gasoline Collection Type: Not reported 

Report Period: 

2008 

Date Report Received: 2 /18/2009 

Ground Water Report Received: Not Required 

Gas Monitoring Report Received: Not reported 

Gas Report Received: 

Not Required 

Training Report Received: Not Required 

Municipal Tons Received: Not reported 

C/D Tons Received: 

70901 

Industrial Tons Received: Not reported 

Other Tons Received: 

Not reported 

Compost Tons Received: Not reported 

Recycling Tons Received: 13600 

S109700475 

BG335 WASTE MANAGEMENT SALT LAKE C/D TRANSFER STATION 

NPDES S107413505 



1.941 mi. 


Relative: 

Equal 

Actual: 

4236 ft. 

NPDES: 

Facid: 






Group 1: 

490000099369 

UTR000996 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

TC02814573.1r Page 301

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

WASTE MANAGEMENT SALT LAKE C/D TRANSFER STATION (Continued) 

Group 2: 

Not reported 

Group 3: 

Not reported 

Group 4: 

Not reported 

Group 5: 

Not reported 

Issue Date: 

Not reported 


Not reported 


12/31/2012 11:59:59 PM 



Not reported 


Not reported 


Not reported 


Not reported 

Amount Paid: 

Not reported 

Inactivated: 

Not reported 

No Exposure: 

Not reported 

Not Received: 

Not reported 


Not reported 


Not reported 


Not reported 

Fac Oper Zip: 

Not reported 


Not reported 

Fac Site Lat: 

Not reported 


Not reported 


Not reported 

Third Sector: 

Not reported 


Not reported 


Not reported 


Not reported 

Permit Name: 

Not reported 


Not reported 

S107413505 

BF336 PARK-N-JET 

LUST U003149918 

ESE 2085 W NORTH TEMPLE UST N/A 


1.945 mi. 

10272 ft. Site 2 of 2 in cluster BF 

Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4232 ft. 

LUST: 

Facility ID: 

Release Id: 

Closed Date: 


Owner Name: 



Owner State: 

Owner Zip: 



4001521 

FKS 

7/1/2009 

12/15/1989 

J FRANK & ESTHER E BRASHER 

780 S 5600 W 


UT 

84104 


Hillary Mason 

UST: 

Facility ID: 

Owner Name: 



Owner Phone: 

Total Tanks: 

4001521 

J FRANK & ESTHER E BRASHER 

780 S 5600 W 


(801) 322-1234 

5 

TC02814573.1r Page 302

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

PARK-N-JET (Continued) 

U003149918 

Closed Tanks: 

5 

BI337 SPILLS S109345661 

East 1886 WEST 900 NORTH N/A 


1.964 mi. 

10370 ft. Site 1 of 3 in cluster BI 

Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4231 ft. 

SPILLS: 




7/18/2008 


7/18/2008 

Responsible Party Name: Pacificorp 

RP Address: 

Not reported 

RP Phone: 

5035459651 

Highway: 

Not reported 

Milemarker: 

0 

Incident Summary: While investigating a power problem, crew discovered transformer 

failure lead to release of mineral oil. Estimated volume of release 

is 47 gallons. Unit is manufacturer’s labeled Non-PCB unit. Release 

impacted concrete pad and surrounding soils only. Pacific West is 

doing remedial work. 

338 SPILLS S105223211 



1.965 mi. 

10373 ft. 

Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4232 ft. 

SPILLS: 




2/5/1997 


2/5/1997 

Responsible Party Name: Utah Department of Health 

RP Address: 

288 North 1950 West Salt Lake City 

RP Phone: 

Not reported 

Highway: 

Not reported 

Milemarker: 

Not reported 

Incident Summary: A sphygmomanometer broke in the Healthy Utah Van spilling mecury over 

a plastic carrying case, onto the carpet and out the back of the van. 

UHP was notified, who contacted us for cleanup advise. I visited the 

van and suggested that they (1) collect as much of the liquid mecury 

as possible for recycling with bulb suction pipets, (2) dust the 

plastic case with sulfur powder to remove any residual mecury and 

sweep the powder into a container for recycling, (3) discard the 

plastic container, (4) have the impacted carpet removed. I gave them 

the name and phone number of a University of Utah contact (Steve 

Manning) who also was required to disposed of mecury contaminated 

materials. He will give them some options for the carpet. 

TC02814573.1r Page 303

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

BI339 PST TERMINAL FINDS 1005793597 

East 1875 N 900 W N/A 


1.966 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4231 ft. 

FINDS: 

Registry ID: 

110002295846 




operations. 

BI340 PST TERMINAL 

LUST U003150540 

East 1875 N 900 W UST N/A 


1.966 mi. 


Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4231 ft. 

LUST: 

Facility ID: 

Release Id: 

Closed Date: 


Owner Name: 



Owner State: 

Owner Zip: 



4001627 

GCM 

6/24/1996 

9/6/1990 

UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD CO 

1416 DODGE ST ROOM 930 

OMAHA 

NE 

68179 

OMAHA, NE 68179 

[Evan Sullivan] 

UST: 

Facility ID: 

Owner Name: 



Owner Phone: 

Total Tanks: 

Closed Tanks: 

4001627 

UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD CO 

1416 DODGE ST ROOM 930 

OMAHA, NE 68179 

(402) 271-3031 

1 

1 

341 SPILLS S109033909 

SSE 3000 SOUTH 500 WEST N/A 

> 1 SOUTH SALT LAKE, UT 

1.970 mi. 

10399 ft. 

Relative: 

Higher 

Actual: 

4239 ft. 

SPILLS: 






RP Address: 

RP Phone: 

6773 

Not reported 

12/10/2007 

10/4/2007 

State Painting 

422 West 900 South, Salt Lake City, Utah 

8012579799 

TC02814573.1r Page 304

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

(Continued) 

Highway: 

Milemarker: 


Not reported 

Not reported 

Caller reported that he was employed by State Painting (an Industrial 

Paint & Coatings Removal and Refinishing Company) back in October. 

Caller states that he worked on a surface refinishing project for a 

water tower owned by the City of South Salt Lake. Water tower is 

located at approximately 3000 South 500 West in South Salt Lake. 

Caller reported the company was using steel shot to blast off the 

surface paint coating from the steel tower. Caller stated he was 

instructed to haul the waste paint debris from the site back to the 

company s property to be dumped in the yard. The waste paint debris 

was hauled in 55-gallon drums and described as a fine particulate. 

Caller was concerned that the debris was from lead based paint. 

Caller additionally stated he was never properly trained to perform 

the work or handle wastes and has since filed a complaint with Utah 

OSHA. Caller stated he brought his concerns up with company 

management but they were unresponsive. Caller asked to be informed of 

findings from any DEQ or SLVHD investigation. 

S109033909 

342 MEADOWLARK SCHOOL FINDS 1009748508 

ESE 497 N MORTON DR N/A 


1.975 mi. 

10428 ft. 

Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4229 ft. 

FINDS: 

Registry ID: 

110026625123 


US Geographic Names Information System (GNIS) is the official vehicle 

for geographic names used by the federal government and the source for 

applying geographic names to federal maps and other printed and 

electronic documents. 

NCES (National Center for Education Statistics) is the primary federal 

entity for collecting and analyzing data related to education in the 

United States and other nations and the institute of education 

sciences. 

343 MULTI-AGENCY OFFICE BLDG. 

NPDES S109539937 

ESE 251 N. 1950 WEST N/A 


1.984 mi. 

10477 ft. 

Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4232 ft. 

NPDES: 

Facid: 






Group 1: 

Group 2: 

490000100318 

UTR110861 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

TC02814573.1r Page 305

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

MULTI-AGENCY OFFICE BLDG. (Continued) 

Group 3: 

Not reported 

Group 4: 

Not reported 

Group 5: 

Not reported 

Issue Date: 

Not reported 


Not reported 


11/25/2009 



Not reported 


Not reported 


Not reported 


Not reported 

Amount Paid: 

Not reported 

Inactivated: 

Not reported 

No Exposure: 

Not reported 

Not Received: 

Not reported 


Not reported 


Not reported 


Not reported 

Fac Oper Zip: 

Not reported 


Not reported 

Fac Site Lat: 

Not reported 


Not reported 


Not reported 

Third Sector: 

Not reported 


Not reported 


Not reported 


Not reported 

Permit Name: 

Not reported 


Not reported 

S109539937 

BJ344 BONNEVILLE ARTEMIA INTERNATIONAL, INC. 

LUST U003149933 

SSE 2904 S 500 W UST N/A 


1.987 mi. 

10489 ft. Site 1 of 3 in cluster BJ 

Relative: 

Equal 

Actual: 

4236 ft. 

LUST: 

Facility ID: 

Release Id: 

Closed Date: 


Owner Name: 



Owner State: 

Owner Zip: 



4002035 

JCC 

8/16/2001 

8/11/1995 

Utah Straegic Alliance 

PO Box 9548 

OGDEN 

UT 

84409 

OGDEN, UT 84409 

Hillary Mason 

UST: 

Facility ID: 

Owner Name: 



Owner Phone: 

Total Tanks: 

Closed Tanks: 

4002035 

Utah Straegic Alliance 

PO Box 9548 

OGDEN, UT 84409 

(801) 972-4704 

1 

1 

TC02814573.1r Page 306

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

BJ345 DATS TRUCKING INC, FINDS 1010352161 

SSE 3330 WEST 500 SOUTH N/A 


1.996 mi. 


Relative: 

Higher 

Actual: 

4237 ft. 

FINDS: 

Registry ID: 

110030925328 










BJ346 DATS TRUCKING INC, 

SPILLS S108031391 

SSE 3330 WEST 500 SOUTH NPDES N/A 


1.996 mi. 


Relative: 

Higher 

Actual: 

4237 ft. 

SPILLS: 




5/15/2006 


5/15/2006 

Responsible Party Name: Salt Lake City Public Works 

RP Address: 

Not reported 

RP Phone: 

(801) 483-6821 

Highway: 

Not reported 

Milemarker: 

0 

Incident Summary: Truck tire blow-out ruptured a fuel system component causing a 

release of diesel fuel. All fuel was contained in the road and by 

roadway curbing. No storm drains were impacted. Hazmat repsonded and 

applied absorbant. PRP estimates 20-30 gallons of fuel was released. 

PRP reports that all fuel was captured and cleaned up. 

NPDES: 

Facid: 

Not reported 


UTR000794 


Not reported 


Gary Adams 


Not reported 


Group 1: 

P 

Group 2: 

Not reported 

Group 3: 

Not reported 

Group 4: 

P 

Group 5: 

Not reported 

Issue Date: 

5/15/2007 


5/15/2007 


12/31/2008 

Municipal Operating Storm Sewer System: Salt Lake City 

TC02814573.1r Page 307

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

DATS TRUCKING INC, (Continued) 

S108031391 





Amount Paid: 

Inactivated: 

No Exposure: 

Not Received: 




Fac Oper Zip: 


Fac Site Lat: 



Third Sector: 




Permit Name: 



4210 

Not reported 

Gary Adams 

200 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

40 45 30 

111 58 27 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Not reported 

5/15/2007 

5/15/2007 

Not reported 

Not reported 

Facid: 

Not reported 


UTR000794 


Not reported 


Not reported 


Not reported 


Group 1: 

Not reported 

Group 2: 

Not reported 

Group 3: 

Not reported 

Group 4: 

Not reported 

Group 5: 

Not reported 

Issue Date: 

5/15/2007 


5/15/2007 


12/31/2008 



Not reported 


Not reported 


Not reported 


Not reported 

Amount Paid: 

Not reported 

Inactivated: 

Not reported 

No Exposure: 

Not reported 

Not Received: 

Not reported 


Not reported 


Not reported 


Not reported 

Fac Oper Zip: 

Not reported 


8019759517 

Fac Site Lat: 

+40.758333 


-111.974167 


Not reported 

Third Sector: 

Not reported 


Not reported 


Not reported 

TC02814573.1r Page 308

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Site 

MAP FINDINGS 

Database(s) 

EDR ID Number 

EPA ID Number 

DATS TRUCKING INC, (Continued) 

S108031391 


Permit Name: 


Not reported 

DATS Trucking Inc. 


347 5787 W. HARROLD GADDY DR ERNS 91229727 

West 5787 W. HARROLD GADDY DR N/A 


1.998 mi. 

10550 ft. 

Relative: 

Lower 

Actual: 

4228 ft. 



TC02814573.1r Page 309

ORPHAN SUMMARY 

City EDR ID Site Name Site Address Zip Database(s) 

TOOELE COUNTY 1000171264 ZECCO SEC 16; T 1 N; T 12 W 84122 CORRACTS,RCRA-LQG,MANIFEST,M 

WEST VALLEY CITY 1000182099 ALLIANT TECHSYSTEMS - BACCHUS WORK HWY 111 84044 CORRACTS,FINDS,TRIS,RCRA-TSDF 

SALT LAKE CITY 1000238432 UTAH POWER HYDRAULIC 2701 WEST 900 SOUTH 84116 FINDS,RCRA-NLR 

MAGNA 1000312122 KENNECOTT MAGNA CONCENTRATOR 9600 WEST 2100 SOUTH 84044 FINDS,RCRA-LQG 

ROWLEY 1000472270 US MAGNESIUM LLC 15 MILES NORTH OF I-80 @ EXIT 84116 CERCLIS-NFRAP,FINDS,TRIS,RCRA- 

SALT LAKE CITY 1003877581 BROWN DUMP, LEON 4700 W 4TH - 5TH S 84104 CERCLIS-NFRAP 

SALT LAKE CITY 1003877598 ENERCOR 2100 NORTH 1000 WEST 84116 CERCLIS-NFRAP 

SALT LAKE CITY 1004604997 BULLOUGHS INSULATION\BEAVER COUNTY 50 SOUTH 800 WEST\P.O. BOX 160 84116 FTTS,HIST FTTS INSP,FINDS 

SALT LAKE CITY 1004605482 GRANITE SCHOOL DISTRICT 1950 WEST 150 NORTH 84116 FTTS,FINDS,HIST FTTS INSP 

SALT LAKE CITY 1004788736 CONTINENTAL AIRLINES SALTLAKE INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT 84122 FINDS,RCRA-CESQG 

SALT LAKE CITY 1004788772 RIVERSIDE CEBTER - TRADES 700 SOUTH 1040 WEST 84104 FINDS,RCRA-CESQG 

SALT LAKE CITY 1005438843 VAN WATERS & ROGERS INC (SUB OF UN 650 WEST 8TH SOUTH 84104 SSTS 

SALT LAKE CITY 1005849732 FAA-SALT LAKE CITY ATBM E/G BETWEEN TERMINAL 1 / 2, SALT 84116 FINDS,LUST,UST 

SALT LAKE CITY 1007210904 EMERALD SERVICES, INC. 500 SOUTH 650 WEST 84104 RCRA-NLR 

SALT LAKE CITY 1007287125 MORTON SALT 8800 W MORTON SALT LN/AMF BOX 84122 FTTS,HIST FTTS INSP 

SALT LAKE CITY 1007292778 SALT LAKE CITY SCHOOL DISTRICT 100 SOUTH 440 EAST 84114 FTTS,HIST FTTS INSP 

SALT LAKE CITY 1009463065 BULLOUGH ASBESTOS 800 WEST 50 SOUTH 84104 CERCLIS-NFRAP 

SALT LAKE CITY 1009517993 MCGILLIS JEWISH COMMUNITY CENTER S 2410 E. 1200 SOUTH 84100 FTTS,HIST FTTS INSP 

MAGNA 1011596288 KENNECOT UTAH COPPER - ARBOR PARK 8315 W 3595 S / 11984 W HIGHWA 84044 ICIS 

MAGNA S109540070 KUCC MOLYBDENUM AUTOCLAVE PROCESSI 11393 W UTAH HIGHWAY 201 (1170 84044 NPDES 

TC02814573.1r Page 310

GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING 

To maintain currency of the following federal and state databases, EDR contacts the appropriate governmental agency 

on a monthly or quarterly basis, as required. 

Number of Days to Update: Provides confirmation that EDR is reporting records that have been updated within 90 days 

from the date the government agency made the information available to the public. 



NPL: National Priority List 

National Priorities List (Superfund). The NPL is a subset of CERCLIS and identifies over 1,200 sites for priority 

cleanup under the Superfund Program. NPL sites may encompass relatively large areas. As such, EDR provides polygon 

coverage for over 1,000 NPL site boundaries produced by EPA’s Environmental Photographic Interpretation Center 

(EPIC) and regional EPA offices. 

Date of Government Version: 03/31/2010 

Date Data Arrived at EDR: 04/02/2010 

Date Made Active in Reports: 04/12/2010 

Number of Days to Update: 10 

Source: EPA 

Telephone: N/A 

Last EDR Contact: 05/07/2010 

Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 07/26/2010 

Data Release Frequency: Quarterly 

NPL Site Boundaries 

Sources: 

EPA’s Environmental Photographic Interpretation Center (EPIC) 

Telephone: 202-564-7333 

EPA Region 1 EPA Region 6 

Telephone 617-918-1143 Telephone: 214-655-6659 







EPA Region 10 

Telephone 206-553-8665 

Proposed NPL: Proposed National Priority List Sites 

A site that has been proposed for listing on the National Priorities List through the issuance of a proposed rule 

in the Federal Register. EPA then accepts public comments on the site, responds to the comments, and places on 

the NPL those sites that continue to meet the requirements for listing. 





Source: EPA 





NPL LIENS: Federal Superfund Liens 

Federal Superfund Liens. Under the authority granted the USEPA by CERCLA of 1980, the USEPA has the authority 

to file liens against real property in order to recover remedial action expenditures or when the property owner 

received notification of potential liability. USEPA compiles a listing of filed notices of Superfund Liens. 





Source: EPA 

Telephone: 202-564-4267 



Data Release Frequency: No Update Planned 

TC02814573.1r 

Page GR-1



DELISTED NPL: National Priority List Deletions 

The National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan (NCP) establishes the criteria that the 

EPA uses to delete sites from the NPL. In accordance with 40 CFR 300.425.(e), sites may be deleted from the 

NPL where no further response is appropriate. 





Source: EPA 






CERCLIS: Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Information System 

CERCLIS contains data on potentially hazardous waste sites that have been reported to the USEPA by states, municipalities, 

private companies and private persons, pursuant to Section 103 of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, 

and Liability Act (CERCLA). CERCLIS contains sites which are either proposed to or on the National Priorities 

List (NPL) and sites which are in the screening and assessment phase for possible inclusion on the NPL. 





Source: EPA 

Telephone: 703-412-9810 




FEDERAL FACILITY: Federal Facility Site Information listing 

A listing of National Priority List (NPL) and Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) sites found in the Comprehensive 

Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Information System (CERCLIS) Database where EPAa??s Federal 

Facilities Restoration and Reuse Office is involved in cleanup activities. 





Source: Environmental Protection Agency 

Telephone: 703-603-8704 



Data Release Frequency: Varies 


CERCLIS-NFRAP: CERCLIS No Further Remedial Action Planned 

Archived sites are sites that have been removed and archived from the inventory of CERCLIS sites. Archived status 

indicates that, to the best of EPA’s knowledge, assessment at a site has been completed and that EPA has determined 

no further steps will be taken to list this site on the National Priorities List (NPL), unless information indicates 

this decision was not appropriate or other considerations require a recommendation for listing at a later time. 

This decision does not necessarily mean that there is no hazard associated with a given site; it only means that, 

based upon available information, the location is not judged to be a potential NPL site. 





Source: EPA 

Telephone: 703-412-9810 





CORRACTS: Corrective Action Report 

CORRACTS identifies hazardous waste handlers with RCRA corrective action activity. 

TC02814573.1r 

Page GR-2






Source: EPA 

Telephone: 800-424-9346 





RCRA-TSDF: RCRA - Treatment, Storage and Disposal 

RCRAInfo is EPA’s comprehensive information system, providing access to data supporting the Resource Conservation 

and Recovery Act (RCRA) of 1976 and the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments (HSWA) of 1984. The database 

includes selective information on sites which generate, transport, store, treat and/or dispose of hazardous waste 

as defined by the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). Transporters are individuals or entities that 

move hazardous waste from the generator offsite to a facility that can recycle, treat, store, or dispose of the 

waste. TSDFs treat, store, or dispose of the waste. 






Telephone: 303-312-6149 





RCRA-LQG: RCRA - Large Quantity Generators 




as defined by the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). Large quantity generators (LQGs) generate 

over 1,000 kilograms (kg) of hazardous waste, or over 1 kg of acutely hazardous waste per month. 






Telephone: 303-312-6149 




RCRA-SQG: RCRA - Small Quantity Generators 




as defined by the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). Small quantity generators (SQGs) generate 

between 100 kg and 1,000 kg of hazardous waste per month. 






Telephone: 303-312-6149 




RCRA-CESQG: RCRA - Conditionally Exempt Small Quantity Generators 




as defined by the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). Conditionally exempt small quantity generators 

(CESQGs) generate less than 100 kg of hazardous waste, or less than 1 kg of acutely hazardous waste per month. 






Telephone: 303-312-6149 




TC02814573.1r 

Page GR-3


Federal institutional controls / engineering controls registries 

US ENG CONTROLS: Engineering Controls Sites List 

A listing of sites with engineering controls in place. Engineering controls include various forms of caps, building 

foundations, liners, and treatment methods to create pathway elimination for regulated substances to enter environmental 

media or effect human health. 






Telephone: 703-603-0695 




US INST CONTROL: Sites with Institutional Controls 

A listing of sites with institutional controls in place. Institutional controls include administrative measures, 

such as groundwater use restrictions, construction restrictions, property use restrictions, and post remediation 

care requirements intended to prevent exposure to contaminants remaining on site. Deed restrictions are generally 

required as part of the institutional controls. 






Telephone: 703-603-0695 





ERNS: Emergency Response Notification System 

Emergency Response Notification System. ERNS records and stores information on reported releases of oil and hazardous 

substances. 





Source: National Response Center, United States Coast Guard 

Telephone: 202-267-2180 



Data Release Frequency: Annually 


SHWS: This state does not maintain a SHWS list. See the Federal CERCLIS list and Federal NPL list. 

State Hazardous Waste Sites. State hazardous waste site records are the states’ equivalent to CERCLIS. These sites 

may or may not already be listed on the federal CERCLIS list. Priority sites planned for cleanup using state funds 

(state equivalent of Superfund) are identified along with sites where cleanup will be paid for by potentially 

responsible parties. Available information varies by state. 

Date of Government Version: N/A 

Date Data Arrived at EDR: N/A 

Date Made Active in Reports: N/A 

Number of Days to Update: N/A 

Source: Department of Environmental Quality 

Telephone: 801-536-4100 



Data Release Frequency: N/A 

State and tribal landfill and/or solid waste disposal site lists 

SWF/LF: List of Landfills 

Solid Waste Facilities/Landfill Sites. SWF/LF type records typically contain an inventory of solid waste disposal 

facilities or landfills in a particular state. Depending on the state, these may be active or inactive facilities 

or open dumps that failed to meet RCRA Subtitle D Section 4004 criteria for solid waste landfills or disposal 

sites. 

TC02814573.1r 

Page GR-4







Telephone: 801-538-6170 



Data Release Frequency: Semi-Annually 


LUST: Sites with Leaking Underground Storage Tanks 

Leaking Underground Storage Tank Incident Reports. LUST records contain an inventory of reported leaking underground 

storage tank incidents. Not all states maintain these records, and the information stored varies by state. 






Telephone: 801-536-4115 




LAST: Leaking Aboveground Storage Tank Sites 

A listing of leaking aboveground storage tank locations. 






Telephone: 801-536-4141 




INDIAN LUST R9: Leaking Underground Storage Tanks on Indian Land 

LUSTs on Indian land in Arizona, California, New Mexico and Nevada 






Telephone: 415-972-3372 





LUSTs on Indian land in Florida, Mississippi and North Carolina. 





Source: EPA Region 4 

Telephone: 404-562-8677 





LUSTs on Indian land in Alaska, Idaho, Oregon and Washington. 






Telephone: 206-553-2857 





A listing of leaking underground storage tank locations on Indian Land. 






Telephone: 617-918-1313 




TC02814573.1r 

Page GR-5



LUSTs on Indian land in New Mexico and Oklahoma. 






Telephone: 214-665-6597 





LUSTs on Indian land in Iowa, Kansas, and Nebraska 






Telephone: 913-551-7003 





LUSTs on Indian land in Colorado, Montana, North Dakota, South Dakota, Utah and Wyoming. 






Telephone: 303-312-6271 





UST: List of Sites with Underground Storage Tanks 

Registered Underground Storage Tanks. UST’s are regulated under Subtitle I of the Resource Conservation and Recovery 

Act (RCRA) and must be registered with the state department responsible for administering the UST program. Available 

information varies by state program. 






Telephone: 801-536-4115 




AST: Listing of Aboveground Storage Tanks 

Aboveground storage tank site locations. 






Telephone: 801-536-4100 




INDIAN UST R8: Underground Storage Tanks on Indian Land 

The Indian Underground Storage Tank (UST) database provides information about underground storage tanks on Indian 

land in EPA Region 8 (Colorado, Montana, North Dakota, South Dakota, Utah, Wyoming and 27 Tribal Nations). 






Telephone: 303-312-6137 




TC02814573.1r 

Page GR-6




land in EPA Region 7 (Iowa, Kansas, Missouri, Nebraska, and 9 Tribal Nations). 






Telephone: 913-551-7003 






land in EPA Region 10 (Alaska, Idaho, Oregon, Washington, and Tribal Nations). 






Telephone: 206-553-2857 






land in EPA Region 1 (Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Rhode Island, Vermont and ten Tribal 

Nations). 





Source: EPA, Region 1 

Telephone: 617-918-1313 






land in EPA Region 9 (Arizona, California, Hawaii, Nevada, the Pacific Islands, and Tribal Nations). 






Telephone: 415-972-3368 






land in EPA Region 5 (Michigan, Minnesota and Wisconsin and Tribal Nations). 






Telephone: 312-886-6136 






land in EPA Region 4 (Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee 

and Tribal Nations) 






Telephone: 404-562-9424 




TC02814573.1r 

Page GR-7




land in EPA Region 6 (Louisiana, Arkansas, Oklahoma, New Mexico, Texas and 65 Tribes). 






Telephone: 214-665-7591 




FEMA UST: Underground Storage Tank Listing 

A listing of all FEMA owned underground storage tanks. 





Source: FEMA 

Telephone: 202-646-5797 




State and tribal institutional control / engineering control registries 

INST CONTROL: Sites with Institutional Controls 

Sites included on the Brownfields Sites listing that have institutional controls in place. 






Telephone: 801-536-4100 





INDIAN VCP R7: Voluntary Cleanup Priority Lisitng 

A listing of voluntary cleanup priority sites located on Indian Land located in Region 7. 






Telephone: 913-551-7365 




VCP: Voluntary Cleanup Sites List 

The purpose of the program is to encourage the voluntary cleanup of sites where there has been a contaminant release 

threatening public health and the environment, thereby removing the stigma attached to these sites which blocks 

economic redevelopment. Voluntary cleanup of these sites will hopefully result in clearing the pathway for returning 

these properties to beneficial use. 






Telephone: 801-536-4100 




INDIAN VCP R1: Voluntary Cleanup Priority Listing 

A listing of voluntary cleanup priority sites located on Indian Land located in Region 1. 






Telephone: 617-918-1102 




TC02814573.1r 

Page GR-8



BROWNFIELDS: Brownfields Assessment Sites 

A Brownfields site means real property, the expansion, redevelopment or reuse of which may be complicated by the 

presence or potential presence of a hazardous substance, pollutant or contaminant, controlled substance or petroleum 

product. 







Telephone: 801-536-4100 





US BROWNFIELDS: A Listing of Brownfields Sites 

Included in the listing are brownfields properties addresses by Cooperative Agreement Recipients and brownfields 

properties addressed by Targeted Brownfields Assessments. Targeted Brownfields Assessments-EPA’s Targeted Brownfields 

Assessments (TBA) program is designed to help states, tribes, and municipalities--especially those without EPA 

Brownfields Assessment Demonstration Pilots--minimize the uncertainties of contamination often associated with 

brownfields. Under the TBA program, EPA provides funding and/or technical assistance for environmental assessments 

at brownfields sites throughout the country. Targeted Brownfields Assessments supplement and work with other efforts 

under EPA’s Brownfields Initiative to promote cleanup and redevelopment of brownfields. Cooperative Agreement 

Recipients-States, political subdivisions, territories, and Indian tribes become Brownfields Cleanup Revolving 

Loan Fund (BCRLF) cooperative agreement recipients when they enter into BCRLF cooperative agreements with the 

U.S. EPA. EPA selects BCRLF cooperative agreement recipients based on a proposal and application process. BCRLF 

cooperative agreement recipients must use EPA funds provided through BCRLF cooperative agreement for specified 

brownfields-related cleanup activities. 






Telephone: 202-566-2777 




Local Lists of Landfill / Solid Waste Disposal Sites 

ODI: Open Dump Inventory 

An open dump is defined as a disposal facility that does not comply with one or more of the Part 257 or Part 258 

Subtitle D Criteria. 






Telephone: 800-424-9346 


Next Scheduled EDR Contact: N/A 


DEBRIS REGION 9: Torres Martinez Reservation Illegal Dump Site Locations 

A listing of illegal dump sites location on the Torres Martinez Indian Reservation located in eastern Riverside 

County and northern Imperial County, California. 






Telephone: 415-947-4219 




TC02814573.1r 

Page GR-9


INDIAN ODI: Report on the Status of Open Dumps on Indian Lands 

Location of open dumps on Indian land. 






Telephone: 703-308-8245 




Local Lists of Hazardous waste / Contaminated Sites 

US CDL: Clandestine Drug Labs 

A listing of clandestine drug lab locations. The U.S. Department of Justice ("the Department") provides this 

web site as a public service. It contains addresses of some locations where law enforcement agencies reported 

they found chemicals or other items that indicated the presence of either clandestine drug laboratories or dumpsites. 

In most cases, the source of the entries is not the Department, and the Department has not verified the entry 

and does not guarantee its accuracy. Members of the public must verify the accuracy of all entries by, for example, 

contacting local law enforcement and local health departments. 





Source: Drug Enforcement Administration 

Telephone: 202-307-1000 




CDL: Methamphetamine Contaminated Properties Listing 

Utah Administrative Rule 19-6-901 Illegal Drug Operations Site Reporting and Decontamination Act requires local 

health departments to maintain a list of properties believed to be contaminated by the illegal manufacture of 

drugs. The following properties were reported to the Salt Lake Valley Health Department by a complaint or report 

from a law enforcement agency and the Department has determined that reasonable evidence exists that the property 

is contaminated. 





Source: Salt Lake Valley Health Department 

Telephone: 801-468-2750 




US HIST CDL: National Clandestine Laboratory Register 

A listing of clandestine drug lab locations. The U.S. Department of Justice ("the Department") provides this 

web site as a public service. It contains addresses of some locations where law enforcement agencies reported 

they found chemicals or other items that indicated the presence of either clandestine drug laboratories or dumpsites. 

In most cases, the source of the entries is not the Department, and the Department has not verified the entry 

and does not guarantee its accuracy. Members of the public must verify the accuracy of all entries by, for example, 

contacting local law enforcement and local health departments. 





Source: Drug Enforcement Administration 

Telephone: 202-307-1000 





LIENS 2: CERCLA Lien Information 

A Federal CERCLA (’Superfund’) lien can exist by operation of law at any site or property at which EPA has spent 

Superfund monies. These monies are spent to investigate and address releases and threatened releases of contamination. 

CERCLIS provides information as to the identity of these sites and properties. 

TC02814573.1r 

Page GR-10







Telephone: 202-564-6023 




LUCIS: Land Use Control Information System 

LUCIS contains records of land use control information pertaining to the former Navy Base Realignment and Closure 

properties. 





Source: Department of the Navy 

Telephone: 843-820-7326 





HMIRS: Hazardous Materials Information Reporting System 

Hazardous Materials Incident Report System. HMIRS contains hazardous material spill incidents reported to DOT. 





Source: U.S. Department of Transportation 

Telephone: 202-366-4555 




SPILLS: Spills Data 

Incidents reported to the Division of Environmental Response and Remediation 






Telephone: 801-536-4100 





RCRA-NonGen: RCRA - Non Generators 




as defined by the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). Non-Generators do not presently generate hazardous 

waste. 






Telephone: 303-312-6149 




DOT OPS: Incident and Accident Data 

Department of Transporation, Office of Pipeline Safety Incident and Accident data. 





Source: Department of Transporation, Office of Pipeline Safety 

Telephone: 202-366-4595 




TC02814573.1r 

Page GR-11


DOD: Department of Defense Sites 

This data set consists of federally owned or administered lands, administered by the Department of Defense, that 

have any area equal to or greater than 640 acres of the United States, Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Virgin Islands. 





Source: USGS 

Telephone: 703-692-8801 




FUDS: Formerly Used Defense Sites 

The listing includes locations of Formerly Used Defense Sites properties where the US Army Corps of Engineers 

is actively working or will take necessary cleanup actions. 





Source: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 

Telephone: 202-528-4285 




CONSENT: Superfund (CERCLA) Consent Decrees 

Major legal settlements that establish responsibility and standards for cleanup at NPL (Superfund) sites. Released 

periodically by United States District Courts after settlement by parties to litigation matters. 





Source: Department of Justice, Consent Decree Library 

Telephone: Varies 




ROD: Records Of Decision 

Record of Decision. ROD documents mandate a permanent remedy at an NPL (Superfund) site containing technical 

and health information to aid in the cleanup. 





Source: EPA 

Telephone: 703-416-0223 




UMTRA: Uranium Mill Tailings Sites 

Uranium ore was mined by private companies for federal government use in national defense programs. When the mills 

shut down, large piles of the sand-like material (mill tailings) remain after uranium has been extracted from 

the ore. Levels of human exposure to radioactive materials from the piles are low; however, in some cases tailings 

were used as construction materials before the potential health hazards of the tailings were recognized. 





Source: Department of Energy 

Telephone: 505-845-0011 




MINES: Mines Master Index File 

Contains all mine identification numbers issued for mines active or opened since 1971. The data also includes 

violation information. 





Source: Department of Labor, Mine Safety and Health Administration 

Telephone: 303-231-5959 




TC02814573.1r 

Page GR-12


TRIS: Toxic Chemical Release Inventory System 

Toxic Release Inventory System. TRIS identifies facilities which release toxic chemicals to the air, water and 

land in reportable quantities under SARA Title III Section 313. 





Source: EPA 

Telephone: 202-566-0250 




TSCA: Toxic Substances Control Act 

Toxic Substances Control Act. TSCA identifies manufacturers and importers of chemical substances included on the 

TSCA Chemical Substance Inventory list. It includes data on the production volume of these substances by plant 

site. 





Source: EPA 

Telephone: 202-260-5521 



Data Release Frequency: Every 4 Years 

FTTS: FIFRA/ TSCA Tracking System - FIFRA (Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, & Rodenticide Act)/TSCA (Toxic Substances Control Act) 

FTTS tracks administrative cases and pesticide enforcement actions and compliance activities related to FIFRA, 

TSCA and EPCRA (Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act). To maintain currency, EDR contacts the 

Agency on a quarterly basis. 





Source: EPA/Office of Prevention, Pesticides and Toxic Substances 

Telephone: 202-566-1667 




FTTS INSP: FIFRA/ TSCA Tracking System - FIFRA (Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, & Rodenticide Act)/TSCA (Toxic Substances Control Act) 

A listing of FIFRA/TSCA Tracking System (FTTS) inspections and enforcements. 





Source: EPA 

Telephone: 202-566-1667 




HIST FTTS: FIFRA/TSCA Tracking System Administrative Case Listing 

A complete administrative case listing from the FIFRA/TSCA Tracking System (FTTS) for all ten EPA regions. The 

information was obtained from the National Compliance Database (NCDB). NCDB supports the implementation of FIFRA 

(Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act) and TSCA (Toxic Substances Control Act). Some EPA regions 

are now closing out records. Because of that, and the fact that some EPA regions are not providing EPA Headquarters 

with updated records, it was decided to create a HIST FTTS database. It included records that may not be included 

in the newer FTTS database updates. This database is no longer updated. 






Telephone: 202-564-2501 




HIST FTTS INSP: FIFRA/TSCA Tracking System Inspection & Enforcement Case Listing 

A complete inspection and enforcement case listing from the FIFRA/TSCA Tracking System (FTTS) for all ten EPA 

regions. The information was obtained from the National Compliance Database (NCDB). NCDB supports the implementation 

of FIFRA (Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act) and TSCA (Toxic Substances Control Act). Some 

EPA regions are now closing out records. Because of that, and the fact that some EPA regions are not providing 

EPA Headquarters with updated records, it was decided to create a HIST FTTS database. It included records that 

may not be included in the newer FTTS database updates. This database is no longer updated. 

TC02814573.1r 

Page GR-13







Telephone: 202-564-2501 




SSTS: Section 7 Tracking Systems 

Section 7 of the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act, as amended (92 Stat. 829) requires all 

registered pesticide-producing establishments to submit a report to the Environmental Protection Agency by March 

1st each year. Each establishment must report the types and amounts of pesticides, active ingredients and devices 

being produced, and those having been produced and sold or distributed in the past year. 





Source: EPA 

Telephone: 202-564-4203 




ICIS: Integrated Compliance Information System 

The Integrated Compliance Information System (ICIS) supports the information needs of the national enforcement 

and compliance program as well as the unique needs of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) 

program. 






Telephone: 202-564-5088 




PADS: PCB Activity Database System 

PCB Activity Database. PADS Identifies generators, transporters, commercial storers and/or brokers and disposers 

of PCB’s who are required to notify the EPA of such activities. 





Source: EPA 

Telephone: 202-566-0500 




MLTS: Material Licensing Tracking System 

MLTS is maintained by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and contains a list of approximately 8,100 sites which 

possess or use radioactive materials and which are subject to NRC licensing requirements. To maintain currency, 

EDR contacts the Agency on a quarterly basis. 





Source: Nuclear Regulatory Commission 

Telephone: 301-415-7169 




RADINFO: Radiation Information Database 

The Radiation Information Database (RADINFO) contains information about facilities that are regulated by U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) regulations for radiation and radioactivity. 






Telephone: 202-343-9775 




TC02814573.1r 

Page GR-14


FINDS: Facility Index System/Facility Registry System 

Facility Index System. FINDS contains both facility information and ’pointers’ to other sources that contain more 

detail. EDR includes the following FINDS databases in this report: PCS (Permit Compliance System), AIRS (Aerometric 

Information Retrieval System), DOCKET (Enforcement Docket used to manage and track information on civil judicial 

enforcement cases for all environmental statutes), FURS (Federal Underground Injection Control), C-DOCKET (Criminal 

Docket System used to track criminal enforcement actions for all environmental statutes), FFIS (Federal Facilities 

Information System), STATE (State Environmental Laws and Statutes), and PADS (PCB Activity Data System). 





Source: EPA 

Telephone: (303) 312-6312 




RAATS: RCRA Administrative Action Tracking System 

RCRA Administration Action Tracking System. RAATS contains records based on enforcement actions issued under RCRA 

pertaining to major violators and includes administrative and civil actions brought by the EPA. For administration 

actions after September 30, 1995, data entry in the RAATS database was discontinued. EPA will retain a copy of 

the database for historical records. It was necessary to terminate RAATS because a decrease in agency resources 

made it impossible to continue to update the information contained in the database. 





Source: EPA 

Telephone: 202-564-4104 




BRS: Biennial Reporting System 

The Biennial Reporting System is a national system administered by the EPA that collects data on the generation 

and management of hazardous waste. BRS captures detailed data from two groups: Large Quantity Generators (LQG) 

and Treatment, Storage, and Disposal Facilities. 





Source: EPA/NTIS 

Telephone: 800-424-9346 



Data Release Frequency: Biennially 

DRYCLEANERS: Registered Drycleaners 

A listing of registered drycleaners. 






Telephone: 801-536-4437 




NPDES: Permitted Facilities Listing 

A listing of Division of Water Quality permits. 






Telephone: 801-538-6146 




INDIAN RESERV: Indian Reservations 

This map layer portrays Indian administered lands of the United States that have any area equal to or greater 

than 640 acres. 

TC02814573.1r 

Page GR-15






Source: USGS 

Telephone: 202-208-3710 




SCRD DRYCLEANERS: State Coalition for Remediation of Drycleaners Listing 

The State Coalition for Remediation of Drycleaners was established in 1998, with support from the U.S. EPA Office 

of Superfund Remediation and Technology Innovation. It is comprised of representatives of states with established 

drycleaner remediation programs. Currently the member states are Alabama, Connecticut, Florida, Illinois, Kansas, 

Minnesota, Missouri, North Carolina, Oregon, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, and Wisconsin. 






Telephone: 615-532-8599 




COAL ASH DOE: Sleam-Electric Plan Operation Data 

A listing of power plants that store ash in surface ponds. 





Source: Department of Energy 

Telephone: 202-586-8719 




COAL ASH EPA: Coal Combustion Residues Surface Impoundments List 

A listing of coal combustion residues surface impoundments with high hazard potential ratings. 










PCB TRANSFORMER: PCB Transformer Registration Database 

The database of PCB transformer registrations that includes all PCB registration submittals. 






Telephone: 202-566-0517 




FEDLAND: Federal and Indian Lands 

Federally and Indian administrated lands of the United States. Lands included are administrated by: Army Corps 

of Engineers, Bureau of Reclamation, National Wild and Scenic River, National Wildlife Refuge, Public Domain Land, 

Wilderness, Wilderness Study Area, Wildlife Management Area, Bureau of Indian Affairs, Bureau of Land Management, 

Department of Justice, Forest Service, Fish and Wildlife Service, National Park Service. 






Source: U.S. Geological Survey 

Telephone: 888-275-8747 



Data Release Frequency: N/A 


TC02814573.1r 

Page GR-16


Manufactured Gas Plants: EDR Proprietary Manufactured Gas Plants 

The EDR Proprietary Manufactured Gas Plant Database includes records of coal gas plants (manufactured gas plants) 

compiled by EDR’s researchers. Manufactured gas sites were used in the United States from the 1800’s to 1950’s 

to produce a gas that could be distributed and used as fuel. These plants used whale oil, rosin, coal, or a mixture 

of coal, oil, and water that also produced a significant amount of waste. Many of the byproducts of the gas production, 

such as coal tar (oily waste containing volatile and non-volatile chemicals), sludges, oils and other compounds 

are potentially hazardous to human health and the environment. The byproduct from this process was frequently 

disposed of directly at the plant site and can remain or spread slowly, serving as a continuous source of soil 

and groundwater contamination. 

Date of Government Version: N/A 

Date Data Arrived at EDR: N/A 

Date Made Active in Reports: N/A 

Number of Days to Update: N/A 

Source: EDR, Inc. 


Last EDR Contact: N/A 

Next Scheduled EDR Contact: N/A 


OTHER DATABASE(S) 

Depending on the geographic area covered by this report, the data provided in these specialty databases may or may not be 

complete. For example, the existence of wetlands information data in a specific report does not mean that all wetlands in the 

area covered by the report are included. Moreover, the absence of any reported wetlands information does not necessarily 

mean that wetlands do not exist in the area covered by the report. 

NY MANIFEST: Facility and Manifest Data 

Manifest is a document that lists and tracks hazardous waste from the generator through transporters to a TSD 

facility. 





Source: Department of Environmental Conservation 

Telephone: 518-402-8651 




PA MANIFEST: Manifest Information 

Hazardous waste manifest information. 





Source: Department of Environmental Protection 

Telephone: 717-783-8990 




WI MANIFEST: Manifest Information 

Hazardous waste manifest information. 





Source: Department of Natural Resources 





Oil/Gas Pipelines: This data was obtained by EDR from the USGS in 1994. It is referred to by USGS as GeoData Digital Line Graphs 

from 1:100,000-Scale Maps. It was extracted from the transportation category including some oil, but primarily 

gas pipelines. 

Electric Power Transmission Line Data 

Source: Rextag Strategies Corp. 

Telephone: (281) 769-2247 

U.S. Electric Transmission and Power Plants Systems Digital GIS Data 

Sensitive Receptors: There are individuals deemed sensitive receptors due to their fragile immune systems and special sensitivity 

to environmental discharges. These sensitive receptors typically include the elderly, the sick, and children. While the location of all 

sensitive receptors cannot be determined, EDR indicates those buildings and facilities - schools, daycares, hospitals, medical centers, 

and nursing homes - where individuals who are sensitive receptors are likely to be located. 

TC02814573.1r 

Page GR-17


AHA Hospitals: 

Source: American Hospital Association, Inc. 

Telephone: 312-280-5991 

The database includes a listing of hospitals based on the American Hospital Association’s annual survey of hospitals. 

Medical Centers: Provider of Services Listing 

Source: Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services 

Telephone: 410-786-3000 

A listing of hospitals with Medicare provider number, produced by Centers of Medicare & Medicaid Services, 

a federal agency within the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. 

Nursing Homes 

Source: National Institutes of Health 

Telephone: 301-594-6248 

Information on Medicare and Medicaid certified nursing homes in the United States. 

Public Schools 

Source: National Center for Education Statistics 

Telephone: 202-502-7300 

The National Center for Education Statistics’ primary database on elementary 

and secondary public education in the United States. It is a comprehensive, annual, national statistical 

database of all public elementary and secondary schools and school districts, which contains data that are 

comparable across all states. 

Private Schools 

Source: National Center for Education Statistics 

Telephone: 202-502-7300 

The National Center for Education Statistics’ primary database on private school locations in the United States. 

Daycare Centers: Child Care Provider List 

Source: Department of Health 

Telephone: 801-538-9299 

Flood Zone Data: This data, available in select counties across the country, was obtained by EDR in 2003 & 2009 from the Federal 

Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). Data depicts 100-year and 500-year flood zones as defined by FEMA. 

NWI: National Wetlands Inventory. This data, available in select counties across the country, was obtained by EDR 

in 2002 and 2005 from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 

State Wetlands Data: Wetlands in Utah 

Source: Automated Geographic Reference Center 

Telephone: 801-537-9201 

STREET AND ADDRESS INFORMATION 

© 2010 Tele Atlas North America, Inc. All rights reserved. This material is proprietary and the subject of copyright protection 

and other intellectual property rights owned by or licensed to Tele Atlas North America, Inc. The use of this material is subject 

to the terms of a license agreement. You will be held liable for any unauthorized copying or disclosure of this material. 

TC02814573.1r 

Page GR-18

GEOCHECK ® - PHYSICAL SETTING SOURCE ADDENDUM 

TARGET PROPERTY ADDRESS 

TERMINAL REDEVELOPMENT PROGRAM 

TERMINAL DR 


TARGET PROPERTY COORDINATES 

Latitude (North): 

Longitude (West): 

Universal Tranverse Mercator: 

UTM X (Meters): 

UTM Y (Meters): 

Elevation: 

40.78620 - 40˚ 47’ 10.3’’ 

111.9821 - 111˚ 58’ 55.6’’ 

Zone 12 

417134.8 

4515276.0 

4236 ft. above sea level 

USGS TOPOGRAPHIC MAP 

Target Property Map: 


West Map: 


40111-G8 SALT LAKE CITY NORTH, UT 

2001 

40112-G1 SALTAIR, UT 

2001 

EDR’s GeoCheck Physical Setting Source Addendum is provided to assist the environmental professional in 

forming an opinion about the impact of potential contaminant migration. 

Assessment of the impact of contaminant migration generally has two principle investigative components: 

1. Groundwater flow direction, and 

2. Groundwater flow velocity. 

Groundwater flow direction may be impacted by surface topography, hydrology, hydrogeology, characteristics 

of the soil, and nearby wells. Groundwater flow velocity is generally impacted by the nature of the 

geologic strata. 

TC02814573.1r Page A-1

GEOCHECK ® - PHYSICAL SETTING SOURCE SUMMARY 

GROUNDWATER FLOW DIRECTION INFORMATION 

Groundwater flow direction for a particular site is best determined by a qualified environmental professional 

using site-specific well data. If such data is not reasonably ascertainable, it may be necessary to rely on other 

sources of information, such as surface topographic information, hydrologic information, hydrogeologic data 

collected on nearby properties, and regional groundwater flow information (from deep aquifers). 

TOPOGRAPHIC INFORMATION 

Surface topography may be indicative of the direction of surficial groundwater flow. This information can be used to 

assist the environmental professional in forming an opinion about the impact of nearby contaminated properties or, 

should contamination exist on the target property, what downgradient sites might be impacted. 

TARGET PROPERTY TOPOGRAPHY 

General Topographic Gradient: 

General South 

SURROUNDING TOPOGRAPHY: ELEVATION PROFILES 

Elevation (ft) 

Elevation (ft) 

4242 4228 

4235 

North 

4232 

4232 

4237 

4229 

4242 

4229 

4242 

4229 

4239 

4232 

4238 

4236 

4236 

4230 

4236 

4236 

TP 

4236 

4233 

4236 

4232 

4236 

4232 

4236 

4232 

4236 

4232 

4236 

4229 

4232 

4229 

4232 

4229 

4229 

South 

4232 

4232 

West 

✩Target Property Elevation: 4236 ft. 

East 

TP 

0 1/2 1 Miles 

Source: Topography has been determined from the USGS 7.5’ Digital Elevation Model and should be evaluated 

on a relative (not an absolute) basis. Relative elevation information between sites of close proximity 

should be field verified. 

TC02814573.1r Page A-2


HYDROLOGIC INFORMATION 

Surface water can act as a hydrologic barrier to groundwater flow. Such hydrologic information can be used to assist 

the environmental professional in forming an opinion about the impact of nearby contaminated properties or, should 

contamination exist on the target property, what downgradient sites might be impacted. 

Refer to the Physical Setting Source Map following this summary for hydrologic information (major waterways 

and bodies of water). 

FEMA FLOOD ZONE 

Target Property County 

SALT LAKE, UT 

Flood Plain Panel at Target Property: 

Additional Panels in search area: 

NATIONAL WETLAND INVENTORY 

NWI Quad at Target Property 

SALT LAKE CITY NORTH 

FEMA Flood 

Electronic Data 

YES - refer to the Overview Map and Detail Map 

4901050013A - FEMA Q3 Flood data 



NWI Electronic 

Data Coverage 

YES - refer to the Overview Map and Detail Map 

HYDROGEOLOGIC INFORMATION 

Hydrogeologic information obtained by installation of wells on a specific site can often be an indicator 

of groundwater flow direction in the immediate area. Such hydrogeologic information can be used to assist the 

environmental professional in forming an opinion about the impact of nearby contaminated properties or, should 

contamination exist on the target property, what downgradient sites might be impacted. 

AQUIFLOW ® 

Search Radius: 1.000 Mile. 

EDR has developed the AQUIFLOW Information System to provide data on the general direction of groundwater 

flow at specific points. EDR has reviewed reports submitted by environmental professionals to regulatory 

authorities at select sites and has extracted the date of the report, groundwater flow direction as determined 

hydrogeologically, and the depth to water table. 

MAP ID 

Not Reported 

LOCATION 

FROM TP 

GENERAL DIRECTION 

GROUNDWATER FLOW 

TC02814573.1r Page A-3


GROUNDWATER FLOW VELOCITY INFORMATION 

Groundwater flow velocity information for a particular site is best determined by a qualified environmental professional 

using site specific geologic and soil strata data. If such data are not reasonably ascertainable, it may be necessary 

to rely on other sources of information, including geologic age identification, rock stratigraphic unit and soil 

characteristics data collected on nearby properties and regional soil information. In general, contaminant plumes 

move more quickly through sandy-gravelly types of soils than silty-clayey types of soils. 

GEOLOGIC INFORMATION IN GENERAL AREA OF TARGET PROPERTY 

Geologic information can be used by the environmental professional in forming an opinion about the relative speed 

at which contaminant migration may be occurring. 

ROCK STRATIGRAPHIC UNIT 

GEOLOGIC AGE IDENTIFICATION 

Era: 

Cenozoic 

Category: 

System: 

Quaternary 

Series: 

Quaternary 

Code: Q (decoded above as Era, System & Series) 

Stratifed Sequence 

Geologic Age and Rock Stratigraphic Unit Source: P.G. Schruben, R.E. Arndt and W.J. Bawiec, Geology 

of the Conterminous U.S. at 1:2,500,000 Scale - a digital representation of the 1974 P.B. King and H.M. Beikman 

Map, USGS Digital Data Series DDS - 11 (1994). 

TC02814573.1r Page A-4

EDR Inc. 

1 

2 

0 1/16 1/8 1/4 Miles


DOMINANT SOIL COMPOSITION IN GENERAL AREA OF TARGET PROPERTY 

The U.S. Department of Agriculture’s (USDA) Soil Conservation Service (SCS) leads the National Cooperative Soil 

Survey (NCSS) and is responsible for collecting, storing, maintaining and distributing soil survey information 

for privately owned lands in the United States. A soil map in a soil survey is a representation of soil patterns 

in a landscape. The following information is based on Soil Conservation Service SSURGO data. 

Soil Map ID: 1 

Soil Component Name: 

Soil Surface Texture: 

Hydrologic Group: 

MADE LAND 

Not reported 

Soil Drainage Class: 

Hydric Status: Unknown 

Corrosion Potential - Uncoated Steel: 

Depth to Bedrock Min: 

Depth to Watertable Min: 

Not Reported 

> 0 inches 

> 0 inches 

No Layer Information available. 

Soil Map ID: 2 

Soil Component Name: 

Soil Surface Texture: 

Hydrologic Group: 

Soil Drainage Class: 

LASIL 

silt loam 

Class D - Very slow infiltration rates. Soils are clayey, have a high 

water table, or are shallow to an impervious layer. 

Somewhat poorly drained 

Hydric Status: Unknown 

Corrosion Potential - Uncoated Steel: 

Depth to Bedrock Min: 

Depth to Watertable Min: 

High 

> 0 inches 

> 99 inches 

TC02814573.1r Page A-6


Soil Layer Information 

Saturated 

Boundary 

Classification 

hydraulic 

Layer Upper Lower Soil Texture Class AASHTO Group Unified Soil conductivity Soil Reaction 

micro m/sec (pH) 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

0 inches 

5 inches 

9 inches 

14 inches 

29 inches 

48 inches 

5 inches 

9 inches 

14 inches 

29 inches 

48 inches 

77 inches 

silt loam 

silt loam 

clay loam 

silty clay loam 

silt loam 

fine sand 

Silt-Clay 

Materials (more 

than 35 pct. 

passing No. 

200), Silty 

Soils. 

Silt-Clay 


than 35 pct. 

passing No. 

200), Silty 

Soils. 

Silt-Clay 


than 35 pct. 

passing No. 

200), Silty 

Soils. 

Silt-Clay 


than 35 pct. 

passing No. 

200), Silty 

Soils. 

Silt-Clay 


than 35 pct. 

passing No. 

200), Silty 

Soils. 

Silt-Clay 


than 35 pct. 

passing No. 

200), Silty 

Soils. 

COARSE-GRAINED 

SOILS, Sands, 

Sands with fines, 

Silty Sand. 


SOILS, Sands, 


Silty Sand. 


SOILS, Sands, 


Silty Sand. 


SOILS, Sands, 


Silty Sand. 


SOILS, Sands, 


Silty Sand. 


SOILS, Sands, 


Silty Sand. 

Max: 141.14 

Min: 42.34 

Max: 141.14 

Min: 42.34 

Max: 141.14 

Min: 42.34 

Max: 141.14 

Min: 42.34 

Max: 141.14 

Min: 42.34 

Max: 141.14 

Min: 42.34 

Max: 9.6 

Min: 9.1 

Max: 9.6 

Min: 9.1 

Max: 9.6 

Min: 9.1 

Max: 9.6 

Min: 9.1 

Max: 9.6 

Min: 9.1 

Max: 9.6 

Min: 9.1 

LOCAL / REGIONAL WATER AGENCY RECORDS 

EDR Local/Regional Water Agency records provide water well information to assist the environmental 

professional in assessing sources that may impact ground water flow direction, and in forming an 

opinion about the impact of contaminant migration on nearby drinking water wells. 

TC02814573.1r Page A-7


WELL SEARCH DISTANCE INFORMATION 

DATABASE 

Federal USGS 

Federal FRDS PWS 

State Database 

SEARCH DISTANCE (miles) 

2.000 

Nearest PWS within 2.000 miles 

2.000 

FEDERAL USGS WELL INFORMATION 

MAP ID 

H34 

36 

Q65 

91 

94 

Z98 

AG130 

AG136 

140 

AJ143 

AK145 

AL146 

AM147 

AJ155 

AJ156 

AO165 

166 

AU186 

AU192 

197 

WELL ID 

USGS3039544 

USGS3039546 

USGS3039432 

USGS3039412 

USGS3060543 

USGS3039531 

USGS3060552 

USGS3060551 

USGS3060559 

USGS3060553 

USGS3060545 

USGS3039444 

USGS3039445 

USGS3060554 

USGS3060555 

USGS3060563 

USGS3039521 

USGS3060582 

USGS3060583 

USGS3039435 

LOCATION 

FROM TP 

1 - 2 Miles South 

1 - 2 Miles SSE 

1 - 2 Miles NE 

1 - 2 Miles East 

1 - 2 Miles SW 


1 - 2 Miles WSW 


1 - 2 Miles West 



1 - 2 Miles North 






1 - 2 Miles NNW 



FEDERAL FRDS PUBLIC WATER SUPPLY SYSTEM INFORMATION 

MAP ID 

67 

WELL ID 

UT4902290 

LOCATION 

FROM TP 

1 - 2 Miles ENE 

Note: PWS System location is not always the same as well location. 

STATE DATABASE WELL INFORMATION 

MAP ID 

1 

A2 

A3 

A4 

A5 

A6 

WELL ID 

UT4000000204509 

UT4000000204440 

UT4000000204439 

UT4000000204441 

UT4000000204443 

UT4000000204442 

LOCATION 

FROM TP 

1/4 - 1/2 Mile NW 

1/4 - 1/2 Mile WNW 

1/4 - 1/2 Mile WNW 

1/4 - 1/2 Mile WNW 

1/4 - 1/2 Mile WNW 

1/4 - 1/2 Mile WNW 

TC02814573.1r Page A-8



MAP ID 

A7 

A8 

A9 

A10 

A11 

A12 

A13 

B14 

B15 

B16 

C17 

B18 

B19 

B20 

C21 

D22 

D23 

D24 

25 

E26 

E27 

28 

29 

F30 

F31 

G32 

G33 

35 

I37 

I38 

G39 

H40 

J41 

K42 

K43 

G44 

L45 

L46 

47 

M48 

M49 

J50 

51 

52 

53 

54 

N55 

N56 

O57 

O58 

59 

60 

WELL ID 

UT4000000204450 

UT4000000204456 

UT4000000204461 

UT4000000204466 

UT4000000204476 

UT4000000204430 

UT4000000204447 

UT4000000204504 

UT4000000204505 

UT4000000204506 

UT4000000204947 

UT4000000204552 

UT4000000204553 

UT4000000204554 

UT4000000204990 

UT4000000203359 

UT4000000203343 

UT4000000203296 

UT4000000203729 

UT4000000205041 

UT4000000205054 

UT4000000204468 

UT4000000205343 

UT4000000202871 

UT4000000202827 

UT4000000202775 

UT4000000202770 

UT4000000205274 

UT4000000204168 

UT4000000204169 

UT4000000202720 

UT4000000202694 

UT4000000205028 

UT4000000204393 

UT4000000204394 

UT4000000202684 

UT4000000204669 

UT4000000204670 

UT4000000202780 

UT4000000203709 

UT4000000203710 

UT4000000205061 

UT4000000205017 

UT4000000204551 

UT4000000202502 

UT4000000205151 

UT4000000204621 

UT4000000204622 

UT4000000203198 

UT4000000203199 

UT4000000202506 

UT4000000205524 

LOCATION 

FROM TP 

1/4 - 1/2 Mile WNW 

1/4 - 1/2 Mile WNW 

1/4 - 1/2 Mile WNW 

1/4 - 1/2 Mile WNW 

1/4 - 1/2 Mile WNW 

1/4 - 1/2 Mile WNW 

1/4 - 1/2 Mile WNW 

1/4 - 1/2 Mile WNW 

1/4 - 1/2 Mile WNW 

1/4 - 1/2 Mile WNW 

1/2 - 1 Mile NNW 

1/2 - 1 Mile WNW 




1/2 - 1 Mile SSW 



1/2 - 1 Mile SE 



1/2 - 1 Mile East 

1/2 - 1 Mile NNE 

1/2 - 1 Mile South 

1/2 - 1 Mile South 








1 - 2 Miles WNW 






1 - 2 Miles SSW 







1 - 2 Miles NW 







TC02814573.1r Page A-9



MAP ID 

N61 

62 

P63 

N64 

Q66 

R68 

R69 

S70 

S71 

T72 

T73 

U74 

U75 

R76 

77 

R78 

R79 

V80 

V81 

V82 

P83 

W84 

W85 

X86 

X87 

W88 

89 

Y90 

Y92 

Z93 

Z95 

Z96 

Z97 

99 

Z100 

Z101 

Z102 

Z103 

104 

105 

AA106 

AA107 

AB108 

109 

110 

AB111 

112 

AC113 

AC114 

AC115 

AD116 

117 

WELL ID 

UT4000000204633 

UT4000000202620 

UT4000000204510 

UT4000000204604 

UT4000000205571 

UT4000000204768 

UT4000000204769 

UT4000000202958 

UT4000000202959 

UT4000000205742 

UT4000000205743 

UT4000000204242 

UT4000000204243 

UT4000000204837 

UT4000000203152 

UT4000000204804 

UT4000000204805 

UT4000000204853 

UT4000000204854 

UT4000000204855 

UT4000000204570 

UT4000000202681 

UT4000000202664 

UT4000000205805 

UT4000000205806 

UT4000000202557 

UT4000000203089 

UT4000000204006 

UT4000000204007 

UT4000000202135 

UT4000000202119 

UT4000000202130 

UT4000000202117 

UT4000000205988 

UT4000000202118 

UT4000000202113 

UT4000000202110 

UT4000000202107 

UT4000000202851 

UT4000000205990 

UT4000000202060 

UT4000000202061 

UT4000000203913 

UT4000000202997 

UT4000000205796 

UT4000000203842 

UT4000000202801 

UT4000000205422 

UT4000000205423 

UT4000000205424 

UT4000000203604 

UT4000000203337 

LOCATION 

FROM TP 





1 - 2 Miles NNE 

















1 - 2 Miles SE 





















1 - 2 Miles ESE 










TC02814573.1r Page A-10



MAP ID 

AD118 

AD119 

AC120 

AC121 

AC122 

AE123 

AE124 

125 

AF126 

AF127 

AF128 

AF129 

AH131 

132 

133 

134 

AI135 

137 

AH138 

AH139 

141 

AI142 

AJ144 

AN148 

AN149 

AO150 

AO151 

AO152 

AL153 

AI154 

AM157 

AP158 

159 

160 

AK161 

AK162 

AQ163 

AQ164 

AP167 

AP168 

AR169 

170 

171 

AR172 

AR173 

174 

AR175 

AS176 

AT177 

178 

AS179 

180 

WELL ID 

UT4000000203640 

UT4000000203585 

UT4000000205416 

UT4000000205417 

UT4000000205418 

UT4000000204919 

UT4000000204920 

UT4000000202951 

UT4000000202672 

UT4000000202673 

UT4000000202708 

UT4000000202709 

UT4000000202739 

UT4000000203353 

UT4000000204096 

UT4000000204334 

UT4000000206051 

UT4000000204280 

UT4000000202715 

UT4000000202716 

UT4000000202544 

UT4000000206069 

UT4000000204093 

UT4000000201544 

UT4000000201545 

UT4000000204422 

UT4000000204423 

UT4000000204424 

UT4000000206211 

UT4000000206079 

UT4000000206218 

UT4000000202830 

UT4000000206179 

UT4000000206215 

UT4000000202952 

UT4000000202953 

UT4000000201791 

UT4000000201792 

UT4000000202722 

UT4000000202794 

UT4000000203513 

UT4000000206132 

UT4000000204413 

UT4000000203490 

UT4000000203485 

UT4000000206257 

UT4000000203533 

UT4000000204690 

UT4000000205715 

UT4000000201508 

UT4000000204759 

UT4000000202698 

LOCATION 

FROM TP 





















































TC02814573.1r Page A-11



MAP ID 

AS181 

AU182 

AU183 

AS184 

185 

AU187 

AU188 

AU189 

AU190 

191 

AV193 

AT194 

195 

AV196 

WELL ID 

UT4000000204760 

UT4000000206157 

UT4000000206158 

UT4000000204741 

UT4000000206197 

UT4000000206162 

UT4000000206163 

UT4000000206164 

UT4000000206165 

UT4000000204184 

UT4000000201359 

UT4000000205782 

UT4000000201880 

UT4000000201326 

LOCATION 

FROM TP 















OTHER STATE DATABASE INFORMATION 

STATE OIL/GAS WELL INFORMATION 

MAP ID 

1 

2 

WELL ID 

UTG400000025513 

UTG400000025516 

LOCATION 

FROM TP 

1 - 2 Miles NW 


TC02814573.1r Page A-12

EDR Inc. 

UT

GEOCHECK ® - PHYSICAL SETTING SOURCE MAP FINDINGS 

Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

1 

NW 

1/4 - 1/2 Mile 

Lower 

Database 

UT WELLS 

EDR ID Number 

UT4000000204509 

Wrnum: 

Type: 

Status: 

Uses: 

Cfs: 

Acft: 

Location: 

Win: 

Owner: 

Source: 

59-819 

Chexnum: 

Underground 

Summary st: 

APPLDIS 

Priority: 

Not Reported 

.015 

0 

S837 E213 W4 29 1N 1W SL 

0 


Underground Water Well Site id: 

Not Reported 

T 

19500628 

UT4000000204509 

A2 

WNW 

1/4 - 1/2 Mile 

Lower 

UT WELLS 

UT4000000204440 

Wrnum: 

Type: 

Status: 

Uses: 

Cfs: 

Acft: 

Location: 

Win: 

Owner: 

Source: 

59-3677 

Underground 

APPLNPR 

OS 

.015 

0 

S1220 W550 E4 30 1N 1W SL 

10302 

PAUL & JUANITA PULLAN 

Underground Water Well 

Chexnum: 

Summary st: 

Priority: 

Site id: 

Not Reported 

P 

19530603 

UT4000000204440 

A3 

WNW 

1/4 - 1/2 Mile 

Lower 

UT WELLS 

UT4000000204439 

Wrnum: 

Type: 

Status: 

Uses: 

Cfs: 

Acft: 

Location: 

Win: 

Owner: 

Source: 

59-1107 

Underground 

APPLNPR 

OS 

.015 

0 

S1220 W550 E4 30 1N 1W SL 

10302 

A. G. & BLANCHE M. PULLAN 


Chexnum: 

Summary st: 

Priority: 

Site id: 

Not Reported 

P 

19530603 

UT4000000204439 

A4 

WNW 

1/4 - 1/2 Mile 

Lower 

UT WELLS 

UT4000000204441 

TC02814573.1r Page A-14


Wrnum: 

Type: 

Status: 

Uses: 

Cfs: 

Acft: 

Location: 

Win: 

Owner: 

Source: 

59-3678 

Underground 

APPLNPR 

OS 

.015 

0 

S1220 W550 E4 30 1N 1W SL 

10302 

KENNETH & CLARA PULLAN 


Chexnum: 

Summary st: 

Priority: 

Site id: 

Not Reported 

P 

19530603 

UT4000000204441 

A5 

WNW 

1/4 - 1/2 Mile 

Lower 

UT WELLS 

UT4000000204443 

Wrnum: 

Type: 

Status: 

Uses: 

Cfs: 

Acft: 

Location: 

Win: 

Owner: 

Source: 

59-3684 

Underground 

APPLNPR 

OS 

.015 

0 

S1220 W550 E4 30 1N 1W SL 

10302 

D. C. & FERN H. PULLAN 


Chexnum: 

Summary st: 

Priority: 

Site id: 

Not Reported 

P 

19530603 

UT4000000204443 

A6 

WNW 

1/4 - 1/2 Mile 

Lower 

UT WELLS 

UT4000000204442 

Wrnum: 

Type: 

Status: 

Uses: 

Cfs: 

Acft: 

Location: 

Win: 

Owner: 

Source: 

59-3683 

Underground 

APPLNPR 

OS 

.015 

0 

S1220 W550 E4 30 1N 1W SL 

10302 

FLORA DRESCHSEL 


Chexnum: 

Summary st: 

Priority: 

Site id: 

Not Reported 

P 

19530603 

UT4000000204442 

A7 

WNW 

1/4 - 1/2 Mile 

Lower 

UT WELLS 

UT4000000204450 

Wrnum: 

Type: 

Status: 

Uses: 

Cfs: 

Acft: 

Location: 

Win: 

Owner: 

Source: 

0459015M00 

Underground 

APPLAPP 

Not Reported 

0 

0 

S1178 W657 E4 30 1N 1W SL 

31684 

KLEINFELDER INC. 

Non-Production Well: Monitor 

Chexnum: 

Summary st: 

Priority: 

Site id: 

Not Reported 

A 

20041112 

UT4000000204450 

TC02814573.1r Page A-15


Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

A8 

WNW 

1/4 - 1/2 Mile 

Lower 

Database 

UT WELLS 

EDR ID Number 

UT4000000204456 

Wrnum: 

Type: 

Status: 

Uses: 

Cfs: 

Acft: 

Location: 

Win: 

Owner: 

Source: 

0459015M00 

Underground 

APPLAPP 

Not Reported 

0 

0 

S1153 W657 E4 30 1N 1W SL 

31683 



Chexnum: 

Summary st: 

Priority: 

Site id: 

Not Reported 

A 

20041112 

UT4000000204456 

A9 

WNW 

1/4 - 1/2 Mile 

Lower 

UT WELLS 

UT4000000204461 

Wrnum: 

Type: 

Status: 

Uses: 

Cfs: 

Acft: 

Location: 

Win: 

Owner: 

Source: 

0459015M00 

Underground 

APPLAPP 

Not Reported 

0 

0 

S1123 W657 E4 30 1N 1W SL 

31682 



Chexnum: 

Summary st: 

Priority: 

Site id: 

Not Reported 

A 

20041112 

UT4000000204461 

A10 

WNW 

1/4 - 1/2 Mile 

Lower 

UT WELLS 

UT4000000204466 

Wrnum: 

Type: 

Status: 

Uses: 

Cfs: 

Acft: 

Location: 

Win: 

Owner: 

Source: 

0459015M00 

Underground 

APPLAPP 

Not Reported 

0 

0 

S1098 W657 E4 30 1N 1W SL 

31685 



Chexnum: 

Summary st: 

Priority: 

Site id: 

Not Reported 

A 

20041112 

UT4000000204466 

A11 

WNW 

1/4 - 1/2 Mile 

Higher 

UT WELLS 

UT4000000204476 

TC02814573.1r Page A-16


Wrnum: 

Type: 

Status: 

Uses: 

Cfs: 

Acft: 

Location: 

Win: 

Owner: 

Source: 

59-1170 

Underground 

APPLNPR 

OS 

.015 

0 

S990 W650 E4 30 1N 1W SL 

10300 

A. G. & BLANCH M. PULLAN 


Chexnum: 

Summary st: 

Priority: 

Site id: 

Not Reported 

P 

19540628 

UT4000000204476 

A12 

WNW 

1/4 - 1/2 Mile 

Lower 

UT WELLS 

UT4000000204430 

Wrnum: 

Type: 

Status: 

Uses: 

Cfs: 

Acft: 

Location: 

Win: 

Owner: 

Source: 

59-1169 

Underground 

APPLNPR 

S 

.015 

0 

S1275 W830 E4 30 1N 1W SL 

10333 

FLORA DRECHSEL 


Chexnum: 

Summary st: 

Priority: 

Site id: 

Not Reported 

P 

19540625 

UT4000000204430 

A13 

WNW 

1/4 - 1/2 Mile 

Lower 

UT WELLS 

UT4000000204447 

Wrnum: 

Type: 

Status: 

Uses: 

Cfs: 

Acft: 

Location: 

Win: 

Owner: 

Source: 

59-794 

Underground 

APPLCERT 

S 

.029 

0 

S1210 W920 E4 30 1N 1W SL 

10301 

FLORA DRECHSEL 


Chexnum: 

Summary st: 

Priority: 

Site id: 

Not Reported 

P 

19500324 

UT4000000204447 

B14 

WNW 

1/4 - 1/2 Mile 

Higher 

UT WELLS 

UT4000000204504 

Wrnum: 

Type: 

Status: 

Uses: 

Cfs: 

Acft: 

Location: 

Win: 

Owner: 

Source: 

59-3681 

Underground 

APPLNPR 

OS 

.015 

0 

S860 W1050 E4 30 1N 1W SL 

0 

PAUL & JAUNITA PULLAN 


Chexnum: 

Summary st: 

Priority: 

Site id: 

Not Reported 

P 

19490919 

UT4000000204504 

TC02814573.1r Page A-17


Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

B15 

WNW 

1/4 - 1/2 Mile 

Higher 

Database 

UT WELLS 

EDR ID Number 

UT4000000204505 

Wrnum: 

Type: 

Status: 

Uses: 

Cfs: 

Acft: 

Location: 

Win: 

Owner: 

Source: 

59-3682 

Underground 

APPLNPR 

OS 

.015 

0 

S860 W1050 E4 30 1N 1W SL 

0 



Chexnum: 

Summary st: 

Priority: 

Site id: 

Not Reported 

P 

19490919 

UT4000000204505 

B16 

WNW 

1/4 - 1/2 Mile 

Higher 

UT WELLS 

UT4000000204506 

Wrnum: 

Type: 

Status: 

Uses: 

Cfs: 

Acft: 

Location: 

Win: 

Owner: 

Source: 

59-751 

Underground 

APPLNPR 

OS 

.015 

0 

S860 W1050 E4 30 1N 1W SL 

0 

D. C. & FERN H. PULLAN 


Chexnum: 

Summary st: 

Priority: 

Site id: 

Not Reported 

P 

19490919 

UT4000000204506 

C17 

NNW 

1/2 - 1 Mile 

Lower 

UT WELLS 

UT4000000204947 

Wrnum: 

Type: 

Status: 

Uses: 

Cfs: 

Acft: 

Location: 

Win: 

Owner: 

Source: 

0759013M00 

Chexnum: 

Underground 

Summary st: 

APPLAPP 

Priority: 

Not Reported 

0 

0 

N807 E730 W4 29 1N 1W SL 

430704 

AIRCRAFT SERVICES GROUP INT. (ASIG) 

Non-Production Well: Cathodic Protection Site id: 

Not Reported 

A 

20071011 

UT4000000204947 

B18 

WNW 

1/2 - 1 Mile 

Higher 

UT WELLS 

UT4000000204552 

TC02814573.1r Page A-18


Wrnum: 

Type: 

Status: 

Uses: 

Cfs: 

Acft: 

Location: 

Win: 

Owner: 

Source: 

59-1175 

Underground 

APPLNPR 

OS 

.015 

0 

S680 W1145 E4 30 1N 1W SL 

0 

D. C. & FERN N. PULLAN 


Chexnum: 

Summary st: 

Priority: 

Site id: 

Not Reported 

P 

19540723 

UT4000000204552 

B19 

WNW 

1/2 - 1 Mile 

Higher 

UT WELLS 

UT4000000204553 

Wrnum: 

Type: 

Status: 

Uses: 

Cfs: 

Acft: 

Location: 

Win: 

Owner: 

Source: 

59-3679 

Underground 

APPLNPR 

OS 

.015 

0 

S680 W1145 E4 30 1N 1W SL 

0 

PAUL & JUANITA PULLAN 


Chexnum: 

Summary st: 

Priority: 

Site id: 

Not Reported 

P 

19540723 

UT4000000204553 

B20 

WNW 

1/2 - 1 Mile 

Higher 

UT WELLS 

UT4000000204554 

Wrnum: 

Type: 

Status: 

Uses: 

Cfs: 

Acft: 

Location: 

Win: 

Owner: 

Source: 

59-3680 

Underground 

APPLNPR 

OS 

.015 

0 

S680 W1145 E4 30 1N 1W SL 

0 



Chexnum: 

Summary st: 

Priority: 

Site id: 

Not Reported 

P 

19540723 

UT4000000204554 

C21 

NNW 

1/2 - 1 Mile 

Lower 

UT WELLS 

UT4000000204990 

Wrnum: 

Type: 

Status: 

Uses: 

Cfs: 

Acft: 

Location: 

Win: 

Owner: 

Source: 

0759013M00 

Chexnum: 

Underground 

Summary st: 

APPLAPP 

Priority: 

Not Reported 

0 

0 

N909 E487 W4 29 1N 1W SL 

430677 

AIRCRAFT SERVICES GROUP INT. (ASIG) 


Not Reported 

A 

20071011 

UT4000000204990 

TC02814573.1r Page A-19


Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

D22 

SSW 

1/2 - 1 Mile 

Lower 

Wrnum: 

Type: 

Status: 

Uses: 

Cfs: 

Acft: 

Location: 

Win: 

Owner: 

Source: 

Database 

UT WELLS 

59-4951 

Chexnum: 

Not Reported 

Return 

Summary st: 

T 

APPLREJD 

Priority: 

19830608 

P 

50 

0 

N3000 E150 SW 32 1N 1W SL 

0 

CONSOLIDATED NATIONAL GAS AND ELECTRIC CORPORATION 

Surplus Canal 

Site id: 

UT4000000203359 

EDR ID Number 

UT4000000203359 

D23 

SSW 

1/2 - 1 Mile 

Lower 

UT WELLS 

UT4000000203343 

Wrnum: 

Type: 

Status: 

Uses: 

Cfs: 

Acft: 

Location: 

Win: 

Owner: 

Source: 

59-1975 

Chexnum: 

Underground 

Summary st: 

UGWCDIS 

Priority: 

Not Reported 

.022 

0 

S2313 W65 NE 31 1N 1W SL 

0 



Not Reported 

T 

1931 

UT4000000203343 

D24 

SSW 

1/2 - 1 Mile 

Lower 

Wrnum: 

Type: 

Status: 

Uses: 

Cfs: 

Acft: 

Location: 

Win: 

Owner: 

Source: 

UT WELLS 

59-4951 

Chexnum: 

Not Reported 

Surface 

Summary st: 

T 

APPLREJD 

Priority: 

19830608 

P 

50 

0 

N2850 E250 SW 32 1N 1W SL 

0 

CONSOLIDATED NATIONAL GAS AND ELECTRIC CORPORATION 

Surplus Canal 

Site id: 

UT4000000203296 

UT4000000203296 

25 

SE 

1/2 - 1 Mile 

Lower 

UT WELLS 

UT4000000203729 

TC02814573.1r Page A-20


Wrnum: 

Type: 

Status: 

Uses: 

Cfs: 

Acft: 

Location: 

Win: 

Owner: 

Source: 

59-2488 

Underground 

UGWCDIS 

Not Reported 

.015 

0 

S1300 W1126 NE 32 1N 1W SL 

0 

SALT LAKE CITY CORP. 


Chexnum: 

Summary st: 

Priority: 

Site id: 

Not Reported 

T 

19300800 

UT4000000203729 

E26 

NNW 

1/2 - 1 Mile 

Lower 

UT WELLS 

UT4000000205041 

Wrnum: 

Type: 

Status: 

Uses: 

Cfs: 

Acft: 

Location: 

Win: 

Owner: 

Source: 

59-2995 

Underground 

UGWC 

DIS 

.033 

0 

S1360 W625 NE 30 1N 1W SL 

0 

FRANK JACKETTA 


Chexnum: 

Summary st: 

Priority: 

Site id: 

Not Reported 

P 

1907 

UT4000000205041 

E27 

NNW 

1/2 - 1 Mile 

Lower 

UT WELLS 

UT4000000205054 

Wrnum: 

Type: 

Status: 

Uses: 

Cfs: 

Acft: 

Location: 

Win: 

Owner: 

Source: 

59-3671 

Underground 

UGWC 

IS 

.007 

0 

S1260 W580 NE 30 1N 1W SL 

0 

FRANK JACKETTA 


Chexnum: 

Summary st: 

Priority: 

Site id: 

Not Reported 

P 

1925 

UT4000000205054 

28 

East 

1/2 - 1 Mile 

Lower 

UT WELLS 

UT4000000204468 

Wrnum: 

Type: 

Status: 

Uses: 

Cfs: 

Acft: 

Location: 

Win: 

Owner: 

Source: 

59-2668 

Chexnum: 

Underground 

Summary st: 

UGWCDIS 

Priority: 

Not Reported 

.022 

0 

N1601 E236 SE 29 1N 1W SL 

0 



Not Reported 

T 

19220000 

UT4000000204468 

TC02814573.1r Page A-21


Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

29 

NNE 

1/2 - 1 Mile 

Higher 

Database 

UT WELLS 

EDR ID Number 

UT4000000205343 

Wrnum: 

Type: 

Status: 

Uses: 

Cfs: 

Acft: 

Location: 

Win: 

Owner: 

Source: 

59-249 

Chexnum: 

Underground 

Summary st: 

APPLTERM 

Priority: 

Not Reported 

.015 

0 

S170 E1120 N4 29 1N 1W SL 

0 



Not Reported 

T 

19410619 

UT4000000205343 

F30 

South 

1/2 - 1 Mile 

Lower 

UT WELLS 

UT4000000202871 

Wrnum: 

Type: 

Status: 

Uses: 

Cfs: 

Acft: 

Location: 

Win: 

Owner: 

Source: 

59-1717 

Underground 

APPLCERT 

DI 

.008 

0 

N1052 E1247 SW 32 1N 1W SL 

428285 

ELVIRA BARRUTIA 


Chexnum: 

Summary st: 

Priority: 

Site id: 

Not Reported 

P 

19640213 

UT4000000202871 

F31 

South 

1/2 - 1 Mile 

Lower 

UT WELLS 

UT4000000202827 

Wrnum: 

Type: 

Status: 

Uses: 

Cfs: 

Acft: 

Location: 

Win: 

Owner: 

Source: 

59-786 

Underground 

APPLCERT 

O 

.015 

0 

N875 E1175 SW 32 1N 1W SL 

0 

PAT BARRUTIA 


Chexnum: 

Summary st: 

Priority: 

Site id: 

Not Reported 

P 

19500223 

UT4000000202827 

G32 

South 

1 - 2 Miles 

Lower 

UT WELLS 

UT4000000202775 

TC02814573.1r Page A-22


Wrnum: 

Type: 

Status: 

Uses: 

Cfs: 

Acft: 

Location: 

Win: 

Owner: 

Source: 

59-2601 

Chexnum: 

Underground 

Summary st: 

UGWCDIS 

Priority: 

Not Reported 

.011 

0 

S4590 E2330 SW 29 1N 1W SL 

0 



Not Reported 

T 

18760000 

UT4000000202775 

G33 

South 

1 - 2 Miles 

Lower 

UT WELLS 

UT4000000202770 

Wrnum: 

Type: 

Status: 

Uses: 

Cfs: 

Acft: 

Location: 

Win: 

Owner: 

Source: 

59-2596 

Chexnum: 

Underground 

Summary st: 

UGWCDIS 

Priority: 

Not Reported 

.011 

0 

S4623 E2182 SW 29 1N 1W SL 

0 



Not Reported 

T 

18760000 

UT4000000202770 

H34 

South 

1 - 2 Miles 

Lower 

FED USGS 

USGS3039544 

Agency cd: 

Site name: 

Latitude: 

Longitude: 

Dec lon: 

Coor accr: 

Dec latlong datum: 

State: 

Country: 

Location map: 

Altitude: 

Altitude method: 

Altitude accuracy: 

Altitude datum: 

Hydrologic: 

Topographic: 

Site type: 

Date inventoried: 

Local standard time flag: 

Type of ground water site: 

Aquifer Type: 

Aquifer: 

Well depth: 

Source of depth data: 

Project number: 

Real time data flag: 

Daily flow data end date: 

Peak flow data begin date: 

USGS 

Site no: 

(B- 1- 1)32ccd- 1 

404616 

EDR Site id: 

1115858 

Dec lat: 

-111.98355036 

Coor meth: 

F 

Latlong datum: 

NAD83 

District: 

49 

County: 

US 

Land net: 

SLC NORTH 

Map scale: 

4220.00 

Interpolated from topographic map 

20 

National Geodetic Vertical Datum of 1929 

Jordan. Utah. Area = 791 sq.mi. 

Not Reported 

Ground-water other than Spring Date construction: 

Not Reported 

Mean greenwich time offset: 

Y 

Test hole, not completed as a well 

Not Reported 

Not Reported 

19.1 

Hole depth: 

owner 

1464915010 

0 

Daily flow data begin date: 

0000-00-00 

Daily flow data count: 

0000-00-00 

Peak flow data end date: 

404616111585801 

USGS3039544 

40.77105677 

M 

NAD27 

49 

035 

SESWSWS32 T01N R01W S 

Not Reported 

19821005 

MST 

20.0 

0000-00-00 

0 

0000-00-00 

TC02814573.1r Page A-23


Peak flow data count: 0 

Water quality data end date:1983-02-01 

Ground water data begin date: 1982-10-05 

Ground water data count: 57 

Water quality data begin date: 1982-10-27 

Water quality data count: 2 

Ground water data end date: 1988-08-30 

Ground-water levels, Number of Measurements: 57 

Date 

Feet below 

Surface 

Feet to 

Sealevel 

Date 

Feet below 

Surface 

Feet to 

Sealevel 

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

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

1988-08-30 7.74 1988-05-31 5.09 

1988-04-27 4.52 1988-03-28 5.37 

1988-02-16 4.31 1987-11-30 4.80 

1987-10-28 4.39 1987-09-24 5.25 

1987-07-30 4.72 1987-05-03 5.37 

1987-03-30 4.69 1987-02-12 4.89 

1987-01-27 5.49 1987-01-05 4.87 

1986-11-25 4.94 1986-10-30 5.22 

1986-09-30 6.79 1986-08-25 7.63 

1986-07-31 7.43 1986-06-25 6.24 

1986-05-29 4.54 1986-04-29 2.22 

1986-03-26 3.91 1986-02-12 3.99 

1986-01-24 3.99 1985-03-12 2.62 

1985-02-05 5.38 1984-12-05 4.43 

1984-10-23 4.76 1984-05-10 3.86 

1984-04-26 3.69 1984-04-17 3.67 

1984-04-12 3.01 1984-04-03 2.85 

1984-03-28 3.67 1984-03-21 3.19 

1984-03-14 3.42 1984-03-07 3.55 

1984-02-27 3.83 1984-02-22 3.69 

1983-10-05 4.23 1983-09-07 4.13 

1983-08-10 6.20 1983-07-06 5.65 

1983-06-09 4.96 1983-05-17 3.93 

1983-05-05 4.30 1983-04-12 3.77 

1983-03-28 2.93 1983-03-07 3.93 

1983-02-01 3.70 1983-01-14 4.27 

1982-12-22 3.67 1982-11-16 4.47 

1982-10-27 4.07 1982-10-21 4.53 

1982-10-05 1.03 

35 

NE 

1 - 2 Miles 

Higher 

UT WELLS 

UT4000000205274 

Wrnum: 

Type: 

Status: 

Uses: 

Cfs: 

Acft: 

Location: 

Win: 

Owner: 

Source: 

59-2661 

Chexnum: 

Underground 

Summary st: 

UGWCDIS 

Priority: 

Not Reported 

.013 

0 

S370 W225 NE 29 1N 1W SL 

0 



Not Reported 

T 

19190000 

UT4000000205274 

TC02814573.1r Page A-24


Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

36 

SSE 

1 - 2 Miles 

Lower 

Database 

FED USGS 

EDR ID Number 

USGS3039546 

Agency cd: 

USGS 

Site no: 

404619111582801 

Site name: 

(B- 1- 1)32dca- 1 

Latitude: 

404619 

EDR Site id: 

USGS3039546 

Longitude: 

1115827 

Dec lat: 

40.77189012 

Dec lon: 

-111.97493899 

Coor meth: 

M 

Coor accr: 

F 


NAD27 

Dec latlong datum: NAD83 

District: 

49 

State: 

49 

County: 

035 

Country: 

US 

Land net: 

Not Reported 

Location map: 

SLC NORTH 

Map scale: 

24000 

Altitude: 

4220.00 



Altitude accuracy: 5 



Hydrologic: 


Topographic: 

Not Reported 

Site type: 


19820101 

Date inventoried: Not Reported 

Mean greenwich time offset: MST 

Local standard time flag: Y 

Type of ground water site: Test hole, not completed as a well 

Aquifer Type: 

Not Reported 

Aquifer: 

Not Reported 

Well depth: 

15.0 

Hole depth: 

15.0 

Source of depth data: Not Reported 


1464915011 

Real time data flag: 0 

Daily flow data begin date: 0000-00-00 

Daily flow data end date: 0000-00-00 

Daily flow data count: 0 

Peak flow data begin date: 0000-00-00 

Peak flow data end date: 0000-00-00 









Date 

Feet below 

Surface 

Feet to 

Sealevel 

Date 

Feet below 

Surface 

Feet to 

Sealevel 

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

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

1990-05-03 7.3 1982-09-16 6.3 

1982-09-14 6.68 1982-08-25 6.2 

1982-08-09 5.8 1982-07-13 5.6 

1982-06-15 5.4 1982-05-25 5.4 

1982-04-30 5.2 1982-04-09 5.0 

1982-03-02 6.2 1982-02-02 6.3 

I37 

West 

1 - 2 Miles 

Lower 

UT WELLS 

UT4000000204168 

TC02814573.1r Page A-25


Wrnum: 

Type: 

Status: 

Uses: 

Cfs: 

Acft: 

Location: 

Win: 

Owner: 

Source: 

57-10282 

Chexnum: 

Underground 

Summary st: 

APPLREJ 

Priority: 

DIMOSX 

0 

143758 

N0 E1160 NW 31 1N 1W SL 

0 

WESTERN WATER LLC 

Underground Water Wells & various Site surface id: sources 

Not Reported 

T 

20010523 

UT4000000204168 

I38 

West 

1 - 2 Miles 

Lower 

UT WELLS 

UT4000000204169 

Wrnum: 

Type: 

Status: 

Uses: 

Cfs: 

Acft: 

Location: 

Win: 

Owner: 

Source: 

59-5821 

Underground 

APPLUNAP 

DIS 

0 

56880 

N0 E1160 NW 31 1N 1W SL 

0 

WESTERN WATER, LLC 

Underground Water Wells 

Chexnum: 

Summary st: 

Priority: 

Site id: 

Not Reported 

U 

20060222 

UT4000000204169 

G39 

South 

1 - 2 Miles 

Lower 

UT WELLS 

UT4000000202720 

Wrnum: 

Type: 

Status: 

Uses: 

Cfs: 

Acft: 

Location: 

Win: 

Owner: 

Source: 

59-1538 

Chexnum: 

Underground 

Summary st: 

APPLDIS 

Priority: 

Not Reported 

.1 

0 

N600 W390 S4 32 1N 1W SL 

429326 

FRATERNAL ORDER OF EAGLES #67 


Not Reported 

T 

19590813 

UT4000000202720 

H40 

South 

1 - 2 Miles 

Lower 

UT WELLS 

UT4000000202694 

Wrnum: 

Type: 

Status: 

Uses: 

Cfs: 

Acft: 

Location: 

Win: 

Owner: 

Source: 

59-1586 

Underground 

APPLCERT 

DO 

.007 

0 

N505 E1260 SW 32 1N 1W SL 

429355 

LEON AND LEONE BROWN 


Chexnum: 

Summary st: 

Priority: 

Site id: 

Not Reported 

P 

19610127 

UT4000000202694 

TC02814573.1r Page A-26


Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

J41 

WNW 

1 - 2 Miles 

Lower 

Database 

UT WELLS 

EDR ID Number 

UT4000000205028 

Wrnum: 

Type: 

Status: 

Uses: 

Cfs: 

Acft: 

Location: 

Win: 

Owner: 

Source: 

59-3069 

Chexnum: 

Underground 

Summary st: 

UGWCDIS 

Priority: 

Not Reported 

.022 

0 

N3897 W3370 SE 30 1N 1W SL 

0 

TONY AND MARGARET JACKETTA 


Not Reported 

T 

18890000 

UT4000000205028 

K42 

West 

1 - 2 Miles 

Lower 

UT WELLS 

UT4000000204393 

Wrnum: 

Type: 

Status: 

Uses: 

Cfs: 

Acft: 

Location: 

Win: 

Owner: 

Source: 

57-10282 

Chexnum: 

Underground 

Summary st: 

APPLREJ 

Priority: 

DIMOSX 

0 

143758 

N1210 E1060 SW 30 1N 1W SL 

0 



Not Reported 

T 

20010523 

UT4000000204393 

K43 

West 

1 - 2 Miles 

Lower 

UT WELLS 

UT4000000204394 

Wrnum: 

Type: 

Status: 

Uses: 

Cfs: 

Acft: 

Location: 

Win: 

Owner: 

Source: 

59-5821 

Underground 

APPLUNAP 

DIS 

0 

56880 

N1210 E1060 SW 30 1N 1W SL 

0 



Chexnum: 

Summary st: 

Priority: 

Site id: 

Not Reported 

U 

20060222 

UT4000000204394 

G44 

South 

1 - 2 Miles 

Lower 

UT WELLS 

UT4000000202684 

TC02814573.1r Page A-27


Wrnum: 

Type: 

Status: 

Uses: 

Cfs: 

Acft: 

Location: 

Win: 

Owner: 

Source: 

59-426 

Chexnum: 

Underground 

Summary st: 

APPLDIS 

Priority: 

Not Reported 

.015 

0 

N492 W200 S4 32 1N 1W SL 

0 



Not Reported 

T 

19441016 

UT4000000202684 

L45 

WNW 

1 - 2 Miles 

Lower 

UT WELLS 

UT4000000204669 

Wrnum: 

Type: 

Status: 

Uses: 

Cfs: 

Acft: 

Location: 

Win: 

Owner: 

Source: 

57-10282 

Chexnum: 

Underground 

Summary st: 

APPLREJ 

Priority: 

DIMOSX 

0 

143758 

N2420 E1060 SW 30 1N 1W SL 

0 



Not Reported 

T 

20010523 

UT4000000204669 

L46 

WNW 

1 - 2 Miles 

Lower 

UT WELLS 

UT4000000204670 

Wrnum: 

Type: 

Status: 

Uses: 

Cfs: 

Acft: 

Location: 

Win: 

Owner: 

Source: 

59-5821 

Underground 

APPLUNAP 

DIS 

0 

56880 

N2420 E1060 SW 30 1N 1W SL 

0 



Chexnum: 

Summary st: 

Priority: 

Site id: 

Not Reported 

U 

20060222 

UT4000000204670 

47 

SSW 

1 - 2 Miles 

Lower 

UT WELLS 

UT4000000202780 

Wrnum: 

Type: 

Status: 

Uses: 

Cfs: 

Acft: 

Location: 

Win: 

Owner: 

Source: 

59-3127 

Underground 

UGWCDIS 

Not Reported 

.045 

0 

N776 W1023 SW 32 1N 1W SL 

0 

DIAMOND PARKING 


Chexnum: 

Summary st: 

Priority: 

Site id: 

Not Reported 

T 

18900000 

UT4000000202780 

TC02814573.1r Page A-28


Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

M48 

WSW 

1 - 2 Miles 

Lower 

Database 

UT WELLS 

EDR ID Number 

UT4000000203709 

Wrnum: 

Type: 

Status: 

Uses: 

Cfs: 

Acft: 

Location: 

Win: 

Owner: 

Source: 

57-10282 

Chexnum: 

Underground 

Summary st: 

APPLREJ 

Priority: 

DIMOSX 

0 

143758 

S1430 E1220 NW 31 1N 1W SL 

0 



Not Reported 

T 

20010523 

UT4000000203709 

M49 

WSW 

1 - 2 Miles 

Lower 

UT WELLS 

UT4000000203710 

Wrnum: 

Type: 

Status: 

Uses: 

Cfs: 

Acft: 

Location: 

Win: 

Owner: 

Source: 

59-5821 

Underground 

APPLUNAP 

DIS 

0 

56880 

S1430 E1220 NW 31 1N 1W SL 

0 



Chexnum: 

Summary st: 

Priority: 

Site id: 

Not Reported 

U 

20060222 

UT4000000203710 

J50 

WNW 

1 - 2 Miles 

Lower 

UT WELLS 

UT4000000205061 

Wrnum: 

Type: 

Status: 

Uses: 

Cfs: 

Acft: 

Location: 

Win: 

Owner: 

Source: 

59-1381 

Chexnum: 

Underground 

Summary st: 

APPLNPR 

Priority: 

DIS 

.015 

0 

S1180 E1710 NW 30 1N 1W SL 

0 



Not Reported 

P 

19580729 

UT4000000205061 

51 

WNW 

1 - 2 Miles 

Lower 

UT WELLS 

UT4000000205017 

TC02814573.1r Page A-29


Wrnum: 

Type: 

Status: 

Uses: 

Cfs: 

Acft: 

Location: 

Win: 

Owner: 

Source: 

59-320 

Chexnum: 

Underground 

Summary st: 

APPLTERM 

Priority: 

Not Reported 

.015 

0 

N3847 W3870 SE 30 1N 1W SL 

0 



Not Reported 

T 

19420622 

UT4000000205017 

52 

West 

1 - 2 Miles 

Lower 

UT WELLS 

UT4000000204551 

Wrnum: 

Type: 

Status: 

Uses: 

Cfs: 

Acft: 

Location: 

Win: 

Owner: 

Source: 

59-5330 

Chexnum: 

Return 

Summary st: 

TEMPEXP 

Priority: 

O 

0 

80 

N1980 E660 SW 30 1N 1W SL 

0 

KERN RIVER GAS TRANSMISSION COMPANY 

Jordan River - Surplus Canal Site id: 

Not Reported 

T 

19910802 

UT4000000204551 

53 

SSW 

1 - 2 Miles 

Lower 

UT WELLS 

UT4000000202502 

Wrnum: 

Type: 

Status: 

Uses: 

Cfs: 

Acft: 

Location: 

Win: 

Owner: 

Source: 

59-55 

Chexnum: 

Surface 

Summary st: 

APPLTERM 

Priority: 

Not Reported 

16.33 

0 

0 E83 SW 32 1N 1W SL 

0 


Williams Lake 

Site id: 

Not Reported 

T 

19290731 

UT4000000202502 

54 

NW 

1 - 2 Miles 

Lower 

UT WELLS 

UT4000000205151 

Wrnum: 

Type: 

Status: 

Uses: 

Cfs: 

Acft: 

Location: 

Win: 

Owner: 

Source: 

59-1522 

Chexnum: 

Underground 

Summary st: 

APPLCERT 

Priority: 

S 

.021 

0 

S810 E1360 NW 30 1N 1W SL 

430011 



Not Reported 

P 

19590505 

UT4000000205151 

TC02814573.1r Page A-30


Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

N55 

ENE 

1 - 2 Miles 

Higher 

Database 

UT WELLS 

EDR ID Number 

UT4000000204621 

Wrnum: 

Type: 

Status: 

Uses: 

Cfs: 

Acft: 

Location: 

Win: 

Owner: 

Source: 

9759016M00 

Underground 

APPLAPP 

Not Reported 

0 

0 

N2309 W2886 SE 28 1N 1W SL 

17049 


Non-Production Well: 

Chexnum: 

Summary st: 

Priority: 

Site id: 

Not Reported 

A 

Not Reported 

UT4000000204621 

N56 

ENE 

1 - 2 Miles 

Higher 

UT WELLS 

UT4000000204622 

Wrnum: 

Type: 

Status: 

Uses: 

Cfs: 

Acft: 

Location: 

Win: 

Owner: 

Source: 

9857001M00 

Underground 

APPLAPP 

Not Reported 

0 

0 

N2309 W2886 SE 28 1N 1W SL 

17014 



Chexnum: 

Summary st: 

Priority: 

Site id: 

Not Reported 

A 

Not Reported 

UT4000000204622 

O57 

WSW 

1 - 2 Miles 

Lower 

UT WELLS 

UT4000000203198 

Wrnum: 

Type: 

Status: 

Uses: 

Cfs: 

Acft: 

Location: 

Win: 

Owner: 

Source: 

57-10282 

Chexnum: 

Underground 

Summary st: 

APPLREJ 

Priority: 

DIMOSX 

0 

143758 

N2530 E1280 SW 31 1N 1W SL 

0 



Not Reported 

T 

20010523 

UT4000000203198 

O58 

WSW 

1 - 2 Miles 

Lower 

UT WELLS 

UT4000000203199 

TC02814573.1r Page A-31


Wrnum: 

Type: 

Status: 

Uses: 

Cfs: 

Acft: 

Location: 

Win: 

Owner: 

Source: 

59-5821 

Underground 

APPLUNAP 

DIS 

0 

56880 

N2530 E1280 SW 31 1N 1W SL 

0 



Chexnum: 

Summary st: 

Priority: 

Site id: 

Not Reported 

U 

20060222 

UT4000000203199 

59 

SSW 

1 - 2 Miles 

Lower 

UT WELLS 

UT4000000202506 

Wrnum: 

Type: 

Status: 

Uses: 

Cfs: 

Acft: 

Location: 

Win: 

Owner: 

Source: 

59-55 

Chexnum: 

Surface 

Summary st: 

APPLTERM 

Priority: 

Not Reported 

16.33 

0 

0 E1628 S4 31 1N 1W SL 

0 


Williams Lake 

Site id: 

Not Reported 

T 

19290731 

UT4000000202506 

60 

NE 

1 - 2 Miles 

Higher 

UT WELLS 

UT4000000205524 

Wrnum: 

Type: 

Status: 

Uses: 

Cfs: 

Acft: 

Location: 

Win: 

Owner: 

Source: 

59-163 

Underground 

APPLNPR 

DIMOS 

.015 

0 

N735 E140 SW 21 1N 1W SL 

7894 



Chexnum: 

Summary st: 

Priority: 

Site id: 

Not Reported 

P 

19400824 

UT4000000205524 

N61 

ENE 

1 - 2 Miles 

Lower 

UT WELLS 

UT4000000204633 

Wrnum: 

Type: 

Status: 

Uses: 

Cfs: 

Acft: 

Location: 

Win: 

Owner: 

Source: 

9759016M00 

Underground 

APPLAPP 

Not Reported 

0 

0 

N2348 W2655 SE 28 1N 1W SL 

17048 



Chexnum: 

Summary st: 

Priority: 

Site id: 

Not Reported 

A 

Not Reported 

UT4000000204633 

TC02814573.1r Page A-32


Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

62 

SSW 

1 - 2 Miles 

Lower 

Database 

UT WELLS 

EDR ID Number 

UT4000000202620 

Wrnum: 

Type: 

Status: 

Uses: 

Cfs: 

Acft: 

Location: 

Win: 

Owner: 

Source: 

59-5384 

Chexnum: 

Surface 

Summary st: 

TEMPEXP 

Priority: 

O 

.03 

0 

N272 E712 S4 31 1N 1W SL 

0 

MOUNTAIN FUEL SUPPLY COMPANY 

Goggin Drain 

Site id: 

Not Reported 

T 

19930122 

UT4000000202620 

P63 

East 

1 - 2 Miles 

Lower 

UT WELLS 

UT4000000204510 

Wrnum: 

Type: 

Status: 

Uses: 

Cfs: 

Acft: 

Location: 

Win: 

Owner: 

Source: 

9759016M00 

Underground 

APPLAPP 

Not Reported 

0 

0 

N1847 W2549 SE 28 1N 1W SL 

17046 



Chexnum: 

Summary st: 

Priority: 

Site id: 

Not Reported 

A 

Not Reported 

UT4000000204510 

N64 

ENE 

1 - 2 Miles 

Higher 

UT WELLS 

UT4000000204604 

Wrnum: 

Type: 

Status: 

Uses: 

Cfs: 

Acft: 

Location: 

Win: 

Owner: 

Source: 

9759016M00 

Underground 

APPLAPP 

Not Reported 

0 

0 

N2254 W2568 SE 28 1N 1W SL 

17047 



Chexnum: 

Summary st: 

Priority: 

Site id: 

Not Reported 

A 

Not Reported 

UT4000000204604 

Q65 

NE 

1 - 2 Miles 

Higher 

FED USGS 

USGS3039432 

TC02814573.1r Page A-33


Agency cd: 

USGS 

Site no: 

404806111580301 

Site name: 

(B- 1- 1)20dda- 1 

Latitude: 

404806 

EDR Site id: 

USGS3039432 

Longitude: 

1115803 

Dec lat: 

40.80161209 

Dec lon: 

-111.96827251 

Coor meth: 

M 

Coor accr: 

T 


NAD27 


District: 

49 

State: 

49 

County: 

035 

Country: 

US 

Land net: 

NESESES20 T01N R01W S 

Location map: 

SALT LAKE CITY NORTH Map scale: 

24000 

Altitude: 

4223.00 






Hydrologic: 


Topographic: 

Not Reported 

Site type: 


19751010 




Type of ground water site: Single well, other than collector or Ranney type 

Aquifer Type: 

Not Reported 

Aquifer: 

Not Reported 

Well depth: 

360 

Hole depth: 

360 



Not Reported 

Real time data flag: Not Reported 

Daily flow data begin date: Not Reported 

Daily flow data end date: Not Reported 

Daily flow data count: Not Reported 

Peak flow data begin date: Not Reported 

Peak flow data end date: Not Reported 

Peak flow data count: Not Reported 

Water quality data begin date: Not Reported 

Water quality data end date:Not Reported 

Water quality data count: Not Reported 

Ground water data begin date: Not Reported 

Ground water data end date: Not Reported 

Ground water data count: Not Reported 


Q66 

NNE 

1 - 2 Miles 

Higher 

UT WELLS 

UT4000000205571 

Wrnum: 

Type: 

Status: 

Uses: 

Cfs: 

Acft: 

Location: 

Win: 

Owner: 

Source: 

59-174 

Underground 

APPLCERT 

DIMOS 

.008 

0 

N1200 W190 SE 20 1N 1W SL 

7886 



Chexnum: 

Summary st: 

Priority: 

Site id: 

Not Reported 

P 

19400620 

UT4000000205571 

67 

ENE 

1 - 2 Miles 

Lower 

FRDS PWS 

UT4902290 

TC02814573.1r Page A-34


PWS ID: 

Date Initiated: 

PWS Name: 

UT4902290 

7706 

Date Deactivated: 

SILVER CREEK CORP. 

Not Reported 

Addressee / Facility: 

Not Reported 

Facility Latitude: 

City Served: 

Treatment Class: 

40 47 36 

SILVER CREEK JU 

Untreated 

Facility Longitude: 

Population: 

111 57 30 

00000025 

Violations information not reported. 

R68 

WNW 

1 - 2 Miles 

Lower 

UT WELLS 

UT4000000204768 

Wrnum: 

Type: 

Status: 

Uses: 

Cfs: 

Acft: 

Location: 

Win: 

Owner: 

Source: 

57-10282 

Chexnum: 

Underground 

Summary st: 

APPLREJ 

Priority: 

DIMOSX 

0 

143758 

N2730 E0 SW 30 1N 1W SL 

0 



Not Reported 

T 

20010523 

UT4000000204768 

R69 

WNW 

1 - 2 Miles 

Lower 

UT WELLS 

UT4000000204769 

Wrnum: 

Type: 

Status: 

Uses: 

Cfs: 

Acft: 

Location: 

Win: 

Owner: 

Source: 

59-5821 

Underground 

APPLUNAP 

DIS 

0 

56880 

N2730 E0 SW 30 1N 1W SL 

0 



Chexnum: 

Summary st: 

Priority: 

Site id: 

Not Reported 

U 

20060222 

UT4000000204769 

S70 

SW 

1 - 2 Miles 

Lower 

UT WELLS 

UT4000000202958 

Wrnum: 

Type: 

Status: 

Uses: 

Cfs: 

Acft: 

Location: 

Win: 

Owner: 

Source: 

57-10282 

Chexnum: 

Underground 

Summary st: 

APPLREJ 

Priority: 

DIMOSX 

0 

143758 

N1600 E1390 SW 31 1N 1W SL 

0 



Not Reported 

T 

20010523 

UT4000000202958 

TC02814573.1r Page A-35


Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

S71 

SW 

1 - 2 Miles 

Lower 

Database 

UT WELLS 

EDR ID Number 

UT4000000202959 

Wrnum: 

Type: 

Status: 

Uses: 

Cfs: 

Acft: 

Location: 

Win: 

Owner: 

Source: 

59-5821 

Underground 

APPLUNAP 

DIS 

0 

56880 

N1600 E1390 SW 31 1N 1W SL 

0 



Chexnum: 

Summary st: 

Priority: 

Site id: 

Not Reported 

U 

20060222 

UT4000000202959 

T72 

NNW 

1 - 2 Miles 

Higher 

UT WELLS 

UT4000000205742 

Wrnum: 

Type: 

Status: 

Uses: 

Cfs: 

Acft: 

Location: 

Win: 

Owner: 

Source: 

59-2924 

Underground 

UGWCDIS 

Not Reported 

.111 

0 

S242 W169 E4 19 1N 1W SL 

0 

THOMAS E. JEREMY 


Chexnum: 

Summary st: 

Priority: 

Site id: 

Not Reported 

T 

1899 

UT4000000205742 

T73 

NNW 

1 - 2 Miles 

Higher 

UT WELLS 

UT4000000205743 

Wrnum: 

Type: 

Status: 

Uses: 

Cfs: 

Acft: 

Location: 

Win: 

Owner: 

Source: 

59-3668 

Underground 

UGWCDIS 

Not Reported 

.022 

0 

S242 W169 E4 19 1N 1W SL 

0 

GRACE J. CASSADAY 


Chexnum: 

Summary st: 

Priority: 

Site id: 

Not Reported 

T 

1900 

UT4000000205743 

U74 

East 

1 - 2 Miles 

Lower 

UT WELLS 

UT4000000204242 

TC02814573.1r Page A-36


Wrnum: 

Type: 

Status: 

Uses: 

Cfs: 

Acft: 

Location: 

Win: 

Owner: 

Source: 

0459009M00 

Underground 

APPLAPP 

Not Reported 

0 

0 

N290 W2210 SE 28 1N 1W SL 

0 



Chexnum: 

Summary st: 

Priority: 

Site id: 

Not Reported 

A 

20040521 

UT4000000204242 

U75 

East 

1 - 2 Miles 

Lower 

UT WELLS 

UT4000000204243 

Wrnum: 

Type: 

Status: 

Uses: 

Cfs: 

Acft: 

Location: 

Win: 

Owner: 

Source: 

0459009M00 

Underground 

APPLAPP 

Not Reported 

0 

0 

N290 W2210 SE 28 1N 1W SL 

29674 



Chexnum: 

Summary st: 

Priority: 

Site id: 

Not Reported 

A 

20040521 

UT4000000204243 

R76 

WNW 

1 - 2 Miles 

Lower 

UT WELLS 

UT4000000204837 

Wrnum: 

Type: 

Status: 

Uses: 

Cfs: 

Acft: 

Location: 

Win: 

Owner: 

Source: 

55-AREA 

Chexnum: 

Return 

Summary st: 

APPLEXP 

Priority: 

O 

0 

65 

S2200 0 NW 30 1N 1W SL 

0 


Welby Jacobs Water Users CanalSite id: 

t91-55-39 

T 

19910813 

UT4000000204837 

77 

WSW 

1 - 2 Miles 

Lower 

UT WELLS 

UT4000000203152 

Wrnum: 

Type: 

Status: 

Uses: 

Cfs: 

Acft: 

Location: 

Win: 

Owner: 

Source: 

59-4448 

Chexnum: 

Underground 

Summary st: 

APPLLAP 

Priority: 

IO 

2 

0 

S2850 E610 NW 31 1N 1W SL 

1749 

SLICCAMA C/O BONNEVILLE REALTY MANAGEMENT 

Underground Water Wells Site id: 

Not Reported 

T 

19920602 

UT4000000203152 

TC02814573.1r Page A-37


Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

R78 

WNW 

1 - 2 Miles 

Lower 

Database 

UT WELLS 

EDR ID Number 

UT4000000204804 

Wrnum: 

Type: 

Status: 

Uses: 

Cfs: 

Acft: 

Location: 

Win: 

Owner: 

Source: 

57-10289 

Chexnum: 

Return 

Summary st: 

TEMPLAP 

Priority: 

O 

0 

48.97 

N2960 W50 SE 25 1N 2W SL 

0 


Jordan River (Surplus Canal) Site id: 

Not Reported 

T 

20020322 

UT4000000204804 

R79 

WNW 

1 - 2 Miles 

Lower 

UT WELLS 

UT4000000204805 

Wrnum: 

Type: 

Status: 

Uses: 

Cfs: 

Acft: 

Location: 

Win: 

Owner: 

Source: 

57-10289 

Chexnum: 

Surface 

Summary st: 

TEMPLAP 

Priority: 

O 

0 

48.97 

N2960 W50 SE 25 1N 2W SL 

0 


Jordan River (Surplus Canal) Site id: 

Not Reported 

T 

20020322 

UT4000000204805 

V80 

WNW 

1 - 2 Miles 

Lower 

UT WELLS 

UT4000000204853 

Wrnum: 

Type: 

Status: 

Uses: 

Cfs: 

Acft: 

Location: 

Win: 

Owner: 

Source: 

59-5322 

Chexnum: 

Return 

Summary st: 

TEMPEXP 

Priority: 

O 

0 

14 

N500 0 E4 25 1N 2W SL 

0 


Surplus Canal 

Site id: 

Not Reported 

T 

19910211 

UT4000000204853 

V81 

WNW 

1 - 2 Miles 

Lower 

UT WELLS 

UT4000000204854 

TC02814573.1r Page A-38


Wrnum: 

Type: 

Status: 

Uses: 

Cfs: 

Acft: 

Location: 

Win: 

Owner: 

Source: 

59-5322 

Chexnum: 

Surface 

Summary st: 

TEMPEXP 

Priority: 

O 

0 

14 

N500 0 E4 25 1N 2W SL 

0 


Surplus Canal 

Site id: 

Not Reported 

T 

19910211 

UT4000000204854 

V82 

WNW 

1 - 2 Miles 

Lower 

UT WELLS 

UT4000000204855 

Wrnum: 

Type: 

Status: 

Uses: 

Cfs: 

Acft: 

Location: 

Win: 

Owner: 

Source: 

59-5330 

Chexnum: 

Surface 

Summary st: 

TEMPEXP 

Priority: 

O 

0 

80 

N500 0 E4 25 1N 2W SL 

0 


Jordan River - Surplus Canal Site id: 

Not Reported 

T 

19910802 

UT4000000204855 

P83 

East 

1 - 2 Miles 

Higher 

UT WELLS 

UT4000000204570 

Wrnum: 

Type: 

Status: 

Uses: 

Cfs: 

Acft: 

Location: 

Win: 

Owner: 

Source: 

9759016M00 

Underground 

APPLAPP 

Not Reported 

0 

0 

N1990 W2200 SE 28 1N 1W SL 

16573 



Chexnum: 

Summary st: 

Priority: 

Site id: 

Not Reported 

A 

Not Reported 

UT4000000204570 

W84 

SE 

1 - 2 Miles 

Lower 

UT WELLS 

UT4000000202681 

Wrnum: 

Type: 

Status: 

Uses: 

Cfs: 

Acft: 

Location: 

Win: 

Owner: 

Source: 

59-187 

Chexnum: 

Underground 

Summary st: 

APPLCERT 

Priority: 

DI 

.011 

0 

N490 E440 SW 33 1N 1W SL 

0 

NORTH TEMPLE INVESTMENT 


Not Reported 

P 

19400812 

UT4000000202681 

TC02814573.1r Page A-39


Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

W85 

SE 

1 - 2 Miles 

Lower 

Database 

UT WELLS 

EDR ID Number 

UT4000000202664 

Wrnum: 

Type: 

Status: 

Uses: 

Cfs: 

Acft: 

Location: 

Win: 

Owner: 

Source: 

59-1211 

Chexnum: 

Underground 

Summary st: 

APPLNPR 

Priority: 

DI 

.015 

0 

N420 E400 SW 33 1N 1W SL 

0 



Not Reported 

P 

19550307 

UT4000000202664 

X86 

NNW 

1 - 2 Miles 

Higher 

UT WELLS 

UT4000000205805 

Wrnum: 

Type: 

Status: 

Uses: 

Cfs: 

Acft: 

Location: 

Win: 

Owner: 

Source: 

59-3673 

Chexnum: 

Underground 

Summary st: 

UGWC 

Priority: 

DIMOS 

.022 

0 

N140 W130 E4 19 1N 1W SL 

0 



Not Reported 

P 

1900 

UT4000000205805 

X87 

NNW 

1 - 2 Miles 

Higher 

UT WELLS 

UT4000000205806 

Wrnum: 

Type: 

Status: 

Uses: 

Cfs: 

Acft: 

Location: 

Win: 

Owner: 

Source: 

59-3749 

Chexnum: 

Underground 

Summary st: 

UGWC 

Priority: 

DIMOS 

.022 

0 

N140 W130 E4 19 1N 1W SL 

0 



Not Reported 

P 

1900 

UT4000000205806 

W88 

SE 

1 - 2 Miles 

Lower 

UT WELLS 

UT4000000202557 

TC02814573.1r Page A-40


Wrnum: 

Type: 

Status: 

Uses: 

Cfs: 

Acft: 

Location: 

Win: 

Owner: 

Source: 

59-2349 

Chexnum: 

Underground 

Summary st: 

UGWC 

Priority: 

S 

.045 

0 

N225 E705 SW 33 1N 1W SL 

0 



Not Reported 

P 

18740000 

UT4000000202557 

89 

WSW 

1 - 2 Miles 

Lower 

UT WELLS 

UT4000000203089 

Wrnum: 

Type: 

Status: 

Uses: 

Cfs: 

Acft: 

Location: 

Win: 

Owner: 

Source: 

59-4448 

Chexnum: 

Underground 

Summary st: 

APPLLAP 

Priority: 

IO 

2 

0 

S3180 E220 NW 31 1N 1W SL 

0 

SLICCAMA C/O BONNEVILLE REALTY MANAGEMENT 

Underground Water Wells Site id: 

Not Reported 

T 

19920602 

UT4000000203089 

Y90 

East 

1 - 2 Miles 

Lower 

UT WELLS 

UT4000000204006 

Wrnum: 

Type: 

Status: 

Uses: 

Cfs: 

Acft: 

Location: 

Win: 

Owner: 

Source: 

0859007M00 

Chexnum: 

Underground 

Summary st: 

APPLAPP 

Priority: 

Not Reported 

0 

0 

S600 E1044 N4 33 1N 1W SL 

431714 

QUESTAR GAS, JUSTIN WITHERS 


Not Reported 

A 

20080729 

UT4000000204006 

91 

East 

1 - 2 Miles 

Lower 

FED USGS 

USGS3039412 

TC02814573.1r Page A-41


Agency cd: 

USGS 

Site no: 

404710111570701 

Site name: 

(B- 1- 1)28dca- 1 

Latitude: 

404716 

EDR Site id: 

USGS3039412 

Longitude: 

1115712 

Dec lat: 

40.78772339 

Dec lon: 

-111.95410522 

Coor meth: 

M 

Coor accr: 

F 


NAD27 


District: 

49 

State: 

49 

County: 

035 

Country: 

US 

Land net: 

Not Reported 

Location map: 

S.L.C. NORTH 

Map scale: 

24000 

Altitude: 

4215.00 






Hydrologic: 


Topographic: 

Not Reported 

Site type: 


19820101 





Aquifer Type: 

Not Reported 

Aquifer: 

Not Reported 

Well depth: 

14.7 

Hole depth: 

14.7 



1464915011 















Date 

Feet below 

Surface 

Feet to 

Sealevel 

Date 

Feet below 

Surface 

Feet to 

Sealevel 

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

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

1990-05-03 4.6 1983-04-13 2.5 

1983-03-29 1.8 1983-03-10 2.7 

1983-02-25 2.9 1983-02-04 2.7 

1983-01-21 3.2 1982-12-27 2.6 

1982-11-16 4.6 1982-10-14 3.0 

1982-09-22 2.2 1982-09-16 4.1 

1982-08-25 4.7 1982-08-09 4.3 

1982-07-28 4.75 1982-07-13 4.2 

1982-06-15 3.9 1982-05-25 3.4 

1982-04-30 3.5 1982-04-09 2.5 

1982-03-02 4.4 1982-02-02 4.5 

Y92 

East 

1 - 2 Miles 

Lower 

UT WELLS 

UT4000000204007 

TC02814573.1r Page A-42


Wrnum: 

Type: 

Status: 

Uses: 

Cfs: 

Acft: 

Location: 

Win: 

Owner: 

Source: 

0859007M00 

Chexnum: 

Underground 

Summary st: 

APPLAPP 

Priority: 

Not Reported 

0 

0 

S600 E1069 N4 33 1N 1W SL 

431713 

QUESTAR GAS, JUSTIN WITHERS 


Not Reported 

A 

20080729 

UT4000000204007 

Z93 

SSE 

1 - 2 Miles 

Higher 

UT WELLS 

UT4000000202135 

Wrnum: 

Type: 

Status: 

Uses: 

Cfs: 

Acft: 

Location: 

Win: 

Owner: 

Source: 

59-179 

Chexnum: 

Underground 

Summary st: 

APPLCERT 

Priority: 

DIMOS 

.007 

0 

N1656 W240 E4 05 1S 1W SL 

726 



Not Reported 

P 

19400718 

UT4000000202135 

94 

SW 

1 - 2 Miles 

Lower 

FED USGS 

USGS3060543 

Agency cd: 

Site name: 

Latitude: 

Longitude: 

Dec lon: 

Coor accr: 


State: 

Country: 

Location map: 

Altitude: 




Hydrologic: 

Topographic: 

Site type: 




Aquifer Type: 

Aquifer: 

Well depth: 






USGS 

Site no: 

(B- 1- 1)31ccb- 1 

404619 

EDR Site id: 

1120013 

Dec lat: 

-112.00438435 

Coor meth: 

T 


NAD83 

District: 

49 

County: 

US 

Land net: 

SALTAIR 

Map scale: 

4225.00 


10 



Not Reported 


Not Reported 


Y 

Single well, other than collector or Ranney type 

Not Reported 

Not Reported 

600 

Hole depth: 

Not Reported 

Not Reported 

Not Reported 


Not Reported 


Not Reported 


404619112001301 

USGS3060543 

40.77189 

M 

NAD27 

49 

035 

NWSWSWS31 T01N R01W S 

24000 

19760510 

MST 

600 

Not Reported 

Not Reported 

Not Reported 

TC02814573.1r Page A-43










Z95 

SSE 

1 - 2 Miles 

Higher 

UT WELLS 

UT4000000202119 

Wrnum: 

Type: 

Status: 

Uses: 

Cfs: 

Acft: 

Location: 

Win: 

Owner: 

Source: 

59-1353 

Chexnum: 

Underground 

Summary st: 

APPLCERT 

Priority: 

DIOS 

.104 

0 

N1555 W310 E4 05 1S 1W SL 

729 


Utah Wool Pulling Company Site id: 

Not Reported 

P 

19580128 

UT4000000202119 

Z96 

SSE 

1 - 2 Miles 

Higher 

UT WELLS 

UT4000000202130 

Wrnum: 

Type: 

Status: 

Uses: 

Cfs: 

Acft: 

Location: 

Win: 

Owner: 

Source: 

59-1040 

Chexnum: 

Underground 

Summary st: 

APPLDIS 

Priority: 

Not Reported 

.015 

0 

S1010 W145 NE 05 1S 1W SL 

733 



Not Reported 

T 

Not Reported 

UT4000000202130 

Z97 

SSE 

1 - 2 Miles 

Higher 

UT WELLS 

UT4000000202117 

Wrnum: 

Type: 

Status: 

Uses: 

Cfs: 

Acft: 

Location: 

Win: 

Owner: 

Source: 

59-1353 

Chexnum: 

Underground 

Summary st: 

APPLCERT 

Priority: 

DIOS 

.104 

0 

N1545 W290 E4 05 1S 1W SL 

732 


Utah Wool Pulling Company Site id: 

Not Reported 

P 

19580128 

UT4000000202117 

TC02814573.1r Page A-44


Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Z98 

SSE 

1 - 2 Miles 

Higher 

Database 

FED USGS 

EDR ID Number 

USGS3039531 

Agency cd: 

USGS 

Site no: 

404559111580501 

Site name: 

(C- 1- 1) 5aad- 4 

Latitude: 

404559 

EDR Site id: 

USGS3039531 

Longitude: 

1115805 

Dec lat: 

40.76633464 

Dec lon: 

-111.96882761 

Coor meth: 

M 

Coor accr: 

F 


NAD27 


District: 

49 

State: 

49 

County: 

035 

Country: 

US 

Land net: 

Not Reported 

Location map: 

SLC NORTH 

Map scale: 

24000 

Altitude: 

4222.00 






Hydrologic: 


Topographic: 

Not Reported 

Site type: 


19580401 





Aquifer Type: 

Not Reported 

Aquifer: 

VALLEY FILL 

Well depth: 

660 

Hole depth: 

Not Reported 

Source of depth data: owner 


1464915001 















99 

North 

1 - 2 Miles 

Higher 

UT WELLS 

UT4000000205988 

Wrnum: 

Type: 

Status: 

Uses: 

Cfs: 

Acft: 

Location: 

Win: 

Owner: 

Source: 

59-1030 

Chexnum: 

Underground 

Summary st: 

APPLDIS 

Priority: 

Not Reported 

.015 

0 

S1600 E1460 NW 20 1N 1W SL 

7890 



Not Reported 

T 

19520710 

UT4000000205988 

TC02814573.1r Page A-45


Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

Z100 

SSE 

1 - 2 Miles 

Higher 

Database 

UT WELLS 

EDR ID Number 

UT4000000202118 

Wrnum: 

Type: 

Status: 

Uses: 

Cfs: 

Acft: 

Location: 

Win: 

Owner: 

Source: 

59-1090 

Chexnum: 

Underground 

Summary st: 

APPLCERT 

Priority: 

DIMOS 

.082 

0 

N1545 W200 E4 05 1S 1W SL 

730 



Not Reported 

P 

19551201 

UT4000000202118 

Z101 

SSE 

1 - 2 Miles 

Higher 

UT WELLS 

UT4000000202113 

Wrnum: 

Type: 

Status: 

Uses: 

Cfs: 

Acft: 

Location: 

Win: 

Owner: 

Source: 

59-1549 

Chexnum: 

Underground 

Summary st: 

APPLCERT 

Priority: 

DIMOS 

.222 

0 

N1530 W230 E4 05 1S 1W SL 

740 



Not Reported 

P 

19600116 

UT4000000202113 

Z102 

SSE 

1 - 2 Miles 

Higher 

UT WELLS 

UT4000000202110 

Wrnum: 

Type: 

Status: 

Uses: 

Cfs: 

Acft: 

Location: 

Win: 

Owner: 

Source: 

59-1549 

Chexnum: 

Underground 

Summary st: 

APPLCERT 

Priority: 

DIMOS 

.222 

0 

N1515 W215 E4 05 1S 1W SL 

739 



Not Reported 

P 

19600116 

UT4000000202110 

Z103 

SSE 

1 - 2 Miles 

Higher 

UT WELLS 

UT4000000202107 

TC02814573.1r Page A-46


Wrnum: 

Type: 

Status: 

Uses: 

Cfs: 

Acft: 

Location: 

Win: 

Owner: 

Source: 

59-1549 

Chexnum: 

Underground 

Summary st: 

APPLCERT 

Priority: 

DIMOS 

.222 

0 

N1509 W193 E4 05 1S 1W SL 

738 



Not Reported 

P 

19600116 

UT4000000202107 

104 

SE 

1 - 2 Miles 

Lower 

UT WELLS 

UT4000000202851 

Wrnum: 

Type: 

Status: 

Uses: 

Cfs: 

Acft: 

Location: 

Win: 

Owner: 

Source: 

59-2487 

Underground 

UGWCDIS 

Not Reported 

.036 

0 

N1067 W120 S4 33 1N 1W SL 

0 



Chexnum: 

Summary st: 

Priority: 

Site id: 

Not Reported 

T 

19080500 

UT4000000202851 

105 

North 

1 - 2 Miles 

Higher 

UT WELLS 

UT4000000205990 

Wrnum: 

Type: 

Status: 

Uses: 

Cfs: 

Acft: 

Location: 

Win: 

Owner: 

Source: 

59-1021 

Underground 

APPLNPR 

DI 

.015 

0 

S1570 W90 NE 19 1N 1W SL 

0 

JACK A. BRADSHAW 


Chexnum: 

Summary st: 

Priority: 

Site id: 

Not Reported 

P 

19520526 

UT4000000205990 

AA106 

SSE 

1 - 2 Miles 

Lower 

UT WELLS 

UT4000000202060 

Wrnum: 

Type: 

Status: 

Uses: 

Cfs: 

Acft: 

Location: 

Win: 

Owner: 

Source: 

59-3437 

Chexnum: 

Rediversion 

Summary st: 

APPLUNAP 

Priority: 

DIMOS 

0 

100000 

S1300 E200 NW 04 1S 1W SL 

0 

CENTRAL UTAH WATER CONSERVANCY DISTRICT 

Jordan River 

Site id: 

Not Reported 

U 

19671102 

UT4000000202060 

TC02814573.1r Page A-47


Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

AA107 

SSE 

1 - 2 Miles 

Lower 

Database 

UT WELLS 

EDR ID Number 

UT4000000202061 

Wrnum: 

Type: 

Status: 

Uses: 

Cfs: 

Acft: 

Location: 

Win: 

Owner: 

Source: 

59-4616 

Chexnum: 

Rediversion 

Summary st: 

APPLUNAP 

Priority: 

Not Reported 

0 

100000 

S1300 E200 NW 04 1S 1W SL 

0 

CENTRAL UTAH WATER CONSERVANCY DISTRICT 

Jordan River 

Site id: 

Not Reported 

U 

19671102 

UT4000000202061 

AB108 

ESE 

1 - 2 Miles 

Lower 

UT WELLS 

UT4000000203913 

Wrnum: 

Type: 

Status: 

Uses: 

Cfs: 

Acft: 

Location: 

Win: 

Owner: 

Source: 

9255001M00 

Underground 

APPLAPP 

Not Reported 

0 

0 

S900 W800 NE 33 1N 1W SL 

1642 



Chexnum: 

Summary st: 

Priority: 

Site id: 

Not Reported 

A 

Not Reported 

UT4000000203913 

109 

WSW 

1 - 2 Miles 

Lower 

UT WELLS 

UT4000000202997 

Wrnum: 

Type: 

Status: 

Uses: 

Cfs: 

Acft: 

Location: 

Win: 

Owner: 

Source: 

59-3413 

Chexnum: 

Underground 

Summary st: 

APPLLAPD 

Priority: 

Not Reported 

.03 

0 

N1850 W750 SE 36 1N 2W SL 

0 

ROBERT B. & PETER B. SWANER 


Not Reported 

T 

19661129 

UT4000000202997 

110 

NE 

1 - 2 Miles 

Higher 

UT WELLS 

UT4000000205796 

TC02814573.1r Page A-48


Wrnum: 

Type: 

Status: 

Uses: 

Cfs: 

Acft: 

Location: 

Win: 

Owner: 

Source: 

59-1029 

Chexnum: 

Underground 

Summary st: 

APPLDIS 

Priority: 

Not Reported 

.015 

0 

S2640 E1000 NW 21 1N 1W SL 

7893 



Not Reported 

T 

19520710 

UT4000000205796 

AB111 

ESE 

1 - 2 Miles 

Lower 

UT WELLS 

UT4000000203842 

Wrnum: 

Type: 

Status: 

Uses: 

Cfs: 

Acft: 

Location: 

Win: 

Owner: 

Source: 

9255001M00 

Underground 

APPLAPP 

Not Reported 

0 

0 

S1100 W750 NE 33 1N 1W SL 

1653 



Chexnum: 

Summary st: 

Priority: 

Site id: 

Not Reported 

A 

Not Reported 

UT4000000203842 

112 

SW 

1 - 2 Miles 

Lower 

UT WELLS 

UT4000000202801 

Wrnum: 

Type: 

Status: 

Uses: 

Cfs: 

Acft: 

Location: 

Win: 

Owner: 

Source: 

59-4126 

Underground 

APPLCERT 

I 

1.7 

537.399 

N857 W232 SE 36 1N 2W SL 

1748 

SLICCAMA 


Chexnum: 

Summary st: 

Priority: 

Site id: 

Not Reported 

P 

19750319 

UT4000000202801 

AC113 

ENE 

1 - 2 Miles 

Lower 

UT WELLS 

UT4000000205422 

Wrnum: 

Type: 

Status: 

Uses: 

Cfs: 

Acft: 

Location: 

Win: 

Owner: 

Source: 

59-2715 

Underground 

UGWC 

S 

.022 

0 

N25 E900 S4 21 1N 1W SL 

0 

EDWARD L. GILLMOR 


Chexnum: 

Summary st: 

Priority: 

Site id: 

Not Reported 

P 

1891 

UT4000000205422 

TC02814573.1r Page A-49


Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

AC114 

ENE 

1 - 2 Miles 

Lower 

Database 

UT WELLS 

EDR ID Number 

UT4000000205423 

Wrnum: 

Type: 

Status: 

Uses: 

Cfs: 

Acft: 

Location: 

Win: 

Owner: 

Source: 

59-3564 

Underground 

UGWC 

S 

.015 

0 

N25 E900 S4 21 1N 1W SL 

0 

EDWARD LESLIE GILLMOR 


Chexnum: 

Summary st: 

Priority: 

Site id: 

Not Reported 

P 

1891 

UT4000000205423 

AC115 

ENE 

1 - 2 Miles 

Lower 

UT WELLS 

UT4000000205424 

Wrnum: 

Type: 

Status: 

Uses: 

Cfs: 

Acft: 

Location: 

Win: 

Owner: 

Source: 

59-3650 

Underground 

UGWC 

S 

.015 

0 

N25 E900 S4 21 1N 1W SL 

0 

CHARLES F. GILLMOR 


Chexnum: 

Summary st: 

Priority: 

Site id: 

Not Reported 

P 

1891 

UT4000000205424 

AD116 

ESE 

1 - 2 Miles 

Lower 

UT WELLS 

UT4000000203604 

Wrnum: 

Type: 

Status: 

Uses: 

Cfs: 

Acft: 

Location: 

Win: 

Owner: 

Source: 

59-5422 

Chexnum: 

Underground 

Summary st: 

FIXDLAP 

Priority: 

O 

.223 

0 

N875 W750 E4 33 1N 1W SL 

0 

UNISYS CORPORATION SALT LAKE CITY 

Underground Water Well & trenches(3) Site id: 

Not Reported 

T 

19980506 

UT4000000203604 

117 

ESE 

1 - 2 Miles 

Lower 

UT WELLS 

UT4000000203337 

TC02814573.1r Page A-50


Wrnum: 

Type: 

Status: 

Uses: 

Cfs: 

Acft: 

Location: 

Win: 

Owner: 

Source: 

59-5422 

Chexnum: 

Underground 

Summary st: 

FIXDLAP 

Priority: 

O 

.223 

0 

N330 W850 E4 33 1N 1W SL 

0 



Not Reported 

T 

19980506 

UT4000000203337 

AD118 

ESE 

1 - 2 Miles 

Lower 

UT WELLS 

UT4000000203640 

Wrnum: 

Type: 

Status: 

Uses: 

Cfs: 

Acft: 

Location: 

Win: 

Owner: 

Source: 

59-5422 

Chexnum: 

Underground 

Summary st: 

FIXDLAP 

Priority: 

O 

.223 

0 

N1000 W600 E4 33 1N 1W SL 

0 



Not Reported 

T 

19980506 

UT4000000203640 

AD119 

ESE 

1 - 2 Miles 

Higher 

UT WELLS 

UT4000000203585 

Wrnum: 

Type: 

Status: 

Uses: 

Cfs: 

Acft: 

Location: 

Win: 

Owner: 

Source: 

59-5422 

Chexnum: 

Return 

Summary st: 

FIXDLAP 

Priority: 

O 

.223 

0 

N800 W600 E4 33 1N 1W SL 

0 



Not Reported 

T 

19980506 

UT4000000203585 

AC120 

ENE 

1 - 2 Miles 

Lower 

UT WELLS 

UT4000000205416 

Wrnum: 

Type: 

Status: 

Uses: 

Cfs: 

Acft: 

Location: 

Win: 

Owner: 

Source: 

59-3561 

Underground 

UGWC 

S 

.033 

0 

N15 E1260 S4 21 1N 1W SL 

0 



Chexnum: 

Summary st: 

Priority: 

Site id: 

Not Reported 

P 

1891 

UT4000000205416 

TC02814573.1r Page A-51


Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

AC121 

ENE 

1 - 2 Miles 

Lower 

Database 

UT WELLS 

EDR ID Number 

UT4000000205417 

Wrnum: 

Type: 

Status: 

Uses: 

Cfs: 

Acft: 

Location: 

Win: 

Owner: 

Source: 

59-3562 

Underground 

UGWC 

S 

.022 

0 

N15 E1260 S4 21 1N 1W SL 

0 

CHARLES F. GILLMOR 


Chexnum: 

Summary st: 

Priority: 

Site id: 

Not Reported 

P 

1891 

UT4000000205417 

AC122 

ENE 

1 - 2 Miles 

Lower 

UT WELLS 

UT4000000205418 

Wrnum: 

Type: 

Status: 

Uses: 

Cfs: 

Acft: 

Location: 

Win: 

Owner: 

Source: 

59-3563 

Underground 

UGWC 

S 

.022 

0 

N15 E1260 S4 21 1N 1W SL 

0 

EDWARD L. GILLMOR 


Chexnum: 

Summary st: 

Priority: 

Site id: 

Not Reported 

P 

1891 

UT4000000205418 

AE123 

WNW 

1 - 2 Miles 

Lower 

UT WELLS 

UT4000000204919 

Wrnum: 

Type: 

Status: 

Uses: 

Cfs: 

Acft: 

Location: 

Win: 

Owner: 

Source: 

57-10282 

Chexnum: 

Surface 

Summary st: 

APPLREJ 

Priority: 

DIMOSX 

0 

143758 

S1890 W1975 NE 25 1N 2W SL 

0 



Not Reported 

T 

20010523 

UT4000000204919 

AE124 

WNW 

1 - 2 Miles 

Lower 

UT WELLS 

UT4000000204920 

TC02814573.1r Page A-52


Wrnum: 

Type: 

Status: 

Uses: 

Cfs: 

Acft: 

Location: 

Win: 

Owner: 

Source: 

59-5821 

Surface 

APPLUNAP 

DIS 

0 

56880 

S1890 W1975 NE 25 1N 2W SL 

0 



Chexnum: 

Summary st: 

Priority: 

Site id: 

Not Reported 

U 

20060222 

UT4000000204920 

125 

ESE 

1 - 2 Miles 

Lower 

UT WELLS 

UT4000000202951 

Wrnum: 

Type: 

Status: 

Uses: 

Cfs: 

Acft: 

Location: 

Win: 

Owner: 

Source: 

59-3121 

Chexnum: 

Underground 

Summary st: 

UGWCDIS 

Priority: 

Not Reported 

.223 

0 

N1590 W1394 SE 33 1N 1W SL 

0 



Not Reported 

T 

19320000 

UT4000000202951 

AF126 

SE 

1 - 2 Miles 

Lower 

UT WELLS 

UT4000000202672 

Wrnum: 

Type: 

Status: 

Uses: 

Cfs: 

Acft: 

Location: 

Win: 

Owner: 

Source: 

0859010M00 

Underground 

APPLAPP 

Not Reported 

0 

0 

N475 W2167 SE 33 1N 1W SL 

0 

STANTEC CONSULTING 


Chexnum: 

Summary st: 

Priority: 

Site id: 

Not Reported 

A 

20081030 

UT4000000202672 

AF127 

SE 

1 - 2 Miles 

Lower 

UT WELLS 

UT4000000202673 

Wrnum: 

Type: 

Status: 

Uses: 

Cfs: 

Acft: 

Location: 

Win: 

Owner: 

Source: 

0859010M00 

Underground 

APPLAPP 

Not Reported 

0 

0 

N475 W2167 SE 33 1N 1W SL 

432086 



Chexnum: 

Summary st: 

Priority: 

Site id: 

Not Reported 

A 

20081030 

UT4000000202673 

TC02814573.1r Page A-53


Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

AF128 

SE 

1 - 2 Miles 

Lower 

Database 

UT WELLS 

EDR ID Number 

UT4000000202708 

Wrnum: 

Type: 

Status: 

Uses: 

Cfs: 

Acft: 

Location: 

Win: 

Owner: 

Source: 

0859010M00 

Underground 

APPLAPP 

Not Reported 

0 

0 

N620 W1888 SE 33 1N 1W SL 

432087 



Chexnum: 

Summary st: 

Priority: 

Site id: 

Not Reported 

A 

20081030 

UT4000000202708 

AF129 

SE 

1 - 2 Miles 

Lower 

UT WELLS 

UT4000000202709 

Wrnum: 

Type: 

Status: 

Uses: 

Cfs: 

Acft: 

Location: 

Win: 

Owner: 

Source: 

0859010M00 

Underground 

APPLAPP 

Not Reported 

0 

0 

N620 W1888 SE 33 1N 1W SL 

0 



Chexnum: 

Summary st: 

Priority: 

Site id: 

Not Reported 

A 

20081030 

UT4000000202709 

AG130 

WSW 

1 - 2 Miles 

Lower 

FED USGS 

USGS3060552 

Agency cd: 

Site name: 

Latitude: 

Longitude: 

Dec lon: 

Coor accr: 


State: 

Country: 

Location map: 

Altitude: 




Hydrologic: 

Topographic: 

Site type: 


USGS 

Site no: 

(B- 1- 2)36abc- 1 

404651 

EDR Site id: 

1120050 

Dec lat: 

-112.01466255 

Coor meth: 

F 


NAD83 

District: 

49 

County: 

US 

Land net: 

SALTAIR 

Map scale: 

4220.00 


10 



Not Reported 


Not Reported 


404651112005001 

USGS3060552 

40.78077873 

M 

NAD27 

49 

035 

Not Reported 

24000 

19820101 

MST 

TC02814573.1r Page A-54



Type of ground water site: Test hole, not completed as a well 

Aquifer Type: 

Not Reported 

Aquifer: 

Not Reported 

Well depth: 

13.0 

Hole depth: 

Not Reported 



1464915011 















Date 

Feet below 

Surface 

Feet to 

Sealevel 

Date 

Feet below 

Surface 

Feet to 

Sealevel 

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

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

1989-10-25 7.64 1989-09-26 7.17 

1989-08-28 6.73 1989-07-24 6.16 

1989-06-27 6.72 1989-05-30 6.54 

1989-04-25 7.30 1989-03-28 6.94 

1989-02-14 7.29 1989-01-31 8.06 

1988-12-29 7.97 1988-11-01 6.43 

1988-09-29 6.91 1988-08-30 6.56 

1988-07-27 5.46 1988-06-28 6.50 

1988-05-31 6.82 1988-04-27 6.91 

1988-03-28 7.64 1988-02-16 7.14 

1987-11-30 7.32 1987-10-28 7.22 

1987-09-24 6.70 1987-07-30 7.64 

1987-03-30 6.97 1987-02-18 6.22 

1985-03-12 4.35 1985-02-05 7.69 

1984-12-05 7.26 1984-10-23 6.31 

1984-05-22 6.48 1984-05-10 5.66 

1984-04-26 5.52 1984-04-17 5.38 

1984-04-12 4.88 1984-04-03 4.80 

1984-03-28 5.58 1984-03-21 4.57 

1984-03-14 5.01 1984-03-07 4.90 

1984-02-27 6.29 1984-02-22 5.90 

1984-02-06 6.74 1983-09-13 7.10 

1983-08-23 6.60 1983-08-10 6.90 

1983-07-18 6.80 1983-06-28 6.92 

1983-06-23 6.92 1983-06-07 6.60 

1983-05-18 6.90 1983-05-09 6.70 

1983-04-13 6.0 1983-03-29 5.2 

1983-03-28 5.10 1983-03-10 6.2 

1983-03-07 6.44 1983-02-25 6.5 

1983-02-04 6.1 1983-02-01 6.18 

1983-01-21 7.1 1982-12-27 7.0 

1982-11-16 8.1 1982-10-14 7.1 

1982-09-29 6.0 1982-09-16 7.1 

1982-09-14 7.40 1982-08-25 7.3 

1982-08-09 7.6 1982-07-13 7.6 

1982-06-15 7.3 1982-04-30 7.5 

1982-04-09 7.2 1982-03-02 8.3 

1982-02-02 8.5 

TC02814573.1r Page A-55


Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

AH131 

SE 

1 - 2 Miles 

Lower 

Database 

UT WELLS 

EDR ID Number 

UT4000000202739 

Wrnum: 

Type: 

Status: 

Uses: 

Cfs: 

Acft: 

Location: 

Win: 

Owner: 

Source: 

9359004M00 

Chexnum: 

Underground 

Summary st: 

APPLAPP 

Priority: 

Not Reported 

0 

0 

N650 W1750 SE 33 1N 1W SL 

2696 

LITTON GUIDENCE AND CONTROL SYSTEMS 


Site id: 

Not Reported 

A 

Not Reported 

UT4000000202739 

132 

ESE 

1 - 2 Miles 

Lower 

UT WELLS 

UT4000000203353 

Wrnum: 

Type: 

Status: 

Uses: 

Cfs: 

Acft: 

Location: 

Win: 

Owner: 

Source: 

59-5422 

Chexnum: 

Underground 

Summary st: 

FIXDLAP 

Priority: 

O 

.223 

0 

N350 W450 E4 33 1N 1W SL 

0 



Not Reported 

T 

19980506 

UT4000000203353 

133 

East 

1 - 2 Miles 

Lower 

UT WELLS 

UT4000000204096 

Wrnum: 

Type: 

Status: 

Uses: 

Cfs: 

Acft: 

Location: 

Win: 

Owner: 

Source: 

59-3111 

Underground 

UGWC 

S 

.018 

0 

S265 E30 NW 34 1N 1W SL 

0 

OMNI ENTERPRISES 


Chexnum: 

Summary st: 

Priority: 

Site id: 

Not Reported 

P 

1923 

UT4000000204096 

134 

East 

1 - 2 Miles 

Lower 

UT WELLS 

UT4000000204334 

TC02814573.1r Page A-56


Wrnum: 

Type: 

Status: 

Uses: 

Cfs: 

Acft: 

Location: 

Win: 

Owner: 

Source: 

59-2790 

Chexnum: 

Underground 

Summary st: 

UGWCDIS 

Priority: 

Not Reported 

.022 

0 

N811 E115 SW 27 1N 1W SL 

0 

OMNI ENTERPRISES C/O ROLAND R. WRIGHT 


Not Reported 

T 

1918 

UT4000000204334 

AI135 

NNE 

1 - 2 Miles 

Higher 

UT WELLS 

UT4000000206051 

Wrnum: 

Type: 

Status: 

Uses: 

Cfs: 

Acft: 

Location: 

Win: 

Owner: 

Source: 

59-1678 

Chexnum: 

Underground 

Summary st: 

APPLCERT 

Priority: 

DIMOS 

.015 

0 

S1165 W178 NE 20 1N 1W SL 

7888 

SALT LAKE CITY CORP. 300 CITY & CO. BUILDING 


Not Reported 

P 

19621128 

UT4000000206051 

AG136 

WSW 

1 - 2 Miles 

Lower 

FED USGS 

USGS3060551 

Agency cd: 

Site name: 

Latitude: 

Longitude: 

Dec lon: 

Coor accr: 


State: 

Country: 

Location map: 

Altitude: 




Hydrologic: 

Topographic: 

Site type: 




Aquifer Type: 

Aquifer: 

Well depth: 






USGS 

Site no: 

(B- 1- 1)36abc- 2 

404650 

EDR Site id: 

1120052 

Dec lat: 

-112.01521812 

Coor meth: 

T 


NAD83 

District: 

49 

County: 

US 

Land net: 

SALTAIR 

Map scale: 

4225.00 


10 



Not Reported 


Not Reported 


Y 

Single well, other than collector or Ranney type 

Not Reported 

Not Reported 

161 

Hole depth: 

Not Reported 

Not Reported 

Not Reported 


Not Reported 


Not Reported 


404650112005201 

USGS3060551 

40.78050095 

M 

NAD27 

49 

035 

SWNWNES36 T01N R01W S 

24000 

19741023 

MST 

163 

Not Reported 

Not Reported 

Not Reported 

TC02814573.1r Page A-57










137 

East 

1 - 2 Miles 

Lower 

UT WELLS 

UT4000000204280 

Wrnum: 

Type: 

Status: 

Uses: 

Cfs: 

Acft: 

Location: 

Win: 

Owner: 

Source: 

59-2306 

Chexnum: 

Underground 

Summary st: 

UGWCDIS 

Priority: 

Not Reported 

.027 

0 

N438 E205 SW 27 1N 1W SL 

0 

C/O ROLAND R. WRIGHT OMNI ENTERPRISES 


Not Reported 

T 

19160000 

UT4000000204280 

AH138 

SE 

1 - 2 Miles 

Lower 

UT WELLS 

UT4000000202715 

Wrnum: 

Type: 

Status: 

Uses: 

Cfs: 

Acft: 

Location: 

Win: 

Owner: 

Source: 

0859010M00 

Underground 

APPLAPP 

Not Reported 

0 

0 

N620 W1569 SE 33 1N 1W SL 

432088 



Chexnum: 

Summary st: 

Priority: 

Site id: 

Not Reported 

A 

20081030 

UT4000000202715 

AH139 

SE 

1 - 2 Miles 

Lower 

UT WELLS 

UT4000000202716 

Wrnum: 

Type: 

Status: 

Uses: 

Cfs: 

Acft: 

Location: 

Win: 

Owner: 

Source: 

0859010M00 

Underground 

APPLAPP 

Not Reported 

0 

0 

N620 W1569 SE 33 1N 1W SL 

0 



Chexnum: 

Summary st: 

Priority: 

Site id: 

Not Reported 

A 

20081030 

UT4000000202716 

TC02814573.1r Page A-58


Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

140 

West 

1 - 2 Miles 

Lower 

Database 

FED USGS 

EDR ID Number 

USGS3060559 

Agency cd: 

USGS 

Site no: 

404708112005601 

Site name: 

(B- 1- 2)25cdd- 1 

Latitude: 

404708 

EDR Site id: 

USGS3060559 

Longitude: 

1120056 

Dec lat: 

40.78550089 

Dec lon: 

-112.01632933 

Coor meth: 

M 

Coor accr: 

S 


NAD27 


District: 

49 

State: 

49 

County: 

035 

Country: 

US 

Land net: 

Not Reported 

Location map: 

Not Reported 

Map scale: 

Not Reported 

Altitude: 

4224.00 



Altitude accuracy: 5. 



Hydrologic: 


Topographic: 

Valley flat 

Site type: 


Not Reported 





Aquifer Type: 

Not Reported 

Aquifer: 

VALLEY FILL 

Well depth: 

105 

Hole depth: 

Not Reported 



Not Reported 















141 

SE 

1 - 2 Miles 

Lower 

UT WELLS 

UT4000000202544 

Wrnum: 

Type: 

Status: 

Uses: 

Cfs: 

Acft: 

Location: 

Win: 

Owner: 

Source: 

0859010M00 

Underground 

APPLAPP 

Not Reported 

0 

0 

N210 W1832 SE 33 1N 1W SL 

432089 



Chexnum: 

Summary st: 

Priority: 

Site id: 

Not Reported 

A 

20081030 

UT4000000202544 

TC02814573.1r Page A-59


Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

AI142 

NNE 

1 - 2 Miles 

Higher 

Database 

UT WELLS 

EDR ID Number 

UT4000000206069 

Wrnum: 

Type: 

Status: 

Uses: 

Cfs: 

Acft: 

Location: 

Win: 

Owner: 

Source: 

59-803 

Chexnum: 

Underground 

Summary st: 

APPLNPR 

Priority: 

IS 

.015 

0 

S960 W380 NE 20 1N 1W SL 

7889 

DONALD J. & MARY J. PATTON 


Not Reported 

P 

19500421 

UT4000000206069 

AJ143 

West 

1 - 2 Miles 

Lower 

FED USGS 

USGS3060553 

Agency cd: 

USGS 

Site no: 

404659112005601 

Site name: 

(B- 1- 2)36baa- 1 

Latitude: 

404659 

EDR Site id: 

USGS3060553 

Longitude: 

1120056 

Dec lat: 

40.78300092 

Dec lon: 

-112.01632929 

Coor meth: 

M 

Coor accr: 

F 


NAD27 


District: 

49 

State: 

49 

County: 

035 

Country: 

US 

Land net: 

NENENWS36 T 1 N R 2 W S 

Location map: 

SALTAIR 

Map scale: 

10 

Altitude: 

4223.60 


Level or other surveying method 

Altitude accuracy: .1 



Hydrologic: 


Topographic: 

Valley flat 

Site type: 


1915 





Aquifer Type: 

Not Reported 

Aquifer: 

VALLEY FILL 

Well depth: 

464 

Hole depth: 

464 

Source of depth data: driller 


464900200 














TC02814573.1r Page A-60



Date 

Feet below 

Surface 

Feet to 

Sealevel 

Date 

Feet below 

Surface 

Feet to 

Sealevel 

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

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

1996-02-12 -8.47 1995-02-10 -8.55 

1994-02-15 -9.13 1993-02-25 -8.05 

1992-09-10 -8.95 1992-03-02 -10.08 

1992-02-13 -9.72 1991-09-20 -8.63 

1991-07-30 -6.7 1991-02-12 -6.95 

1990-08-24 -6.30 1990-02-22 -8.20 

1989-09-07 -6.30 1989-02-14 -7.70 

1988-09-19 -6.57 1988-02-16 -8.34 

1987-08-28 -6.85 1987-02-18 -10.50 

1986-09-02 -8.70 1986-02-10 -9.30 

1985-09-27 -9.30 1985-02-05 -9.70 

1984-09-06 -8.30 1984-04-03 -8.75 

1984-03-21 -8.90 1984-03-07 -7.70 

1984-02-06 -8.95 1983-09-15 -7.50 

1983-02-14 -8.60 1982-09-14 -6.90 

1982-02-10 -7.64 1981-09-04 -7.72 

1981-02-14 -7.55 1980-09-24 -7.00 

1980-02-14 -7.54 1979-09-18 -7.05 

1979-02-22 -8.64 1978-09-19 -7.65 

1978-02-21 -9.10 1977-09-14 -8.80 

1977-02-16 -9.00 1976-09-21 -7.50 

1976-02-19 -9.90 1975-09-08 -10.30 

1975-02-18 -10.70 1974-09-03 -11.40 

1974-02-25 -11.50 1973-09-11 -12.10 

1973-02-21 -11.50 1972-09-19 -10.70 

1972-02-16 -10.70 1971-09-08 -10.10 

1971-02-22 -10.60 1970-09-16 -10.20 

1970-02-17 -10.44 1969-09-02 -10.50 

1969-02-19 -10.30 1968-12-30 -9.90 

1968-11-27 -11.40 1968-10-30 -10.30 

1968-09-30 -10.03 1968-09-04 -9.88 

1968-07-31 -8.95 1968-06-28 -9.91 

1968-05-29 -9.93 1968-04-30 -10.13 

1968-03-28 -10.01 1968-02-12 -10.02 

1968-01-30 -9.98 1967-12-29 -9.91 

1967-12-05 -9.65 1967-10-30 -9.12 

1967-09-29 -9.21 1967-09-05 -9.15 

1967-07-29 -8.95 1967-06-29 -9.30 

1967-06-02 -9.55 1967-04-28 -9.90 

1967-02-17 -10.01 1967-01-31 -10.07 

1966-12-29 -10.18 1966-11-30 -9.90 

1966-10-31 -9.50 1966-09-29 -9.60 

1966-09-06 -9.60 1966-08-24 -9.58 

1966-08-01 -9.49 1966-07-14 -9.53 

1966-06-27 -9.66 1966-06-09 -9.90 

1966-05-16 -10.04 1966-04-22 -10.18 

1966-04-12 -10.44 1966-03-16 -10.30 

1966-02-23 -10.61 1966-02-04 -11.40 

1966-01-17 -10.56 1965-12-28 -11.30 

1965-12-13 -10.91 1965-11-10 -12.60 

1965-10-14 -10.59 1965-09-28 -10.78 

1965-09-03 -10.38 1965-07-27 -10.07 

1965-07-13 -10.09 1965-06-28 -10.12 

1965-06-14 -10.47 1965-06-03 -10.25 

1965-05-11 -10.45 1965-04-26 -10.50 

TC02814573.1r Page A-61


Ground-water levels, continued. 

Date 

Feet below 

Surface 

Feet to 

Sealevel 

Date 

Feet below 

Surface 

Feet to 

Sealevel 

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

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

1965-04-06 -10.70 1965-03-11 -10.80 

1965-02-17 -11.03 1965-01-27 -11.10 

1965-01-11 -11.00 1964-12-23 -11.03 

1964-12-03 -10.95 1964-11-18 -10.79 

1964-10-27 -10.98 1964-10-01 -10.60 

1964-09-15 -10.72 1964-08-31 -8.70 

1964-08-19 -10.40 1964-08-04 -9.10 

1964-07-21 -10.70 1964-07-07 -10.50 

1964-06-23 -9.70 1964-06-11 -9.80 

1964-05-11 -10.40 1964-04-27 -10.40 

1964-04-13 -10.40 1964-02-26 -10.80 

1963-10-23 -10.55 1963-08-05 -10.30 

1963-02-28 -10.70 1962-12-11 -11.10 

1962-03-14 -10.40 1961-12-13 -10.60 

1961-05-23 -10.80 1961-03-20 -11.30 

1960-12-05 -11.40 1960-09-05 -10.90 

1960-05-10 -11.70 1960-01-14 -12.20 

1959-10-01 -9.50 1959-07-29 -9.10 

1959-05-20 -10.60 1959-03-10 -11.50 

1958-12-17 -11.60 1958-10-27 -10.80 

1958-07-25 -9.40 1958-06-05 -9.80 

1958-03-12 -9.80 1957-12-10 -9.30 

1957-10-18 -9.50 1957-08-20 -9.30 

1957-07-17 -7.80 1957-06-11 -9.70 

1957-04-30 -9.70 1957-03-26 -10.10 

1957-02-20 -9.10 1956-12-21 -11.10 

1955-03-29 -10.00 1953-04-20 -13.80 

1952-01-04 -14.20 1951-04-02 -15.20 

1950-12-13 -15.00 1950-04-03 -14.60 

1949-12-05 -14.10 1949-03-18 -15.00 

1948-12-09 -15.30 1948-03-23 -14.50 

1947-12-03 -15.00 1947-04-01 -15.10 

1946-12-11 -15.30 1945-12-17 -15.10 

1945-03-21 -15.20 1944-12-16 -15.50 

1944-04-08 -15.10 1943-12-07 -14.50 

1943-03-23 -14.55 1942-12-24 -14.70 

1942-04-02 -14.70 1941-12-08 -14.70 

1941-10-15 -14.50 1941-09-03 -14.30 

1941-07-16 -13.80 1941-06-02 -14.35 

1933-03-20 -12.67 1933-01-10 -13.47 

1932-12-13 -13.61 1932-11-03 -13.54 

1932-10-06 -13.97 1932-09-14 -13.68 

1932-08-12 -13.83 1932-07-08 -14.12 

1932-06-09 -14.19 1932-05-03 -13.97 

1932-04-11 -14.41 1932-03-07 -14.26 

1932-02-05 -14.84 1932-01-22 -14.12 

1932-01-09 -14.26 1931-12-15 -13.97 

1931-11-12 -14.56 1931-10-09 -13.90 

AJ144 

West 

1 - 2 Miles 

Lower 

UT WELLS 

UT4000000204093 

TC02814573.1r Page A-62


Wrnum: 

Type: 

Status: 

Uses: 

Cfs: 

Acft: 

Location: 

Win: 

Owner: 

Source: 

59-2922 

Chexnum: 

Underground 

Summary st: 

UGWC 

Priority: 

S 

.111 

0 

S236 E2375 NW 36 1N 2W SL 

0 

FIRST SECURITY MORTGAGE COMPANY 


Not Reported 

P 

1920 

UT4000000204093 

AK145 

WSW 

1 - 2 Miles 

Lower 

FED USGS 

USGS3060545 

Agency cd: 

USGS 

Site no: 

404627112004301 

Site name: 

(B- 1- 2)36dbd- 1 

Latitude: 

404627 

EDR Site id: 

USGS3060545 

Longitude: 

1120043 

Dec lat: 

40.77411214 

Dec lon: 

-112.01271796 

Coor meth: 

M 

Coor accr: 

F 


NAD27 


District: 

49 

State: 

49 

County: 

035 

Country: 

US 

Land net: 

Not Reported 

Location map: 

SALTAIR 

Map scale: 

24000 

Altitude: 

4225.00 






Hydrologic: 


Topographic: 

Not Reported 

Site type: 


19770601 





Aquifer Type: 

Not Reported 

Aquifer: 

Not Reported 

Well depth: 

224 

Hole depth: 

327 



Not Reported 















AL146 

North 

1 - 2 Miles 

Higher 

FED USGS 

USGS3039444 

TC02814573.1r Page A-63


Agency cd: 

USGS 

Site no: 

404845111584901 

Site name: 

(B- 1- 1)20bab- 1 

Latitude: 

404845 

EDR Site id: 

USGS3039444 

Longitude: 

1115849 

Dec lat: 

40.81244527 

Dec lon: 

-111.98105083 

Coor meth: 

M 

Coor accr: 

F 


NAD27 


District: 

49 

State: 

49 

County: 

035 

Country: 

US 

Land net: 

Not Reported 

Location map: 

SLC NORTH 

Map scale: 

24000 

Altitude: 

4217.00 






Hydrologic: 


Topographic: 

Not Reported 

Site type: 


Not Reported 





Aquifer Type: 

Not Reported 

Aquifer: 

VALLEY FILL 

Well depth: 

260 

Hole depth: 

274 



1464915001 















Date 

Feet below 

Surface 

Feet to 

Sealevel 

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

1964-07-15 -3.00 

AM147 

North 

1 - 2 Miles 

Higher 

FED USGS 

USGS3039445 

Agency cd: 

Site name: 

Latitude: 

Longitude: 

Dec lon: 

Coor accr: 


State: 

Country: 

Location map: 

Altitude: 




Hydrologic: 

Topographic: 

Site type: 


USGS 

Site no: 

(B- 1- 1)20bba- 2 

404845 

EDR Site id: 

1115857 

Dec lat: 

-111.98327312 

Coor meth: 

F 


NAD83 

District: 

49 

County: 

US 

Land net: 

Not Reported 

Map scale: 

4217.00 


20 



Not Reported 


Not Reported 


404845111585701 

USGS3039445 

40.81244526 

M 

NAD27 

49 

035 

NENWNWS20 T01N R01W S 

Not Reported 

Not Reported 

MST 

TC02814573.1r Page A-64




Aquifer Type: 

Not Reported 

Aquifer: 

Not Reported 

Well depth: 

Not Reported 

Hole depth: 

Not Reported 



Not Reported 















AN148 

South 

1 - 2 Miles 

Lower 

UT WELLS 

UT4000000201544 

Wrnum: 

Type: 

Status: 

Uses: 

Cfs: 

Acft: 

Location: 

Win: 

Owner: 

Source: 

57-10282 

Chexnum: 

Underground 

Summary st: 

APPLREJ 

Priority: 

DIMOSX 

0 

143758 

N2020 W2300 SE 05 1S 1W SL 

0 



Not Reported 

T 

20010523 

UT4000000201544 

AN149 

South 

1 - 2 Miles 

Lower 

UT WELLS 

UT4000000201545 

Wrnum: 

Type: 

Status: 

Uses: 

Cfs: 

Acft: 

Location: 

Win: 

Owner: 

Source: 

59-5821 

Underground 

APPLUNAP 

DIS 

0 

56880 

N2020 W2300 SE 05 1S 1W SL 

0 



Chexnum: 

Summary st: 

Priority: 

Site id: 

Not Reported 

U 

20060222 

UT4000000201545 

AO150 

West 

1 - 2 Miles 

Lower 

UT WELLS 

UT4000000204422 

TC02814573.1r Page A-65


Wrnum: 

Type: 

Status: 

Uses: 

Cfs: 

Acft: 

Location: 

Win: 

Owner: 

Source: 

59-3394 

Underground 

UGWC 

DS 

.015 

0 

N1365 W285 S4 25 1N 2W SL 

0 



Chexnum: 

Summary st: 

Priority: 

Site id: 

Not Reported 

P 

18850000 

UT4000000204422 

AO151 

West 

1 - 2 Miles 

Lower 

UT WELLS 

UT4000000204423 

Wrnum: 

Type: 

Status: 

Uses: 

Cfs: 

Acft: 

Location: 

Win: 

Owner: 

Source: 

59-3465 

Underground 

UGWC 

DS 

.015 

0 

N1365 W285 S4 25 1N 2W SL 

0 



Chexnum: 

Summary st: 

Priority: 

Site id: 

Not Reported 

P 

1885 

UT4000000204423 

AO152 

West 

1 - 2 Miles 

Lower 

UT WELLS 

UT4000000204424 

Wrnum: 

Type: 

Status: 

Uses: 

Cfs: 

Acft: 

Location: 

Win: 

Owner: 

Source: 

59-3466 

Underground 

UGWC 

DS 

.015 

0 

N1365 W285 S4 25 1N 2W SL 

0 



Chexnum: 

Summary st: 

Priority: 

Site id: 

Not Reported 

P 

1885 

UT4000000204424 

AL153 

North 

1 - 2 Miles 

Higher 

UT WELLS 

UT4000000206211 

Wrnum: 

Type: 

Status: 

Uses: 

Cfs: 

Acft: 

Location: 

Win: 

Owner: 

Source: 

59-1556 

Underground 

APPLCERT 

S 

.015 

0 

S140 E1430 NW 20 1N 1W SL 

7891 

R. C. ASHWORTH 


Chexnum: 

Summary st: 

Priority: 

Site id: 

Not Reported 

P 

19600409 

UT4000000206211 

TC02814573.1r Page A-66


Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

AI154 

NNE 

1 - 2 Miles 

Higher 

Database 

UT WELLS 

EDR ID Number 

UT4000000206079 

Wrnum: 

Type: 

Status: 

Uses: 

Cfs: 

Acft: 

Location: 

Win: 

Owner: 

Source: 

59-3676 

Chexnum: 

Underground 

Summary st: 

UGWC 

Priority: 

IS 

.004 

0 

S920 W160 NE 20 1N 1W SL 

7887 

DONALD J. & MARY J. PATTON 


Not Reported 

P 

1920 

UT4000000206079 

AJ155 

West 

1 - 2 Miles 

Lower 

FED USGS 

USGS3060554 

Agency cd: 

USGS 

Site no: 

404700112005701 

Site name: 

(B- 1- 2)36baa- 2 

Latitude: 

404700 

EDR Site id: 

USGS3060554 

Longitude: 

1120057 

Dec lat: 

40.78327869 

Dec lon: 

-112.01660708 

Coor meth: 

M 

Coor accr: 

S 


NAD27 


District: 

49 

State: 

49 

County: 

035 

Country: 

US 

Land net: 

Not Reported 

Location map: 

SALTAIR 

Map scale: 

24000 

Altitude: 

4223.6 






Hydrologic: 


Topographic: 

Valley flat 

Site type: 


19910312 





Aquifer Type: 

Confined single aquifer 

Aquifer: 

VALLEY FILL 

Well depth: 

83. 

Hole depth: 

83. 

Source of depth data: reporting agency (generally USGS) 


464920500 














TC02814573.1r Page A-67



Date 

Feet below 

Surface 

Feet to 

Sealevel 

Date 

Feet below 

Surface 

Feet to 

Sealevel 

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

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

1992-03-02 2.67 1992-02-03 3.26 

1991-12-31 3.39 1991-11-25 3.50 

1991-10-30 3.76 1991-09-27 3.86 

1991-08-29 4.14 1991-08-22 4.14 

1991-07-30 4.00 1991-07-15 3.83 

1991-07-11 3.81 

AJ156 

West 

1 - 2 Miles 

Lower 

FED USGS 

USGS3060555 

Agency cd: 

USGS 

Site no: 

404700112005703 

Site name: 

(B- 1- 2)36baa- 3 

Latitude: 

404700 

EDR Site id: 

USGS3060555 

Longitude: 

1120057 

Dec lat: 

40.78327869 

Dec lon: 

-112.01660708 

Coor meth: 

M 

Coor accr: 

S 


NAD27 


District: 

49 

State: 

49 

County: 

035 

Country: 

US 

Land net: 

Not Reported 

Location map: 

SALTAIR 

Map scale: 

24000 

Altitude: 

4223.8 






Hydrologic: 


Topographic: 

Valley flat 

Site type: 


19910514 





Aquifer Type: 

Confined single aquifer 

Aquifer: 

VALLEY FILL 

Well depth: 

19. 

Hole depth: 

20. 

Source of depth data: driller 


464920500 















Date 

Feet below 

Surface 

Feet to 

Sealevel 

Date 

Feet below 

Surface 

Feet to 

Sealevel 

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

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

1992-03-02 2.88 1992-02-03 4.15 

1991-12-31 4.43 1991-11-25 4.61 

1991-10-30 5.05 1991-09-27 5.47 

1991-08-29 6.18 1991-08-22 6.20 

1991-07-30 6.21 1991-07-11 5.92 

TC02814573.1r Page A-68


Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

AM157 

North 

1 - 2 Miles 

Higher 

Database 

UT WELLS 

EDR ID Number 

UT4000000206218 

Wrnum: 

Type: 

Status: 

Uses: 

Cfs: 

Acft: 

Location: 

Win: 

Owner: 

Source: 

59-3081 

Underground 

UGWC 

S 

.011 

0 

S110 E1085 NW 20 1N 1W SL 

0 

R. C. ASHWORTH 


Chexnum: 

Summary st: 

Priority: 

Site id: 

Not Reported 

P 

19260000 

UT4000000206218 

AP158 

ESE 

1 - 2 Miles 

Lower 

UT WELLS 

UT4000000202830 

Wrnum: 

Type: 

Status: 

Uses: 

Cfs: 

Acft: 

Location: 

Win: 

Owner: 

Source: 

59-2804 

Underground 

UGWC 

DI 

.011 

0 

N935 W1115 SE 33 1N 1W SL 

0 

ELVA J. JOHNSON 


Chexnum: 

Summary st: 

Priority: 

Site id: 

Not Reported 

P 

1932 

UT4000000202830 

159 

NNE 

1 - 2 Miles 

Higher 

UT WELLS 

UT4000000206179 

Wrnum: 

Type: 

Status: 

Uses: 

Cfs: 

Acft: 

Location: 

Win: 

Owner: 

Source: 

59-3271 

Underground 

APPLREJD 

DS 

.015 

0 

S300 E665 N4 20 1N 1W SL 

427892 

SALT LAKE CITY CORP 


Chexnum: 

Summary st: 

Priority: 

Site id: 

Not Reported 

T 

19731108 

UT4000000206179 

160 

North 

1 - 2 Miles 

Higher 

UT WELLS 

UT4000000206215 

TC02814573.1r Page A-69


Wrnum: 

Type: 

Status: 

Uses: 

Cfs: 

Acft: 

Location: 

Win: 

Owner: 

Source: 

59-1015 

Chexnum: 

Underground 

Summary st: 

APPLDIS 

Priority: 

Not Reported 

.015 

0 

S115 E330 NW 20 1N 1W SL 

7892 



Not Reported 

T 

Not Reported 

UT4000000206215 

AK161 

WSW 

1 - 2 Miles 

Lower 

UT WELLS 

UT4000000202952 

Wrnum: 

Type: 

Status: 

Uses: 

Cfs: 

Acft: 

Location: 

Win: 

Owner: 

Source: 

59-4126 

Underground 

APPLCERT 

I 

1.7 

537.399 

N1575 E717 S4 36 1N 2W SL 

1750 

SLICCAMA 


Chexnum: 

Summary st: 

Priority: 

Site id: 

Not Reported 

P 

19750319 

UT4000000202952 

AK162 

WSW 

1 - 2 Miles 

Lower 

UT WELLS 

UT4000000202953 

Wrnum: 

Type: 

Status: 

Uses: 

Cfs: 

Acft: 

Location: 

Win: 

Owner: 

Source: 

59-4449 

Underground 

APPLCERT 

O 

.027 

0 

N1575 E717 S4 36 1N 2W SL 

1750 

SLICCAMA 


Chexnum: 

Summary st: 

Priority: 

Site id: 

Not Reported 

P 

19770322 

UT4000000202953 

AQ163 

SSE 

1 - 2 Miles 

Lower 

UT WELLS 

UT4000000201791 

Wrnum: 

Type: 

Status: 

Uses: 

Cfs: 

Acft: 

Location: 

Win: 

Owner: 

Source: 

57-10282 

Chexnum: 

Underground 

Summary st: 

APPLREJ 

Priority: 

DIMOSX 

0 

143758 

N3070 E1155 SW 04 1S 1W SL 

0 



Not Reported 

T 

20010523 

UT4000000201791 

TC02814573.1r Page A-70


Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

AQ164 

SSE 

1 - 2 Miles 

Lower 

Database 

UT WELLS 

EDR ID Number 

UT4000000201792 

Wrnum: 

Type: 

Status: 

Uses: 

Cfs: 

Acft: 

Location: 

Win: 

Owner: 

Source: 

59-5821 

Underground 

APPLUNAP 

DIS 

0 

56880 

N3070 E1155 SW 04 1S 1W SL 

0 



Chexnum: 

Summary st: 

Priority: 

Site id: 

Not Reported 

U 

20060222 

UT4000000201792 

AO165 

West 

1 - 2 Miles 

Lower 

FED USGS 

USGS3060563 

Agency cd: 

USGS 

Site no: 

404716112010001 

Site name: 

(B- 1- 2)25cad- 2 

Latitude: 

404716 

EDR Site id: 

USGS3060563 

Longitude: 

1120100 

Dec lat: 

40.78772308 

Dec lon: 

-112.0174405 

Coor meth: 

M 

Coor accr: 

S 


NAD27 


District: 

49 

State: 

49 

County: 

035 

Country: 

US 

Land net: 

Not Reported 

Location map: 

Not Reported 

Map scale: 

Not Reported 

Altitude: 

4224.00 



Altitude accuracy: .1 



Hydrologic: 


Topographic: 

Valley flat 

Site type: 


Not Reported 





Aquifer Type: 

Not Reported 

Aquifer: 

VALLEY FILL 

Well depth: 

105 

Hole depth: 

Not Reported 



Not Reported 















TC02814573.1r Page A-71


Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

166 

SSE 

1 - 2 Miles 

Lower 

Database 

FED USGS 

EDR ID Number 

USGS3039521 

Agency cd: 

USGS 

Site no: 

404537111581601 

Site name: 

(C- 1- 1) 5dab- 1 

Latitude: 

404537 

EDR Site id: 

USGS3039521 

Longitude: 

1115816 

Dec lat: 

40.76022358 

Dec lon: 

-111.97188318 

Coor meth: 

M 

Coor accr: 

F 


NAD27 


District: 

49 

State: 

49 

County: 

035 

Country: 

US 

Land net: 

Not Reported 

Location map: 

S L C NORTH 

Map scale: 

24000 

Altitude: 

4227.00 






Hydrologic: 


Topographic: 

Not Reported 

Site type: 


19820101 





Aquifer Type: 

Not Reported 

Aquifer: 

Not Reported 

Well depth: 

15.0 

Hole depth: 

15.0 



1464915011 















Date 

Feet below 

Surface 

Feet to 

Sealevel 

Date 

Feet below 

Surface 

Feet to 

Sealevel 

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

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

1983-04-13 2.9 1983-03-29 2.8 

1983-03-10 2.8 1983-02-25 2.9 

1983-02-04 2.8 1983-01-21 2.6 

1982-12-27 2.9 1982-11-16 3.7 

1982-09-29 2.9 1982-09-16 5.2 

1982-07-13 4.9 1982-05-25 4.60 

1982-05-05 4.6 1982-04-30 4.1 

1982-04-09 2.6 1982-03-03 3.2 

1982-02-02 3.1 

AP167 

SE 

1 - 2 Miles 

Lower 

UT WELLS 

UT4000000202722 

TC02814573.1r Page A-72


Wrnum: 

Type: 

Status: 

Uses: 

Cfs: 

Acft: 

Location: 

Win: 

Owner: 

Source: 

59-3674 

Underground 

UGWC 

I 

.011 

0 

N625 W1000 SE 33 1N 1W SL 

0 

RUTH A. HANER 


Chexnum: 

Summary st: 

Priority: 

Site id: 

Not Reported 

P 

1921 

UT4000000202722 

AP168 

ESE 

1 - 2 Miles 

Lower 

UT WELLS 

UT4000000202794 

Wrnum: 

Type: 

Status: 

Uses: 

Cfs: 

Acft: 

Location: 

Win: 

Owner: 

Source: 

59-3672 

Chexnum: 

Underground 

Summary st: 

UGWC 

Priority: 

I 

.007 

0 

N875 W830 SE 33 1N 1W SL 

0 

JOHN H. AND NAOMI F. APEDAILE 


Not Reported 

P 

1900 

UT4000000202794 

AR169 

ESE 

1 - 2 Miles 

Lower 

UT WELLS 

UT4000000203513 

Wrnum: 

Type: 

Status: 

Uses: 

Cfs: 

Acft: 

Location: 

Win: 

Owner: 

Source: 

59-1346 

Chexnum: 

Underground 

Summary st: 

APPLNPR 

Priority: 

DI 

.015 

0 

N655 E295 W4 34 1N 1W SL 

0 

LOUISE C/O MARCUS URRACHAGA GALARZA 


Not Reported 

P 

19570925 

UT4000000203513 

170 

NNE 

1 - 2 Miles 

Higher 

UT WELLS 

UT4000000206132 

Wrnum: 

Type: 

Status: 

Uses: 

Cfs: 

Acft: 

Location: 

Win: 

Owner: 

Source: 

59-1217 

Underground 

APPLNPR 

DIMOS 

.015 

0 

S580 W140 NE 20 1N 1W SL 

0 



Chexnum: 

Summary st: 

Priority: 

Site id: 

Not Reported 

P 

19550603 

UT4000000206132 

TC02814573.1r Page A-73


Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

171 

East 

1 - 2 Miles 

Lower 

Database 

UT WELLS 

EDR ID Number 

UT4000000204413 

Wrnum: 

Type: 

Status: 

Uses: 

Cfs: 

Acft: 

Location: 

Win: 

Owner: 

Source: 

59-2145 

Underground 

UGWC 

S 

.045 

0 

N1280 E735 SW 27 1N 1W SL 

0 



Chexnum: 

Summary st: 

Priority: 

Site id: 

Not Reported 

P 

1904 

UT4000000204413 

AR172 

ESE 

1 - 2 Miles 

Lower 

UT WELLS 

UT4000000203490 

Wrnum: 

Type: 

Status: 

Uses: 

Cfs: 

Acft: 

Location: 

Win: 

Owner: 

Source: 

59-494 

Underground 

APPLCERT 

DI 

.015 

0 

N620 E360 W4 34 1N 1W SL 

0 

LOUISE GLARZA 


Chexnum: 

Summary st: 

Priority: 

Site id: 

Not Reported 

P 

19460322 

UT4000000203490 

AR173 

ESE 

1 - 2 Miles 

Lower 

UT WELLS 

UT4000000203485 

Wrnum: 

Type: 

Status: 

Uses: 

Cfs: 

Acft: 

Location: 

Win: 

Owner: 

Source: 

59-1337 

Abandoned Well 

APPLNPR 

DI 

.015 

0 

N614 E385 W4 34 1N 1W SL 

29806 

JUANITA M. URRECHAGA 


Chexnum: 

Summary st: 

Priority: 

Site id: 

Not Reported 

P 

19570807 

UT4000000203485 

174 

North 

1 - 2 Miles 

Higher 

UT WELLS 

UT4000000206257 

TC02814573.1r Page A-74


Wrnum: 

Type: 

Status: 

Uses: 

Cfs: 

Acft: 

Location: 

Win: 

Owner: 

Source: 

59-1155 

Underground 

APPLNPR 

DS 

.015 

0 

N225 E125 SW 17 1N 1W SL 

0 

DONALD W. HALL 


Chexnum: 

Summary st: 

Priority: 

Site id: 

Not Reported 

P 

19540331 

UT4000000206257 

AR175 

ESE 

1 - 2 Miles 

Lower 

UT WELLS 

UT4000000203533 

Wrnum: 

Type: 

Status: 

Uses: 

Cfs: 

Acft: 

Location: 

Win: 

Owner: 

Source: 

59-2054 

Underground 

UGWCDIS 

Not Reported 

.056 

0 

S1965 E413 NW 34 1N 1W SL 

0 

LOUISE GALARZA 


Chexnum: 

Summary st: 

Priority: 

Site id: 

Not Reported 

T 

19110000 

UT4000000203533 

AS176 

East 

1 - 2 Miles 

Lower 

UT WELLS 

UT4000000204690 

Wrnum: 

Type: 

Status: 

Uses: 

Cfs: 

Acft: 

Location: 

Win: 

Owner: 

Source: 

59-316 

Underground 

APPLNPR 

DS 

.015 

0 

S200 E730 W4 27 1N 1W SL 

0 

KEITH HOLBROOK 


Chexnum: 

Summary st: 

Priority: 

Site id: 

Not Reported 

P 

19420609 

UT4000000204690 

AT177 

NE 

1 - 2 Miles 

Higher 

UT WELLS 

UT4000000205715 

Wrnum: 

Type: 

Status: 

Uses: 

Cfs: 

Acft: 

Location: 

Win: 

Owner: 

Source: 

59-2347 

Underground 

UGWCDIS 

Not Reported 

.022 

0 

N2290 W1655 SE 21 1N 1W SL 

10299 

ADA B. NEBEKER 


Chexnum: 

Summary st: 

Priority: 

Site id: 

Not Reported 

T 

19180000 

UT4000000205715 

TC02814573.1r Page A-75


Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

178 

SSE 

1 - 2 Miles 

Lower 

Database 

UT WELLS 

EDR ID Number 

UT4000000201508 

Wrnum: 

Type: 

Status: 

Uses: 

Cfs: 

Acft: 

Location: 

Win: 

Owner: 

Source: 

59-1740 

Underground 

APPLREJD 

Not Reported 

.015 

0 

S3490 E4724 NW 05 1S 1W SL 

0 

NEILSON CONSTRUCTORS 


Chexnum: 

Summary st: 

Priority: 

Site id: 

Not Reported 

T 

19650113 

UT4000000201508 

AS179 

East 

1 - 2 Miles 

Lower 

UT WELLS 

UT4000000204759 

Wrnum: 

Type: 

Status: 

Uses: 

Cfs: 

Acft: 

Location: 

Win: 

Owner: 

Source: 

59-4906 

Abandoned Well 

APPLCERT 

I 

.118 

0 

N10 E770 W4 27 1N 1W SL 

30197 

KENT K. NELSON 


Chexnum: 

Summary st: 

Priority: 

Site id: 

Not Reported 

P 

19820820 

UT4000000204759 

180 

ESE 

1 - 2 Miles 

Lower 

UT WELLS 

UT4000000202698 

Wrnum: 

Type: 

Status: 

Uses: 

Cfs: 

Acft: 

Location: 

Win: 

Owner: 

Source: 

59-3095 

Underground 

UGWCDIS 

Not Reported 

.013 

0 

N568 W710 SE 33 1N 1W SL 

0 

JAKOB WERNER 


Chexnum: 

Summary st: 

Priority: 

Site id: 

Not Reported 

T 

19250000 

UT4000000202698 

AS181 

East 

1 - 2 Miles 

Lower 

UT WELLS 

UT4000000204760 

TC02814573.1r Page A-76


Wrnum: 

Type: 

Status: 

Uses: 

Cfs: 

Acft: 

Location: 

Win: 

Owner: 

Source: 

59-4906 

Underground 

APPLCERT 

I 

.118 

0 

N15 E860 W4 27 1N 1W SL 

30196 



Chexnum: 

Summary st: 

Priority: 

Site id: 

Not Reported 

P 

19820820 

UT4000000204760 

AU182 

NNW 

1 - 2 Miles 

Higher 

UT WELLS 

UT4000000206157 

Wrnum: 

Type: 

Status: 

Uses: 

Cfs: 

Acft: 

Location: 

Win: 

Owner: 

Source: 

59-2926 

Underground 

UGWC 

DS 

.134 

0 

S380 W2980 NE 19 1N 1W SL 

0 



Chexnum: 

Summary st: 

Priority: 

Site id: 

Not Reported 

P 

190000 

UT4000000206157 

AU183 

NNW 

1 - 2 Miles 

Higher 

UT WELLS 

UT4000000206158 

Wrnum: 

Type: 

Status: 

Uses: 

Cfs: 

Acft: 

Location: 

Win: 

Owner: 

Source: 

59-3662 

Chexnum: 

Underground 

Summary st: 

UGWC 

Priority: 

DIMOS 

.134 

0 

S380 W2980 NE 19 1N 1W SL 

0 



Not Reported 

P 

1900 

UT4000000206158 

AS184 

East 

1 - 2 Miles 

Lower 

UT WELLS 

UT4000000204741 

Wrnum: 

Type: 

Status: 

Uses: 

Cfs: 

Acft: 

Location: 

Win: 

Owner: 

Source: 

59-4906 

Underground 

APPLCERT 

I 

.118 

0 

S50 E900 W4 27 1N 1W SL 

0 



Chexnum: 

Summary st: 

Priority: 

Site id: 

Not Reported 

P 

19820820 

UT4000000204741 

TC02814573.1r Page A-77


Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

185 

NNE 

1 - 2 Miles 

Higher 

Database 

UT WELLS 

EDR ID Number 

UT4000000206197 

Wrnum: 

Type: 

Status: 

Uses: 

Cfs: 

Acft: 

Location: 

Win: 

Owner: 

Source: 

59-1206 

Chexnum: 

Underground 

Summary st: 

APPLNPR 

Priority: 

DIMOS 

.015 

0 

S195 W140 NE 20 1N 1W SL 

0 



Not Reported 

P 

19550216 

UT4000000206197 

AU186 

NNW 

1 - 2 Miles 

Higher 

FED USGS 

USGS3060582 

Agency cd: 

USGS 

Site no: 

404843111595001 

Site name: 

(B- 1- 1)19baa- 3 

Latitude: 

404843 

EDR Site id: 

USGS3060582 

Longitude: 

1115950 

Dec lat: 

40.81188964 

Dec lon: 

-111.99799579 

Coor meth: 

M 

Coor accr: 

F 


NAD27 


District: 

49 

State: 

49 

County: 

035 

Country: 

US 

Land net: 

Not Reported 

Location map: 

SALTAIR 

Map scale: 

24000 

Altitude: 

4120.00 






Hydrologic: 


Topographic: 

Not Reported 

Site type: 


19300101 





Aquifer Type: 

Not Reported 

Aquifer: 

VALLEY FILL 

Well depth: 

490 

Hole depth: 

Not Reported 



1464915001 














TC02814573.1r Page A-78



Date 

Feet below 

Surface 

Feet to 

Sealevel 

Date 

Feet below 

Surface 

Feet to 

Sealevel 

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

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

1965-02-18 -5.00 1965-02-18 -5.00 

AU187 

NNW 

1 - 2 Miles 

Lower 

UT WELLS 

UT4000000206162 

Wrnum: 

Type: 

Status: 

Uses: 

Cfs: 

Acft: 

Location: 

Win: 

Owner: 

Source: 

59-2925 

Underground 

UGWC 

DS 

.134 

0 

S350 W3150 NE 19 1N 1W SL 

0 



Chexnum: 

Summary st: 

Priority: 

Site id: 

Not Reported 

P 

1900 

UT4000000206162 

AU188 

NNW 

1 - 2 Miles 

Lower 

UT WELLS 

UT4000000206163 

Wrnum: 

Type: 

Status: 

Uses: 

Cfs: 

Acft: 

Location: 

Win: 

Owner: 

Source: 

59-3663 

Chexnum: 

Underground 

Summary st: 

UGWC 

Priority: 

DIMOS 

.134 

0 

S350 W3150 NE 19 1N 1W SL 

0 



Not Reported 

P 

1900 

UT4000000206163 

AU189 

NNW 

1 - 2 Miles 

Lower 

UT WELLS 

UT4000000206164 

Wrnum: 

Type: 

Status: 

Uses: 

Cfs: 

Acft: 

Location: 

Win: 

Owner: 

Source: 

59-2927 

Underground 

UGWC 

DS 

.123 

0 

S349 W3149 NE 19 1N 1W SL 

0 



Chexnum: 

Summary st: 

Priority: 

Site id: 

Not Reported 

P 

1900 

UT4000000206164 

TC02814573.1r Page A-79


Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

AU190 

NNW 

1 - 2 Miles 

Lower 

Database 

UT WELLS 

EDR ID Number 

UT4000000206165 

Wrnum: 

Type: 

Status: 

Uses: 

Cfs: 

Acft: 

Location: 

Win: 

Owner: 

Source: 

59-3664 

Chexnum: 

Underground 

Summary st: 

UGWC 

Priority: 

DIMOS 

.123 

0 

S349 W3149 NE 19 1N 1W SL 

0 



Not Reported 

P 

1900 

UT4000000206165 

191 

East 

1 - 2 Miles 

Lower 

UT WELLS 

UT4000000204184 

Wrnum: 

Type: 

Status: 

Uses: 

Cfs: 

Acft: 

Location: 

Win: 

Owner: 

Source: 

59-3112 

Underground 

UGWC 

S 

.022 

0 

N50 E1120 SW 27 1N 1W SL 

0 



Chexnum: 

Summary st: 

Priority: 

Site id: 

Not Reported 

P 

1922 

UT4000000204184 

AU192 

NNW 

1 - 2 Miles 

Lower 

FED USGS 

USGS3060583 

Agency cd: 

Site name: 

Latitude: 

Longitude: 

Dec lon: 

Coor accr: 


State: 

Country: 

Location map: 

Altitude: 




Hydrologic: 

Topographic: 

Site type: 


USGS 

Site no: 

(B- 1- 1)19baa- 5 

404843 

EDR Site id: 

1115951 

Dec lat: 

-111.99827358 

Coor meth: 

F 


NAD83 

District: 

49 

County: 

US 

Land net: 

SALT LAKE CITY NORTH Map scale: 

4219.80 


.1 



Valley flat 


Not Reported 


404843111595101 

USGS3060583 

40.81188964 

M 

NAD27 

49 

035 

NENENWS19 T01N R01W S 

24000 

1900 

MST 

TC02814573.1r Page A-80




Aquifer Type: 

Not Reported 

Aquifer: 

VALLEY FILL 

Well depth: 

645 

Hole depth: 

645 



464900200 















Date 

Feet below 

Surface 

Feet to 

Sealevel 

Date 

Feet below 

Surface 

Feet to 

Sealevel 

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

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

1995-02-24 -5.92 1995-02-24 -5.92 

1994-02-15 -6.75 1994-02-15 -6.75 

1993-02-22 -7.42 1993-02-22 -7.42 

1992-02-13 -7.92 1992-02-13 -7.92 

1991-02-12 -5.45 1991-02-12 -5.45 

1990-02-21 -5.10 1990-02-21 -5.10 

1989-02-16 -5.70 1989-02-16 -5.70 

1988-02-16 -5.97 1988-02-16 -5.97 

1987-02-17 -6.90 1987-02-17 -6.90 

1986-02-12 -8.10 1986-02-12 -8.10 

1985-02-05 -10.80 1985-02-05 -10.80 

1984-07-31 -9.60 1984-07-31 -9.60 

1984-02-06 -9.10 1984-02-06 -9.10 

1983-02-14 -9.20 1983-02-14 -9.20 

1982-02-10 -8.50 1982-02-10 -8.50 

1981-02-14 -6.90 1981-02-14 -6.90 

1980-02-15 -7.20 1980-02-15 -7.20 

1979-02-22 -8.25 1979-02-22 -8.25 

1978-02-21 -9.10 1978-02-21 -9.10 

1977-02-16 -10.70 1977-02-16 -10.70 

1976-02-19 -10.60 1976-02-19 -10.60 

1975-02-18 -10.70 1975-02-18 -10.70 

1974-02-26 -11.90 1974-02-26 -11.90 

1973-02-22 -11.40 1973-02-22 -11.40 

1972-02-16 -11.50 1972-02-16 -11.50 

1971-02-23 -10.40 1971-02-23 -10.40 

1970-02-18 -10.30 1970-02-18 -10.30 

1969-09-03 -9.10 1969-09-03 -9.10 

1969-02-18 -9.60 1969-02-18 -9.60 

1968-09-05 -9.70 1968-09-05 -9.70 

1968-02-12 -9.60 1968-02-12 -9.60 

1967-09-06 -9.30 1967-09-06 -9.30 

1967-02-13 -10.14 1967-02-13 -10.14 

1966-09-05 -10.00 1966-09-05 -10.00 

1966-02-21 -10.40 1966-02-21 -10.40 

1965-09-08 -10.26 1965-09-08 -10.26 

1935-08-02 -16.95 1935-08-02 -16.95 

1934-10-29 -18.10 1934-10-29 -18.10 

1934-08-13 -18.66 1934-08-13 -18.66 

1933-11-13 -18.17 1933-11-13 -18.17 

TC02814573.1r Page A-81


Ground-water levels, continued. 

Date 

Feet below 

Surface 

Feet to 

Sealevel 

Date 

Feet below 

Surface 

Feet to 

Sealevel 

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

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

1933-05-19 -19.03 1933-05-19 -19.03 

1933-03-20 -19.17 1933-03-20 -19.17 

1933-01-11 -18.59 1933-01-11 -18.59 

1932-12-13 -18.88 1932-12-13 -18.88 

1932-11-03 -19.03 1932-11-03 -19.03 

1932-10-06 -19.60 1932-10-06 -19.60 

1932-09-12 -18.74 1932-09-12 -18.74 

1932-08-12 -19.53 1932-08-12 -19.53 

1932-07-08 -19.60 1932-07-08 -19.60 

1932-06-09 -19.60 1932-06-09 -19.60 

1932-05-03 -20.00 1932-05-03 -20.00 

1932-04-11 -24.00 1932-04-11 -24.00 

1932-03-07 -23.60 1932-03-07 -23.60 

1932-02-05 -24.00 1932-02-05 -24.00 

1932-01-11 -24.08 1932-01-11 -24.08 

1931-12-03 -23.36 1931-12-03 -23.36 

1931-11-13 -19.60 1931-11-13 -19.60 

1931-10-10 -18.88 1931-10-10 -18.88 

AV193 

SSE 

1 - 2 Miles 

Higher 

UT WELLS 

UT4000000201359 

Wrnum: 

Type: 

Status: 

Uses: 

Cfs: 

Acft: 

Location: 

Win: 

Owner: 

Source: 

0343006P00 

Underground 

APPLAPP 

Not Reported 

0 

0 

N1400 W1200 SE 05 1S 1W SL 

27192 

HENRIE, BRET & YARNELL 


Chexnum: 

Summary st: 

Priority: 

Site id: 

Not Reported 

A 

Not Reported 

UT4000000201359 

AT194 

NE 

1 - 2 Miles 

Higher 

UT WELLS 

UT4000000205782 

Wrnum: 

Type: 

Status: 

Uses: 

Cfs: 

Acft: 

Location: 

Win: 

Owner: 

Source: 

59-2346 

Underground 

UGWCDIS 

Not Reported 

.013 

0 

S2734 W1476 NE 21 1N 1W SL 

0 

ADA B. NEBEKER 


Chexnum: 

Summary st: 

Priority: 

Site id: 

Not Reported 

T 

19170000 

UT4000000205782 

TC02814573.1r Page A-82


Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Elevation 

195 

SW 

1 - 2 Miles 

Lower 

Database 

UT WELLS 

EDR ID Number 

UT4000000201880 

Wrnum: 

Type: 

Status: 

Uses: 

Cfs: 

Acft: 

Location: 

Win: 

Owner: 

Source: 

59-3857 

Chexnum: 

Underground 

Summary st: 

APPLAPP 

Priority: 

DIOS 

2 

0 

S2000 E100 NW 06 1S 1W SL 

742 



Not Reported 

A 

19720531 

UT4000000201880 

AV196 

SSE 

1 - 2 Miles 

Higher 

UT WELLS 

UT4000000201326 

Wrnum: 

Type: 

Status: 

Uses: 

Cfs: 

Acft: 

Location: 

Win: 

Owner: 

Source: 

59-2159 

Underground 

UGWC 

DI 

.011 

0 

N1320 W1300 SE 05 1S 1W SL 

0 

TONY AND ADA KATSOS 


Chexnum: 

Summary st: 

Priority: 

Site id: 

Not Reported 

P 

19290000 

UT4000000201326 

197 

NE 

1 - 2 Miles 

Higher 

FED USGS 

USGS3039435 

Agency cd: 

Site name: 

Latitude: 

Longitude: 

Dec lon: 

Coor accr: 


State: 

Country: 

Location map: 

Altitude: 




Hydrologic: 

Topographic: 

Site type: 


USGS 

Site no: 

(B- 1- 1)21dba- 2 

404820 

EDR Site id: 

1115711 

Dec lat: 

-111.95382767 

Coor meth: 

F 


NAD83 

District: 

49 

County: 

US 

Land net: 

Not Reported 

Map scale: 

4216.00 


20 



Not Reported 


Not Reported 


404820111571101 

USGS3039435 

40.80550101 

M 

NAD27 

49 

035 

Not Reported 

Not Reported 

19180101 

MST 

TC02814573.1r Page A-83




Aquifer Type: 

Not Reported 

Aquifer: 

Not Reported 

Well depth: 

300 

Hole depth: 

Not Reported 



1464915001 















Date 

Feet below 

Surface 

Feet to 

Sealevel 

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

1958-08-26 -3.00 

TC02814573.1r Page A-84


Map ID 

Direction 

Distance 

Database 

EDR ID Number 

1 

NW 

1 - 2 Miles 

OIL_GAS 

UTG400000025513 

Api: 

Acct num: 

Field num: 

Locat foot: 

Utm surf n: 

Utm surf e: 

Utm bhl n: 

Utm bhl e: 

Qtr qtr: 

Township: 

Meridian: 

Dir horiz: 

Conf date: 

Lease type: 

Wellstatus: 

Totcum oil: 

Totcum gas: 

Totcum wtr: 

Ind tribe: 

Cbmethflag: 

Bond num: 

Ca number: 

Unit name: 

Lat surf: 

Long surf: 

Comments: 

Modifydate: 

4303516540 

Well name: 

P0233 

Alt addres: 

1 

Elevation: 

0664 FNL 1337 FWL 

4516452 

415569 

0 

0 

SWNW 

Section: 

010N 

Range: 

S 

County: 

Not Reported 

Conf flag: 

06/01/2008 

Lease num: 

4 

Abndondate: 

PA 

Well type: 

0 

0 

0 

Not Reported 

Multi lats: 

0 

Surfowntyp: 

Not Reported 

Bond type: 

Not Reported 

Field type: 

Not Reported 

40.79663 

-112.00081 

590824 COMPL AS WSW 5-5-59;SEE WATER RIGHTS: 

10/02/2008 

Site id: 

JONNIE FEE 1 

# 

4240 DF 

30 

010W 

SALT LAKE 

0 

FEE 

05/05/1959 

D 

0 

4 

Not Reported 

W 

UTG400000025513 

2 

NE 

1 - 2 Miles 

OIL_GAS 

UTG400000025516 

Api: 

Acct num: 

Field num: 

Locat foot: 

Utm surf n: 

Utm surf e: 

Utm bhl n: 

Utm bhl e: 

Qtr qtr: 

Township: 

Meridian: 

Dir horiz: 

Conf date: 

Lease type: 

Wellstatus: 

Totcum oil: 

Totcum gas: 

Totcum wtr: 

Ind tribe: 

Cbmethflag: 

4303516543 

P0857 

1 

1980 FSL 1980 FEL 

4517226 

419419 

0 

0 

NESE 

010N 

S 

Not Reported 

06/01/2008 

4 

PA 

0 

0 

0 

Not Reported 

0 

Well name: 

Alt addres: 

Elevation: 

Section: 

Range: 

County: 

Conf flag: 

Lease num: 

Abndondate: 

Well type: 

Multi lats: 

Surfowntyp: 

1 

# 

4250 GR 

21 

010W 

SALT LAKE 

0 

FEE 

05/05/1959 

NA 

0 

4 

TC02814573.1r Page A-85


Bond num: 

Ca number: 

Unit name: 

Lat surf: 

Long surf: 

Comments: 

Modifydate: 

Not Reported 

Bond type: 

UTU60892 

Field type: 

Not Reported 

40.80399 

-111.95528 

050412 FEE SURF & MINERALS;SEE FILE: 

10/02/2008 

Site id: 

Not Reported 

W 

UTG400000025516 

TC02814573.1r Page A-86


RADON 

AREA RADON INFORMATION 

State Database: UT Radon 

Radon Test Results 

Zip 

__ 

Pct. < 4 pCi/L 

_____________ 

4-10 

___ 

10-20 

____ 

>20 

__ 

Max pCi/L 

________ 

Avg 

__ 

Total Sites 

__________ 

84116 

100.0% 

0.0% 

0.0% 

0.0% 

3.4 

1.3 

15 

Federal EPA Radon Zone for SALT LAKE County: 2 

Note: Zone 1 indoor average level > 4 pCi/L. 

: Zone 2 indoor average level >= 2 pCi/L and

PHYSICAL SETTING SOURCE RECORDS SEARCHED 

TOPOGRAPHIC INFORMATION 

USGS 7.5’ Digital Elevation Model (DEM) 

Source: United States Geologic Survey 

EDR acquired the USGS 7.5’ Digital Elevation Model in 2002 and updated it in 2006. The 7.5 minute DEM corresponds 

to the USGS 1:24,000- and 1:25,000-scale topographic quadrangle maps. The DEM provides elevation data 

with consistent elevation units and projection. 

HYDROLOGIC INFORMATION 

Flood Zone Data: This data, available in select counties across the country, was obtained by EDR in 2003 & 2009 from the Federal 

Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). Data depicts 100-year and 500-year flood zones as defined by FEMA. 

NWI: National Wetlands Inventory. This data, available in select counties across the country, was obtained by EDR 

in 2002 and 2005 from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 

State Wetlands Data: Wetlands in Utah 

Source: Automated Geographic Reference Center 

Telephone: 801-537-9201 

HYDROGEOLOGIC INFORMATION 

AQUIFLOW R Information System 

Source: EDR proprietary database of groundwater flow information 

EDR has developed the AQUIFLOW Information System (AIS) to provide data on the general direction of groundwater 

flow at specific points. EDR has reviewed reports submitted to regulatory authorities at select sites and has 

extracted the date of the report, hydrogeologically determined groundwater flow direction and depth to water table 

information. 

GEOLOGIC INFORMATION 

Geologic Age and Rock Stratigraphic Unit 

Source: P.G. Schruben, R.E. Arndt and W.J. Bawiec, Geology of the Conterminous U.S. at 1:2,500,000 Scale - A digital 

representation of the 1974 P.B. King and H.M. Beikman Map, USGS Digital Data Series DDS - 11 (1994). 

STATSGO: State Soil Geographic Database 

Source: Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Services 

The U.S. Department of Agriculture’s (USDA) Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) leads the national 

Conservation Soil Survey (NCSS) and is responsible for collecting, storing, maintaining and distributing soil 

survey information for privately owned lands in the United States. A soil map in a soil survey is a representation 

of soil patterns in a landscape. Soil maps for STATSGO are compiled by generalizing more detailed (SSURGO) 

soil survey maps. 

SSURGO: Soil Survey Geographic Database 

Source: Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Services (NRCS) 

Telephone: 800-672-5559 

SSURGO is the most detailed level of mapping done by the Natural Resources Conservation Services, mapping 

scales generally range from 1:12,000 to 1:63,360. Field mapping methods using national standards are used to 

construct the soil maps in the Soil Survey Geographic (SSURGO) database. SSURGO digitizing duplicates the 

original soil survey maps. This level of mapping is designed for use by landowners, townships and county 

natural resource planning and management. 

TC02814573.1r Page A-88


LOCAL / REGIONAL WATER AGENCY RECORDS 

FEDERAL WATER WELLS 

PWS: Public Water Systems 

Source: EPA/Office of Drinking Water 

Telephone: 202-564-3750 

Public Water System data from the Federal Reporting Data System. A PWS is any water system which provides water to at 

least 25 people for at least 60 days annually. PWSs provide water from wells, rivers and other sources. 

PWS ENF: Public Water Systems Violation and Enforcement Data 

Source: EPA/Office of Drinking Water 

Telephone: 202-564-3750 

Violation and Enforcement data for Public Water Systems from the Safe Drinking Water Information System (SDWIS) after 

August 1995. Prior to August 1995, the data came from the Federal Reporting Data System (FRDS). 

USGS Water Wells: USGS National Water Inventory System (NWIS) 

This database contains descriptive information on sites where the USGS collects or has collected data on surface 

water and/or groundwater. The groundwater data includes information on wells, springs, and other sources of groundwater. 

STATE RECORDS 

Water Rights Database 

Source: Department of Natural Resources, Division of Water Rights 

Telephone: 801-538-7408 

OTHER STATE DATABASE INFORMATION 

Utah Oil, Gas and Mining Database 

Source: Department of Natural Resources 

Telephone: 801-538-5257 

The Well Data file contains one record of basic information for each well in the Utah Division of Oil, Gas and 

Mining database. 

RADON 

State Database: UT Radon 


Telephone: 801-536-4250 

Test Results by Zip Code 

Area Radon Information 

Source: USGS 

Telephone: 703-356-4020 

The National Radon Database has been developed by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

(USEPA) and is a compilation of the EPA/State Residential Radon Survey and the National Residential Radon Survey. 

The study covers the years 1986 - 1992. Where necessary data has been supplemented by information collected at 

private sources such as universities and research institutions. 

EPA Radon Zones 

Source: EPA 

Telephone: 703-356-4020 

Sections 307 & 309 of IRAA directed EPA to list and identify areas of U.S. with the potential for elevated indoor 

radon levels. 

OTHER 

Airport Landing Facilities: Private and public use landing facilities 

Source: Federal Aviation Administration, 800-457-6656 

Epicenters: World earthquake epicenters, Richter 5 or greater 

Source: Department of Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 

TC02814573.1r Page A-89


STREET AND ADDRESS INFORMATION 

© 2010 Tele Atlas North America, Inc. All rights reserved. This material is proprietary and the subject of copyright protection 

and other intellectual property rights owned by or licensed to Tele Atlas North America, Inc. The use of this material is subject 

to the terms of a license agreement. You will be held liable for any unauthorized copying or disclosure of this material. 

TC02814573.1r Page A-90

Appendix D 

Air Quality

Technical Memorandum: Emissions Modeling


Emissions Modeling 



Prepared for 

CH2M Hill 

And the 


March 2012 

Prepared by

EMISSIONS MODELING 

Contents 

Page 

1.0 Introduction ............................................................................................................................. 1 

2.0 Assumptions ............................................................................................................................ 2 

2.1 Ground Service Equipment ....................................................................................... 2 

2.2 Aircraft Traffic ............................................................................................................ 2 

2.3 Roadway Traffic ......................................................................................................... 3 

3.0 Results ...................................................................................................................................... 4 

Attachment A: EDMS Input Parameter 




i


1.0 Introduction 

The purpose of this technical memorandum is to report the results of a ‘screening level’ air 

quality modeling analysis prepared as part of the Environmental Assessment of the 

Terminal Redevelopment Program (“Project”) at Salt Lake City International Airport. As 

used in this memorandum, ‘screening level’ indicates that the Project specific impacts were 

analyzed using default values provided in the emissions model and industry accepted 

values for the analysis. This approach allows for the identification of general trends and the 

magnitude of air quality emissions, while recognizing that Airport-specific data would be 

required to support a refined emissions inventory. The emissions modeling includes 

landside and airside sources, such as surface roadway traffic, aircraft in all modes 

(e.g. takeoff, taxi, and landing) and ground service equipment. Emissions are modeled 

using FAA’s Emissions and Dispersion Modeling System (EDMS) Version 5.1.3. Five 

scenarios have been modeled: Baseline 2009, Build 2020, No-Build 2020, Build 2025, and 

No-Build 2025. Dispersion of air pollutants was not considered in this analysis since the 

analysis was only intended to quantify emission changes. Modeling inputs were obtained 

from roadway and aviation analyses prepared as part of this Environmental Assessment 

and can be found in the Attachment. 




1


2.0 Assumptions 

When modeling the emissions produced by roadway traffic, EDMS defaults were used for 

all variables except annual vehicle miles traveled (VMT) and average speed, which were 

obtained from the roadway analyses presented in the Attachment. When modeling the 

emissions produced by airside sources, EDMS defaults were used for all variables except 

annual departure/arrival operations and taxi times, which were obtained from the airfield 

analyses presented in the Attachment. Additional information on specific sources is 

provided below. 

2.1 Ground Service Equipment 

Ground service equipment (GSE) usage for all five scenarios were modeled using the 

activity profiles provided by EDMS. Use of these variables assumes no change in GSE use 

between build and no-build scenarios. For example, the average distance a bag tug or 

pushback tractor travels for each operation is assumed to be equivalent among all scenarios. 

Use of the default variables does not account for any changes to GSE operations resulting 

from changes in gate configurations. Likewise the use of the default values does not reflect 

potential differences in the availability and proximity of gate services (e.g. pre-conditioned 

air, ground power, potable water, triturators, catering facilities, or refueling infrastructure). 

2.2 Aircraft Traffic 

The number of aircraft operations was provided for an average day; the air quality 

modeling multiplied this average day by 365 to establish annual operations. This analysis 

was prepared using the default engine types * for each aircraft included in the EDMS model. 

EDMS includes the exact model for each of the aircraft types considered in this analysis with 

the exception of the Astra 1125 and the Boeing 787-800. The emissions from these aircraft 

were assumed to be comparable to the emissions from a Cessna 560 Citation V and a 

Boeing 767, respectively. It was also assumed that auxiliary power units are run for the 

EDMS default average of 26 minutes per landing-takeoff cycle and that the aircraft fleet mix 

will not vary among build and no-build scenarios. 

* Default engines in EDMS represent the most common engine type for a particular aircraft based on data from the BACK 

aviation database. 




A-2


2.3 Roadway Traffic 

The EDMS “Default Fleet Mix” which includes vehicles of all types, fuels, and ages; was 

assumed to accurately represent the distribution of surface roadway traffic. No distinction 

was made between VMT from passenger cars and heavy-duty vehicles. This standard 

distribution was applied to all roadway segments. 




3


3.0 Results 

Emission estimate results can be found in Table 1; Table 2 shows the net change in total 

emissions (i.e. the sum of aircraft, roadways, and GSE emissions). The net change is defined 

as the total emissions in the “build” scenario minus the total baseline emissions in the “nobuild” 

scenario for each future year. The results indicate a consistent decrease in emissions 

from the “no-build” to the “build” scenarios for each pollutant estimated. 

Table 1 

EMISSIONS ESTIMATE (TONS) 



Year Scenario Source CO VOC NOX SOX PM10 PM2.5 

2009 Baseline Aircraft 1172.7 227.9 1113.7 119.9 21.5 21.5 

Roadways 290.7 21.8 35.7 0.3 1.1 0.7 

GSE 1453.9 49.2 147.1 4.5 4.3 4.2 

Subtotal 2917.3 298.8 1296.5 124.7 26.9 26.3 

2020 Build Aircraft 1299.7 257.8 1382.3 143.6 24.6 24.6 

Roadways 256.9 14.3 15.9 0.3 0.9 0.4 

GSE 359.5 12.8 36.2 2.8 2.0 1.9 

Subtotal 1916.1 284.9 1434.4 146.6 27.5 26.9 

No-Build Aircraft 1321.8 261.4 1384.8 144.4 24.7 24.7 

Roadways 267.8 14.9 16.6 0.3 0.9 0.5 

GSE 359.5 12.8 36.2 2.8 2.0 1.9 

Subtotal 1949.1 289.1 1437.6 147.4 27.6 27.0 

2025 Build Aircraft 1421.8 292.1 1522.0 157.4 26.6 26.6 

Roadways 264.4 13.3 13.5 0.3 0.9 0.4 

GSE 303.7 11.3 27.6 3.0 1.8 1.7 

Subtotal 1989.9 316.7 1563.0 160.7 29.3 28.7 

No-Build Aircraft 1434.7 291.7 1521.7 157.5 26.7 26.7 

Roadways 275.7 13.8 14.1 0.3 1.0 0.4 

GSE 303.7 11.3 27.6 3.0 1.8 1.7 

Subtotal 2014.1 316.8 1563.4 160.8 29.5 28.9 

Source: LeighFisher, November 2011. 

Note: May not add due to rounding. 




A-4


Table 2 

BUILD VS. NO-BUILD NET CHANGE IN TOTAL EMISSIONS (TONS) 



Year CO VOC NOX SOX PM10 PM2.5 

2020 (33.0) (4.25) (3.2) (0.8) (0.1) (0.1) 

2025 (24.2) (0.2) (0.3) (0.2) (0.2) (0.2) 


Note: Net change is defined as the total emissions in the “build” 

scenario minus the total baseline emissions in the “no-build” 

scenario. 




5


Attachment A: EDMS Input Parameters 

Table A-1 

ROADWAY INPUT PARAMETERS 



Year 

Scenario 

Annual 

Vehicle Miles 

Traveled 

Average 

Speed (mph) 

2009 Baseline 22,366,505 19.50 

2020 Build 27,694,864 20.20 

No-Build 28,868,446 19.24 

2025 Build 29,613,630 20.15 

No-Build 30,879,195 19.02 

Source: LeighFisher roadway analysis, November 2011. 




A-1


Table A-2 

2009 AIRCRAFT INPUT PARAMETERS 



Aircraft Annual Operations (LTOs) Average Taxi-In Time Average Taxi-Out Time 

AT43 365 0:02 0:06 

A300 3285 0:08 0:15 

A318 365 0:06 0:08 

A320 6752.5 0:04 0:12 

A330 365 0:05 0:15 

B733 7300 0:04 0:11 

B735 365 0:05 0:13 

B73G 8030 0:04 0:11 

B738 9855 0:05 0:15 

B752 365 0:05 0:13 

B757 10037.5 0:05 0:13 

B767 1460 0:05 0:11 

DC10 730 0:09 0:13 

KC35 730 0:05 0:09 

MD80 1825 0:05 0:11 

MD83 365 0:05 0:10 

M90 8212.5 0:05 0:11 

CRJ 40880 0:06 0:12 

CR7 14965 0:06 0:12 

CR9 16425 0:06 0:13 

CL30 1825 0:03 0:08 

CL60 2190 0:03 0:07 

LJ25 365 0:05 0:08 

LJ31 365 0:04 0:06 

LJ35 365 0:03 0:07 

LJ55 365 0:03 0:07 

LJ60 365 0:03 0:10 

C208 1825 0:04 0:08 

C210 730 0:04 0:09 

C425 730 0:04 0:07 

C441 730 0:03 0:07 

C501 730 0:03 0:08 

C525 1095 0:03 0:07 

C550 730 0:03 0:07 

C25A 1825 0:04 0:07 

C560 5475 0:03 0:07 

ASTR 730 0:03 0:09 

C650 365 0:03 0:08 

C25B 1095 0:03 0:08 

C680 1095 0:04 0:08 

C750 1825 0:03 0:07 

FA10 365 0:03 0:06 

F2TH 365 0:03 0:08 

TBM8 365 0:03 0:08 

EM2 11315 0:07 0:12 

ERJ 365 0:05 0:10 

E90 0 0:00 0:00 

SW4 1460 0:04 0:07 

GLF2 365 0:04 0:07 

GALX 730 0:03 0:09 

GLF3 365 0:03 0:11 

GLF4 1460 0:04 0:09 

G5 730 0:04 0:08 

C130 365 0:05 0:07 

MU2 730 0:03 0:07 

P180 730 0:04 0:08 

PC12 3285 0:03 0:08 

PA46 730 0:04 0:09 

B190 365 0:03 0:07 

BE99 1095 0:04 0:07 

H25B 730 0:03 0:07 

H25C 365 0:03 0:06 

BE9T 365 0:03 0:07 

BE20 2190 0:04 0:07 

BE30 730 0:04 0:07 

B787 0 0:00 0:00 

Source: LeighFisher TAAM analysis, January 2011. 




A-2


Aircraft 

Annual 

Operations (LTOs) 

Table A-3 




Build Scenario 

Avg. Taxi-In Time 

No-Build Scenario 


Build Scenario Avg. 

Taxi-Out Time 


Avg. Taxi-Out Time 

AT43 365 0:03 0:03 0:07 0:07 

A300 4015 0:07 0:07 0:14 0:16 

A318 365 0:04 0:06 0:10 0:11 

A320 10585 0:04 0:04 0:12 0:12 

A330 365 0:06 0:08 0:10 0:12 

B733 4380 0:06 0:04 0:13 0:11 

B735 0 0:00 0:00 0:00 0:00 

B73G 13505 0:06 0:04 0:13 0:12 

B738 20075 0:05 0:05 0:13 0:13 

B752 182.5 0:00 0:00 0:14 0:15 

B757 8212.5 0:05 0:05 0:12 0:12 

B767 365 0:05 0:06 0:13 0:13 

DC10 730 0:08 0:08 0:10 0:17 

KC35 730 0:04 0:04 0:08 0:08 

MD80 1460 0:04 0:06 0:11 0:11 

MD83 365 0:04 0:05 0:10 0:09 

M90 7847.5 0:05 0:05 0:12 0:11 

CRJ 10585 0:05 0:07 0:13 0:13 

CR7 30295 0:05 0:06 0:12 0:12 

CR9 38690 0:05 0:06 0:12 0:13 

CL30 1825 0:03 0:03 0:07 0:08 

CL60 2555 0:03 0:03 0:08 0:07 

LJ25 365 0:03 0:03 0:07 0:07 

LJ31 365 0:04 0:04 0:06 0:06 

LJ35 365 0:03 0:03 0:07 0:07 

LJ55 365 0:03 0:03 0:09 0:10 

LJ60 365 0:03 0:03 0:10 0:10 

C208 2190 0:04 0:04 0:09 0:09 

C210 730 0:04 0:04 0:10 0:10 

C425 730 0:04 0:04 0:06 0:07 

C441 730 0:03 0:03 0:08 0:09 

C501 1095 0:04 0:04 0:08 0:08 

C525 1095 0:02 0:02 0:07 0:08 

C550 1095 0:03 0:03 0:10 0:09 

C25A 2190 0:04 0:04 0:08 0:08 

C560 6570 0:03 0:03 0:08 0:08 

ASTR 730 0:03 0:03 0:08 0:09 

C650 365 0:04 0:04 0:07 0:06 

C25B 1095 0:04 0:04 0:07 0:07 

C680 1095 0:04 0:04 0:10 0:10 

C750 2555 0:03 0:03 0:08 0:08 

FA10 365 0:03 0:03 0:06 0:06 

F2TH 365 0:03 0:03 0:09 0:09 

TBM8 365 0:03 0:03 0:12 0:12 

EM2 11315 0:05 0:07 0:11 0:12 

ERJ 0 0:00 0:00 0:00 0:00 

E90 730 0:06 0:05 0:11 0:11 

SW4 1825 0:03 0:03 0:07 0:07 

GLF2 365 0:05 0:05 0:06 0:06 

GALX 1095 0:03 0:03 0:09 0:09 

GLF3 365 0:03 0:03 0:11 0:11 

GLF4 1825 0:04 0:04 0:08 0:08 

G5 1095 0:03 0:03 0:11 0:10 

C130 365 0:04 0:04 0:09 0:09 

MU2 1095 0:03 0:03 0:10 0:09 

P180 730 0:05 0:05 0:09 0:09 

PC12 3650 0:03 0:03 0:09 0:09 

PA46 730 0:04 0:04 0:09 0:10 

B190 365 0:03 0:03 0:07 0:07 

BE99 1095 0:04 0:04 0:07 0:07 

H25B 1095 0:04 0:04 0:09 0:09 

H25C 365 0:04 0:04 0:08 0:09 

BE9T 365 0:04 0:04 0:07 0:07 

BE20 2555 0:04 0:04 0:09 0:09 

BE30 730 0:03 0:03 0:10 0:09 

B787 2737.5 0:06 0:06 0:13 0:12 

Source: LeighFisher TAAM analysis, November 2011. 




A-3


Aircraft 

Annual 

Operations (LTOs) 

Table A-4 












AT43 365 0:03 0:03 0:07 0:07 

A300 4380 0:07 0:07 0:14 0:16 

A318 730 0:04 0:06 0:15 0:14 

A320 16060 0:05 0:05 0:12 0:13 

A330 365 0:07 0:06 0:12 0:11 

B733 0 0:00 0:00 0:00 0:00 

B735 0 0:00 0:00 0:00 0:00 

B73G 18432.5 0:06 0:04 0:14 0:12 

B738 22630 0:05 0:05 0:14 0:13 

B752 0 0:00 0:00 0:00 0:00 

B757 7847.5 0:05 0:05 0:13 0:13 

B767 0 0:00 0:00 0:00 0:00 

DC10 730 0:08 0:08 0:12 0:15 

KC35 730 0:04 0:04 0:11 0:10 

MD80 1460 0:04 0:06 0:10 0:12 

MD83 365 0:05 0:06 0:10 0:09 

M90 7847.5 0:05 0:05 0:12 0:12 

CRJ 10402.5 0:05 0:07 0:13 0:13 

CR7 30295 0:05 0:06 0:12 0:13 

CR9 40150 0:06 0:06 0:13 0:13 

CL30 1825 0:03 0:03 0:08 0:08 

CL60 2555 0:03 0:03 0:08 0:08 

LJ25 365 0:05 0:05 0:11 0:11 

LJ31 365 0:04 0:04 0:08 0:07 

LJ35 365 0:03 0:03 0:06 0:07 

LJ55 365 0:03 0:03 0:09 0:08 

LJ60 730 0:03 0:03 0:11 0:12 

C208 2190 0:04 0:04 0:09 0:09 

C210 730 0:05 0:04 0:11 0:12 

C425 1095 0:04 0:04 0:08 0:07 

C441 1095 0:02 0:02 0:09 0:09 

C501 1095 0:04 0:04 0:09 0:08 

C525 1460 0:02 0:02 0:07 0:07 

C550 1095 0:03 0:03 0:08 0:08 

C25A 2190 0:04 0:04 0:08 0:08 

C560 6935 0:03 0:03 0:09 0:09 

ASTR 1095 0:03 0:03 0:08 0:08 

C650 365 0:03 0:03 0:09 0:07 

C25B 1460 0:04 0:05 0:08 0:07 

C680 1095 0:03 0:03 0:10 0:09 

C750 2555 0:03 0:03 0:08 0:08 

FA10 365 0:03 0:03 0:07 0:07 

F2TH 365 0:03 0:03 0:13 0:13 

TBM8 365 0:03 0:03 0:13 0:12 

EM2 12410 0:05 0:08 0:11 0:13 

ERJ 0 0:00 0:00 0:00 0:00 

E90 730 0:04 0:05 0:11 0:11 

SW4 2190 0:03 0:03 0:07 0:07 

GLF2 365 0:05 0:05 0:08 0:09 

GALX 1095 0:03 0:03 0:08 0:08 

GLF3 365 0:03 0:03 0:12 0:12 

GLF4 1825 0:04 0:04 0:09 0:09 

G5 1095 0:04 0:04 0:10 0:12 

C130 365 0:04 0:04 0:09 0:09 

MU2 1095 0:03 0:03 0:08 0:09 

P180 730 0:04 0:04 0:10 0:10 

PC12 4015 0:03 0:03 0:09 0:09 

PA46 730 0:04 0:04 0:09 0:09 

B190 365 0:03 0:03 0:08 0:08 

BE99 1460 0:04 0:04 0:09 0:09 

H25B 1095 0:04 0:04 0:09 0:09 

H25C 365 0:03 0:03 0:09 0:07 

BE9T 365 0:03 0:03 0:08 0:08 

BE20 2555 0:03 0:03 0:09 0:09 

BE30 1095 0:04 0:04 0:09 0:09 

B787 4380 0:06 0:06 0:13 0:13 

Source: LeighFisher TAAM analysis, November 2011. 




A-4

Technical Memorandum: Airfield Simulation


Airfield Simulation 



Prepared for 

CH2M Hill 


March 2012 

Prepared by

AIRFIELD SIMULATION 

Contents 

Page 

1.0 Overview .................................................................................................................................. 1 

1.1 Objectives ..................................................................................................................... 1 

1.2 TAAM Description ..................................................................................................... 3 

2.0 Modeling Assumptions ......................................................................................................... 4 

2.1 Forecast Demand/Flight Schedule Development ................................................. 4 

2.2 Weather and Wind Analysis ..................................................................................... 6 

2.3 Runway Configurations ............................................................................................ 6 

2.4 Experimental Design .................................................................................................. 8 

2.5 Airspace Structure and Flight Procedures .............................................................. 8 

2.6 Taxiway Layout .......................................................................................................... 9 

2.7 Gate Assignments ..................................................................................................... 11 

3.0 Results .................................................................................................................................... 13 

3.1 Simulation Validation .............................................................................................. 13 

3.2 Simulation Results .................................................................................................... 13 

3.3 Conclusions ............................................................................................................... 17 

Figures 

1 Terminal Layout Scenarios .................................................................................................... 2 

2 Average Day Passenger Activity .......................................................................................... 5 

3 Runway Operating Configurations ..................................................................................... 7 

4 No-Action Taxiway Layout................................................................................................. 10 

5 TRP Taxiway Layout ............................................................................................................ 12 

Tables 

1 Average Day Activity Levels ................................................................................................ 4 

2 TAAM Experimental Design ................................................................................................ 8 

3 Airfield Simulation Average Results ................................................................................. 14 

4 Airfield Simulation Annualized Results ........................................................................... 15 




i


1.0 Overview 

This airfield simulation analysis was performed to support the Environmental Assessment 

(EA) of the Terminal Redevelopment Program (TRP) at Salt Lake City International Airport 

(the Airport or SLC). The analysis included an assessment of the TRP’s impact on aircraft 

taxiing movements and congestion and the delay experienced by aircraft within the terminal 

area. 

1.1 Objectives 

The objective of the airfield simulation was to compare the estimated changes in aircraft 

taxiing times and delays resulting from the TRP with those expected to occur with the No- 

Action plan. Illustrations of the No-Action and TRP terminal area scenarios are presented in 

Figure 1. The airfield-related assessment consisted of the following tasks performed for the 

No-Action plan and TRP: 

1. Evaluate taxi-out and taxi-in times for use in subsequent air quality emissions 

analyses 

2. Calculate unimpeded taxiing times and delays 

3. Evaluate overall average aircraft delay per operation 

The Total Airspace and Airport Modeller (TAAM) was used to simulate the No-Action and 

project scenarios. TAAM was used to estimate and compare the performance of the existing 

and TRP terminal and airfield layouts at the 2009 (defined as existing conditions), 2020, and 

2025 forecast activity levels. The results of the simulation analyses, coupled with expert 

judgment, were used as inputs to the air quality emissions modeling. This simulation 

modeling effort was undertaken in coordination with the Salt Lake City Department of 

Airports (SLCDA), the FAA Air Traffic Organization (i.e., Salt Lake City Tower and 

Terminal Radar Approach Control), and Delta Air Lines. 




1


Figure 1 

TERMINAL LAYOUT SCENARIOS 



No-Action 

TRP 

Source: 

SLC Terminal Development Program, Phasing Studies—Construction Sequence, HOK, 

August 30, 2011. 




2


1.2 TAAM Description 

TAAM is a fast-time airfield and airspace simulation model provided by Jeppesen 

Optimization Solutions. A fast-time model signifies that the time required to run the 

simulation model is less than real-time (i.e., one minute of simulation covers more than one 

minutes of real-time). By contrast, a real-time simulation is one where the simulation time 

matches real-time. One can use TAAM to model the movement of individual aircraft 

operations through the airspace and on the airfield in accordance with user-specified air 

traffic control and ground control rules and aircraft manufacturer-specified aircraft 

performance characteristics. 

TAAM was selected for use in the Environmental Assessment for the following reasons: 

1. TAAM provides a superior visual modeling environment that is easily understood 

by key stakeholders. The model enables the user to program in flexible taxiway, 

runway, and gate usage rules, which permit realistic modeling of aircraft ground 

movements. 

2. TAAM has already been used extensively by key Airport tenant, Delta Air Lines at 

other airports. 

3. TAAM produces performance metrics that are well suited to the assessment of 

taxiway and gate operations, including the following: (1) taxiing delays, which 

would include any delays incurred while taxiing and in the lineup queue (i.e., 

waiting in line for departure); (2) overall delays, which represent excess travel times 

associated with the presence of other aircraft; and (3) unimpeded aircraft taxiing 

times, measured as unimpeded OUT-to-OFF times (out of the gate to off the 

ground) for departures and unimpeded ON-to-IN times (on the ground to in the 

gate) for arrivals. 

TAAM Version 2010.2.0, Release 10, was used in this analysis. 




3


2.0 Modeling Assumptions 

The model inputs and assumptions used in the simulation analysis are described in the 

following sections. 

2.1 Forecast Demand/Flight Schedule Development 

Aircraft flight schedules for the 2009, 2020, and 2025 demand levels were developed using 

the annual activity forecasts. The flight schedules used in the simulation effort represent an 

“average annual day” (i.e., total annual activity divided by 365 days in a year). More detail 

on the forecast and flight schedule development can be found in “Technical Memorandum, 

Aviation Demand Forecasts, Salt Lake City Environmental Assessment, November 2010, 

LeighFisher.” 

Table 1 summarizes the average-day activity levels that were simulated. Commercial 

passenger and cargo arrivals in the flight schedules were “linked” to subsequent departing 

flights to provide a “matched” flight schedule for input to the TAAM modeling of terminal 

gate occupancy and pushback operations. 

Table 1 

AVERAGE DAY ACTIVITY LEVELS 



Year 


Passenger Total 

2009 762 1,021 

2020 890 1,192 

2025 953 1,279 

Source: LeighFisher, January 2011. 




4


Because the main area of focus for the simulation analysis were operations in the aircraft 

gate and parking apron areas, the passenger flight schedule was of particular interest. 

Figure 2 shows the temporal distribution of the 2009, 2020, and 2025 passenger flight 

schedules. This figure shows a rolling count of the number of passenger operations 

scheduled in the next 60 minutes, sampled every 6 minutes. Arrivals are shown plotted 

upward on the positive vertical or "y"-axis, and departures are shown plotted downward on 

the negative y-axis. 

Figure 2 

AVERAGE DAY PASSENGER ACTIVITY 



65 

55 

2009 2020 2025 

45 

35 

Arrivals 

25 

Rolling Hourly Operations 

(60 minute look ahead) 

15 

5 

5 

15 

25 

35 

5:00 

6:00 

7:00 

8:00 

9:00 

10:00 

11:00 

12:00 

13:00 

14:00 

15:00 

16:00 

17:00 

18:00 

19:00 

20:00 

21:00 

22:00 

23:00 

Departures 

45 

55 

65 


Figure 2 clearly shows the arrival and departure banks of the Delta Air Lines’ hubbing 

operation. Additionally, the figure indicates that the future peaking pattern is assumed to 

be very similar to the existing peaking pattern. That is to say, it is assumed that the peaks in 

traffic will not significantly widen or spread with the projected increase in activity. 

Therefore, the demands on gate, taxiway, and runway capacities are expected to increase in 

2020 and 2025 as the peaks become higher and more pronounced. 




5


2.2 Weather and Wind Analysis 

Weather conditions—namely cloud ceiling, visibility, and wind conditions—determine the 

air traffic control (ATC) procedures that can be used at an airport at any given time, which 

in turn affect runway capacity and aircraft delay. Discussions with representatives from 

FAA Salt Lake City Airport Traffic Control Tower/Terminal Radar Approach Control 

Facility (SLC Tower/TRACON), as well as analysis of weather observation data available 

from the FAA Aviation System Performance Metrics (ASPM) database indicated the 

weather conditions to be analyzed in the simulation. It was decided to model only visual 

meteorological conditions (VMC) because: 

 

 

VMC * conditions represent the prevalent operating condition, and occur 

approximately 90% of the time, according to an analysis of ASPM weather data 

from 2009. 

Flow rates are higher during VMC conditions, and thus represent the most 

demanding conditions for gate and taxiing operations. 

Data for 2009 from ASPM were used to estimate the percent occurrence of north flow, those 

aircraft arriving and departing toward the north, and south flow operating conditions, as 

follows: north flow 53.5% of the time; south flow 46.5% of the time. These annual percent 

occurrences were confirmed with observations of the SLC Tower/TRACON and discussions 

with air traffic specialists at those facilities. Assumed runway use procedures are described 

in the following section. 

2.3 Runway Configurations 

Direction of air traffic flow is largely dictated by prevailing wind and weather conditions. 

Because the Airport’s primary three runways are in a north-south orientation, the two 

primary runway operating configurations are north flow and south flow. As discussed 

above, north flow and south flow occur fairly evenly, and the flow is switched based on 

wind and weather. 

Typical north and south flow runway configurations are shown in Figure 3. Runway use 

was simulated in accordance with these runway configurations. The majority of commercial 

traffic uses Runways 16R-34L and 16L-34R, while Runway 17-35 is used primarily for 

* VMC is defined for SLC in the ASPM database as a cloud ceiling of at least 5,300 feet and visibility of at least 3 miles; however, 

according to the FAA ATCT, visual approaches are conducted down to minimums of about a 9,000-foot ceiling and 5- 8 mile 

visibility, below which ILS approaches are conducted. 




6


military and general aviation operations, as well as an offload for some commercial 

operations. 

Figure 3 

RUNWAY OPERATING CONFIGURATIONS 



Note: This diagram depicts the most common runway uses in Visual Meteorological Conditions. 

Source: LeighFisher, based on discussions with SLC Tower/TRACON, December 2010. 

According to SLC Tower/TRACON, no change in runway use or runway assignment 

would be expected with the TRP. Runways are currently assigned based on the origins and 

destinations of the flights rather than on aircraft parking locations. This practice is expected 

to continue with implementation of the TRP. Runway preference is determined using the 

following criteria, in rank order: (1) proximity to arrival fix * for arrivals, and departure gate 

for departures; (2) offloading/balancing rules which allow aircraft to use secondary 

* A fix is a pre-defined point in the airspace where arrivals merge into the incoming airport. 




7


runways in peak arrival/departure peaks; and (3) proximity of aircraft parking position to 

runway end (e.g., General Aviation and military planes prefer to use Runway 17-35). 

2.4 Experimental Design 

The experimental design specifies the characteristics of the individual TAAM simulation 

runs—or “experiments”—that were conducted in the analysis. Table 2 outlines the ten 

simulation experiments that were performed for this analysis. 

Table 2 

TAAM EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN 



Experiment 

Alternative 

Runway 

Use 

Percent 

occurrence 

Runway Configuration (a) 

(arrivals | departures) 

Activity 

level 

1 

2009 

North 

Arrival priority: 34R, 34L, 35 | 34L, 35 

2 53.5% 

2020 

Flow 

Departure priority: 34L, 35 | 34R, 34L, 35 

3 2025 

4 No Action 

2009 

5 South 

Arrival priority: 16R, 16L, 17 | 16R, 17 

46.5% 

2020 

6 Flow 

Departure priority: 16L, 17 | 16R, 16L, 17 2025 

7 

North 

Arrival priority: 34R, 34L, 35 | 34L, 35 2020 

Terminal 

53.5% 

8 Flow Departure priority: 34L, 35 | 34R, 34L, 35 2025 

Redevelopment 

9 South 

Arrival priority: 16R, 16L, 17 | 16R, 17 2020 

Plan 

46.5% 

10 Flow Departure priority: 16L, 17 | 16R, 16L, 17 2025 

(a) Arrival priority signifies highest arrivals capacity configuration, and departure priority signifies highest 

departure capacity configuration 


2.5 Airspace Structure and Flight Procedures 

Developing the modeling assumptions of the airspace structure and flight procedures was 

important for establishing the runway throughput rates, and in turn representing the 

appropriate demands on the terminal gates and taxiway system. The airspace structure and 

flight procedures assumed in TAAM were developed from (1) currently published Standard 

Terminal Arrival Routes (STARs) and Standard Instrument Departure Procedures (SIDs); 

(2) the Letter of Agreement between Salt Lake City Air Route Traffic Control Center and 

Salt Lake City Tower/TRACON, dated January 17, 2008; and (3) information contained in 

SLC Tower Order 7110.10Y, Salt Lake City ATC Tower and Air Traffic Control, dated 




8


October 30, 2009. 

In all experiments, arriving flights were assigned to an arrival fix on the basis of their origin 

airports. STARs were defined between these arrival fixes and runway ends at the Airport in 

accordance with actual air traffic procedures and input provided by SLC Tower/TRACON. 

Likewise, departing flights were assigned to departure gates on the basis of the locations of 

their destination cities. SIDs were defined between the runways and departure gates in 

accordance with actual air traffic procedures and input provided by the SLC Tower/TRACON. 

With respect to air traffic control rules, separation requirements specified in FAA Order 

JO 7110.65T, Air Traffic Control, were applied, including wake turbulence separation 

requirements. 

Airspeed restrictions for arriving flights were specified in TAAM to reflect the restrictions 

that are currently used by air traffic controllers. In particular, arrivals were limited to 

airspeeds no greater than 250 knots within SLC TRACON airspace. On final approach, 

arrival speeds were reduced to about 170 knots by the time aircraft reach the outer marker 

of the instrument landing system (ILS). 

In north flow, arrivals using Runways 34R and 35 were considered dependent, such that 

operations on one runway limit operations on the other. Likewise, in south flow, departures 

using Runways 16L and 17 were considered dependent. 

It is important to note that all findings presented in this Technical Memorandum assume 

that existing air traffic control procedures and runway use configurations would be retained 

throughout the planning period. 

2.6 Taxiway Layout 

The taxiway and taxilane geometry assumed in the No-Action scenario is shown in Figure 4. 

The demolition of the northern portion of Concourse B under the TRP scenario would 

enable existing Taxiway G to be extended full length to the end of Runway 34R. This 

taxiway is assumed to be constructed and operational in 2020 and 2025 for the purposes of 

simulation modeling in the TRP scenario. The geometric design of Taxiway G and the 

associated Airplane Design Group (ADG) * are shown in Figure 5. Taxiway G is designed to 

meet design standards for ADG-V aircraft (maximum 214 foot wingspan). However, two 

portions of the taxiway will not meet ADG-V taxiway separation standards including, 

*The Airplane Design Group (ADG) indicates the maximum aircraft wingspan a runway, taxiway, or taxilane can 

accommodate. 




9


(1) east of Concourse B will instead meet standards for ADG-III aircraft (maximum 118 foot 

wingspan), and (2) east of the Runway 34R deicing pads will instead meet standards for 

ADG-IV aircraft (maximum 171 foot wingspan). With relatively small percentage of ADG-V 

aircraft at the Airport, the aircraft size restrictions on Taxiway G are not expected to impact 

the majority of operations. Alternatively, larger aircraft will be expected to use Taxiway H, 

with little impact on overall average taxiing times. 

Another change in taxiway layout assumed for the future demand levels is the addition of 

Taxiway L, parallel to Runway 14-32. This taxiway is assumed to be constructed and 

operational in 2020 and 2025 for the purposes of simulation modeling in both the No-Action 

and TRP scenarios. However, Taxiway L is not in the vicinity of the terminal area and is 

expected to have limited impacts on the modeling results. 

Figure 4 

NO-ACTION TAXIWAY LAYOUT 



Source: HOK, June 2010. 




10


Taxilanes in the terminal apron area will be modified under the TRP scenario. The assumed 

taxilane layout and geometric design, including ADG used in the TRP models, are displayed 

on Figure 5. New terminal concourses (i.e. the South Concourse East and West) are 

depicted in darker blue. Assumptions related to the taxilane layout under the TRP scenario 

are listed below. 

 

 

Two north-south parallel ADG-V taxilanes are provided between the South 

Concourse West and Taxiway E. 

One parallel east-west ADG-V taxilane and one parallel east-west ADG-IV taxilane 

are provided between the north side of the South Concourse West to Taxiways A 

and B. The clearances are provided for independent ADG-IV pushbacks which 

would not obstruct flows on the taxilanes. 

To the south of the new South Concourse, two ADG-IVA (maximum 150 foot 

wingspan) taxilanes are provided on each of the east and west wings. No 

clearance for pushbacks is provided on these taxilanes. 

2.7 Gate Assignments 

Gate dependencies and sizes for the No-Action and TRP scenarios were provided by 

SLCDA. Passenger gates for the No-Action experiments were assigned based on 

discussions with SLCDA and a gating chart provided by Delta Air Lines. Airline gate 

assignments were not assumed to change from their existing use in the future years with the 

No-Action scenario. 

However, for the TRP scenario, gates assignments were changed based on assumptions 

developed from discussions with SLCDA. In particular, Delta Air Lines was assumed to be 

the tenant for the new South Concourse West, with any additional demand using Concourse 

C, Concourse D, and the new South Concourse East. The remainder of the gates on the new 

South Concourse East and Concourse B were allocated to the remaining carriers based on 

current airline market share at the airport. 

Aside from passenger terminal gate assignments, the only assumed change in parking 

position assignment from existing use was the relocation of FedEx aircraft parking positions 

from the south cargo apron to the north cargo apron in the 2020 and 2025 models for both 

the No-Action and TRP experiments. 




11


Figure 5 

TRP TAXIWAY LAYOUT 



Source: LeighFisher, based on discussions with SLCDA, November 2011. 




12


3.0 Results 

For purposes of estimating aircraft emissions, the primary performance metrics derived 

from the simulation modeling were average aircraft taxi-in and taxi-out times. The 

validation of the models and calculation of the results are described in the following 

sections. 

3.1 Simulation Validation 

Simulation validation was accomplished in two ways: (1) comparison of simulated 

maximum runway throughput rates and taxiing times to actual runway throughput rates 

and taxiing times, and (2) via visual validation (i.e., observing the TAAM computer graphics 

display with SLC Tower/TRACON staff). 

Validation of runway throughput rates was accomplished by (1) creating a series 

of validation flight schedules in which the levels of hourly arrival and departure demand far 

exceeded the anticipated capacity of the simulated runway system, (2) using these 

validation flight schedules in TAAM simulations, and (3) comparing the resulting runway 

throughput rates to actual maximum runway throughput rates as reported in the FAA’s 

ASPM database. 

In addition, draft versions of the TAAM simulation experiments prepared for the Master 

Plan Update were visually validated with representatives from the SLC Tower/TRACON. 

Comments received from these representatives, as well as from SLCDA and Delta Air Lines 

were incorporated into final versions of the TAAM models. 

3.2 Simulation Results 

For purposes of assessing the TRP’s impact on aircraft taxiing movements and congestion 

and the delay experienced by aircraft within the terminal area, the primary performance 

metrics used were average taxi time and average delay. The results of the simulation 

analysis including taxi time and delay are presented in Table 3 on a weighted-average, peraircraft 

basis, and in Table 4 as an annualized total basis. These metrics were computed by 

first multiplying (or weighting) the taxi time/delay estimates for individual TAAM 

simulation experiments by the estimated percent occurrence of their associated runway use 

configuration. 




13


Table 3 

AIRFIELD SIMULATION AVERAGE RESULTS 



Activity 

Level 

NO ACTION 

Average Delay (min/operation) Average Taxi Time (min) 

Arrivals Departures Average Taxi-out Taxi-in Average 

2009 3.16 3.40 3.28 11.68 5.54 8.60 

2020 4.08 3.73 3.91 11.96 5.57 8.77 

2025 4.58 4.52 4.55 12.49 5.56 9.02 

Activity 

Level 

TERMINAL REDEVELOPMENT PLAN (Option 1-ET) 



2009 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 

2020 3.87 3.16 3.52 11.81 5.32 8.57 

2025 4.39 3.69 4.04 12.26 5.37 8.82 

Activity 

Level 

DIFFERENTIAL 




2020 (0.21) (0.57) (0.39) (0.15) (0.25) (0.20) 

2025 (0.19) (0.83) (0.51) (0.23) (0.19) (0.20) 





14


Table 4 

AIRFIELD SIMULATION ANNUALIZED RESULTS 



Activity 

Level 

NO ACTION 


Arrivals Departures Overall Taxi-out Taxi-in Overall 

2009 9,862 10,590 20,452 36,379 17,289 53,625 

2020 14,768 13,501 28,305 43,290 20,161 63,487 

2025 17,831 17,598 35,429 48,628 21,647 70,236 

Activity 

Level 

TERMINAL REDEVELOPMENT PLAN (Option 1-ET) 


Arrivals Departures Average Taxi-out Taxi-in Overall 


2020 14,008 11,438 25,482 42,747 19,256 62,040 

2025 17,092 14,366 31,458 47,732 20,907 68,678 

Activity 

Level 

DIFFERENTIAL 


Arrivals Departures Average Taxi-out Taxi-in Overall 


2020 (760) (2,063) (2,823) (543) (905) (1,448) 

2025 (740) (3,231) (3,971) (895) (740) (1,557) 

Source: LeighFisher, November 2011 

The main conclusion that can be drawn from the results is that the TRP would reduce 

taxiing times by about 0.20 minutes and delay by about 0.40 to 0.50 minutes per aircraft 

operation compared to the No-Action scenario. The reduction in taxi time can be attributed 

mainly to a reduction in congestion and delay associated with the TRP layout, due to (1) the 

extension of Taxiway G to full-length, (2) more flexible gate usage (fewer gate-use 

restriction), (3) increased aircraft pushback areas which do not obstruct circulation, and 

(4) introduction of dual taxilanes and the elimination of some of the constricted “throats” 

between concourses. 

Average delay per operation decreases with the TRP. It is important to note that average 

delay is expected to grow over time as demand increases from 2020 to 2025 (from 3.91 to 

4.55 minutes per operation under the No-Action scenario, and from 3.52 to 4.04 minutes per 

operation under the TRP scenario); thus, the average delay levels is estimated to be lower in 




15


both future years with the TRP scenario. Looking deeper into the results, the 

runway/sequencing delay (the time waiting in a departure queue, or being held before 

landing) has not changed significantly between the No-Action scenario and the TRP 

scenario, which was as expected because the assumed runway use did not 

change. Therefore, the main driver of reduced aircraft delay under the TRP scenario is the 

reduction in gate and taxiway delays (i.e., the time that aircraft spend waiting to get into a 

gate, waiting to pushback from a gate, or waiting for opposing traffic on a taxiway to clear). 

These results would suggest that the TRP creates a more efficient and less congested taxiing 

environment. The main contributors to a decrease in average delay under the TRP scenario 

are: 

 

The new concourses, where the majority of Delta’s hubbing operations will gate, 

allow for simultaneous aircraft pushbacks without blocking circulator taxiways. 

In the No-Action scenario, Delta makes extensive use of Concourses B and C, and 

the narrow throat between these two concourses forms a major bottleneck. If an 

aircraft is pushing back, the entire area is blocked to arrivals or other departures. 

In the TRP scenario, Delta’s major hubbing operations are moved to the new 

concourses, and Concourses B and C are not as heavily utilized, thereby decreasing 

the occurrence of congestion and delay in this area. In addition, the elimination of 

Concourse A and the northern portion of Concourse B allows more space for 

pushbacks. 

 

 

In the No-Action scenario, Concourses B, C, D, and E are mainly used by Delta’s 

hubbing operation, and most other carriers are concentrated on Concourses A and 

a portion of Concourse B. Those aircraft using the northern (lower) gates on 

Concourse B push back directly onto Taxiway H, a major thoroughfare. Pushbacks 

onto Taxiway H cause significant congestion and aircraft delays for those aircraft 

which must wait to avoid head-to-head taxiing. In the TRP scenario, the 

elimination of the northern portion of Concourse B, allowing the full-length 

extension of Taxiway G, provides a much more efficient route for aircraft taxiing 

from the Concourse B and C to Runway 16L-34R. Aircraft from Concourse B will 

not be pushed back onto Taxiway H and will not interrupt aircraft taxiing to and 

from the active runway. 

In the No-Action scenario, Delta’s aircraft that are pushed back from Concourse D 

and E are limited by a single taxilane to access Taxiway E. In the TRP scenario, 




16


Delta’s major operations are moved to the new South Concourse West. With the 

provision of a balanced and redundant taxilane layout, aircraft can efficiently taxi 

from the gates to Taxiways E and F, as well as Taxiways A and B. 

3.3 Conclusions 

The results of the simulation analyses indicate that the TRP will decrease average taxiin/out 

aircraft delays, resulting in a reduction in average aircraft taxiing times on the order 

of about 0.2 minutes per operation, equivalent to a savings in total annual taxiing time of 

approximately 1,500 hours. These results were provided as inputs to the emissions 

modeling effort, which determined the environmental impacts of the TRP from a 

perspective of changes in aircraft taxiing times. 




17

Technical Memorandum: Traffic Analysis


Traffic Analysis 



Prepared for 

CH2M Hill 


March 2012 

Prepared by

TRAFFIC ANALYSIS 

Contents 

Page 

1.0 Overview .................................................................................................................................. 1 

2.0 Methodology ........................................................................................................................... 6 

2.1 Data Collection ........................................................................................................... 6 

2.2 Data Conversion ......................................................................................................... 8 

2.2.1 Annual Traffic Volumes ............................................................................... 8 

2.2.2 Peak Hour Traffic Volumes ......................................................................... 9 

2.2.3 Dwell Times ................................................................................................. 12 

2.2.4 Pedestrian Characteristics .......................................................................... 12 

2.2.5 Vehicle Mix ................................................................................................... 13 

2.3 Model Preparation .................................................................................................... 14 

2.3.1 Employee Parking ....................................................................................... 14 

2.3.2 Public Parking .............................................................................................. 14 

2.3.3 Rental Car Facilities ..................................................................................... 14 

2.3.4 Transit Use .................................................................................................... 15 

2.3.5 Private Vehicle Size ..................................................................................... 15 

2.3.6 Model Calibration ....................................................................................... 15 

2.3.7 QATAR 16 

2.3.8 Temporary Roadway Considerations ...................................................... 16 

2.3.9 Proposed Action Roadway Considerations ............................................. 16 

2.4 Calculations ............................................................................................................... 19 

3.0 Results .................................................................................................................................... 20 

3.1 Roadway Operations ............................................................................................... 20 

3.2 VMT and Average Speed ........................................................................................ 22 




i


Figures 

Page 

1 Existing Airport Roadway Network .................................................................................... 2 

2 Interim/Temporary Airport Roadways .............................................................................. 4 

3 Future Airport Roadways ..................................................................................................... 5 

4 Estimated Annual Traffic Volumes...................................................................................... 9 

5 Estimated Existing Peak Hour Traffic Volumes .............................................................. 10 

6 2025 Peak Hour Traffic Volumes ........................................................................................ 11 

7 Dwell Time Distributions for Terminal 2 Departures Curb ........................................... 12 

8 3D View of VISSIM Model, AM 2025 ................................................................................ 17 

9 VISSIM Model of Airport Curbs, AM 2025 ....................................................................... 18 

10 Curbside LOS S for No Action ............................................................................................ 21 

Tables 

1 Terminal Split for Vehicular Traffic ..................................................................................... 7 

2 Roadway Speeds ..................................................................................................................... 8 

3 Commercial Vehicle Mix ..................................................................................................... 13 

4 Annual VMT, Average Speed Results, and Total Travel Time ...................................... 23 



Salt Lake City International Airport Environmental Assessment DRAFT (08/20/2010) 

ii


1.0 Overview 

This paper describes the methodology and results of the traffic analysis used to develop the 

surface traffic data required for the air quality analysis. The primary goal of the traffic 

analysis was to project the annual vehicle miles traveled (VMT) and the annual average 

speed for the entire Airport roadway network. 

This paper is divided into two sections: methodology and results. The methodology section 

describes (a) the data collection process, including the development of a traffic survey, 

(b) the conversion of data into inputs for the traffic models, (c) preparation of the VISSIM 

model and Quick Analysis Tool for Airport Roadways (QATAR), and (d) calculation of the 

final results. VISSIM (acronym from German name, “Verkehr in Stadten Simulation”) is a 

micro-level traffic simulation model developed by PTV used to analyze roadway operations 

and traffic flows. QATAR is a tool, resulting from the Airport Cooperative Research 

Program, used to analyze traffic operations on airport roadway weaving segments and 

curbside areas. The results section details the expected Level-of-Service (LOS) of the 

roadways and then describes the estimated annual vehicle miles traveled (VMT) and annual 

system-wide average speed which serve as input into the Emissions and Dispersion 

Modeling System (EDMS). The EDMS analysis is described in subsequent sections. 

The Salt Lake City International Airport roadway network is shown in Figure 1. The mainline 

roadway consists of a one-way loop. On the inbound segment of the roadway loop, offramps 

are provided for 3700 West, Commercial Vehicle Hold Lot, Cell Phone Lot, Economy 

Lot, rental car return, and Garage. 3700 West provides access to the Employee Lot, golf 

course, cargo area, post office, and Airport police department. 

There are three terminal buildings served by three parallel at-grade curbsides: Terminal 1, 

Terminal 2, and the International Terminal. The inner curb, nearest the terminal building, is 

the commercial vehicle curbside used by Airport busses, courtesy shuttles, and taxis. 

Vehicles accessing the commercial curbside enter through the Commercial Vehicle Hold Lot. 

The three-lane departures curbside is in the center and has a double-wide drop-off curb lane 

and two through lanes. Charter busses are assigned spaces near the west end of the 

terminals, on the departures curb. The outer curb nearest the parking garage is the arrivals 

curbside with two lanes: an inner double-wide lane for passenger pick-up and one thru 

lane. An alternative curbside is located in the garage on the second level. Passengers using 




1


the alternative, in-garage curbside, access the terminals via pedestrian bridges between the 

garage and the terminals. 

Figure 1 

EXISTING AIRPORT ROADWAY NETWORK 




Terminal 

Terminal 2 

Public Parking and 

Rental-Car Garage 

Terminal 1 

Parking 

Exit Plaza 

Rental Car 

QTA 

Economy 

Lot Entrance 

CV 

Hold 

Lot 

Economy Lot 

Cell 

Lot 

↑ 

North 

Employee Lot 




2


The parking garage is located directly across the roadways from the terminals. The top two 

levels of the garage are for daily parking (long-term). The second level is reserved for 

hourly parking (short-term). The bottom level is rental car (RAC) ready/return spaces. 

Customers return their cars via an entrance prior to the arrivals curbside. Departing rental 

car customers exit via a ramp onto the arrivals roadway at the west end of the garage. RAC 

jockeys use a road directly south of the garage to access quick-turn-around areas (QTAs) 

and service facilities. 

All parking customers, regardless of the parking product, use an exit plaza located in the 

northwest corner of the Economy Lot. Traffic exiting the parking plaza merges with the 

outbound segment of the Airport roadway loop. A recirculation roadway is provided, from 

the outbound segment to the inbound segment, on the south end of the loop. 

In the proposed action roadway network the loop is shortened on the north side as the 

terminal and curbsides are relocated to the west. A new garage will be built directly across 

from the new terminal building. Rental car facilities will use level 1 of the new garage and a 

new QTA will be built directly south of the new garage. The upper levels of the garage will 

be used for public parking. Figure 2 shows the temporary roadways to be used during the 

construction stages of the proposed action and Figure 3 shows the completed 

reconfiguration of the roadway network. 




3


Figure 2 

INTERIM/TEMPORARY AIRPORT ROADWAYS 



↑ 

North 




4


Figure 3 

FUTURE AIRPORT ROADWAYS 



↑ 

North 




5


2.0 Methodology 

This section summarizes the methodology used for the analysis of future roadway traffic 

operations associated with the no-action and preferred projects. It presents (a) the data 

collection process, including the development of a comprehensive traffic survey, (b) the 

conversion of the survey data into inputs for the traffic models, (c) preparations of the 

VISSIM model and QATAR analysis, and (d) the calculation of the final results. 

2.1 Data Collection 

To create estimates of existing and future traffic operations, roadway traffic data were 

collected, including curbside dwell times, the mix of vehicles used by passengers and 

visitors, the volumes of pedestrians using the at-grade crosswalks, the walking speeds of 

pedestrians in the crosswalks, the allocation of vehicular and curbside demands among the 

terminals, free-flow traffic speeds, and roadway geometries. 

Parking data was supplied by Salt Lake City Department of Airports (SLCDA) staff for the 

Economy Lot, the parking garage (hourly and daily parking), and employee parking 

facilities. These data included hourly entrance volumes, exit volumes, and parking 

durations. These data aided in the development of both peak hour traffic volumes and 

annual traffic volumes. 

In May 2010, LeighFisher designed a traffic survey plan for the Airport roadways. WILTEC, 

a company specializing in traffic engineering and data research, conducted the survey 

under the direction of LeighFisher. The survey included Automatic Traffic Recorders 

(ATRs), pneumatic rubber road tubes, dispersed at strategically identified locations to 

measure traffic volumes, in 15-minute time periods, from Monday, May 3, 2010 through 

Monday, May 10, 2010. 

On Monday, May 3, the dwell times of vehicles stopping at the Arrivals, Departures, and 

Commercial curbs at Terminal 1 were measured. The type of vehicle stopping was also 

noted, particularly on the commercial vehicle curbside. The numbers of pedestrians using 

the crosswalks and their time in the crosswalks were also recorded. On Tuesday, May 4, 

these surveys were repeated for Terminal 2. Additional observations were also made at the 

curbs serving the International Terminal. 




6


The proportion of vehicular traffic generated by each of the three terminal buildings was 

assumed to reflect the proportion of annual originating-terminating airline passengers 

served by each air carrier and the terminal in which they are located as presented in the 

November 2010 Aviation Demand Forecasts Technical Memorandum. The resulting 

allocation of vehicular traffic by terminal is shown in Table 1. 

Table 1 

TERMINAL SPLIT FOR VEHICULAR TRAFFIC 



Location 

Vehicle Traffic Split 

Terminal 1 (multi-carrier) 43.5% 

Terminal 2 (Delta) 52.7% 

International Terminal 3.8% 

Note: 

Based on existing annual passengers served by each 

carrier. 

Source: Technical Memorandum, Aviation Demand 

Forecasts, Salt Lake City International Airport 

Environmental Assessment, November 2010, 

LeighFisher. 

Free-flow roadway operating speeds were recorded using a “floating car” methodology 

(following random vehicles and recording their speed at designated locations) on May 3 

and 4, July 2 and 12, and on September 15, 20, 21, 22, and 25, 2010. Speeds at predetermined 

locations were collected and then averaged. The results of the survey are 

summarized in Table 2. 

The precise roadway geometry, number of lanes, and other physical characteristics of the 

roadway network were confirmed using AutoCAD drawings provided by SLCDA staff, 

aerial photographs, and/or on-site investigations. 




7


Table 2 

ROADWAY SPEEDS 



Mainline Roadway Location Speed Limit Average Free-Flow Speed 

I-80 Off-Ramp 50 59.8 

1st Flyover 50 43.3 

3700 West Exit Ramp 45 39.0 

2nd Flyover 35 35.7 

Economy Park Exit Ramp 25 28.7 

Garage Use Exit Ramp 25 21.5 

Arrivals/Departures T1 Curbs 10 12.0 

Arrivals/Departures Int. Curb 10 12.4 

Garage Curb T1 10 12.7 

Garage Curb T2 10 11.7 

Garage Curb exit ramp 20 19.7 

Garage Roadway Merge 30 30.9 

Parking Toll Exit Plaza 35 34.7 

3rd Flyover 45 42.4 

4th Flyover 55 47.0 

Note: 

Minimum of ten observations at each location. 

Source: Collected by LeighFisher staff, May, July, and September 2010. 

2.2 Data Conversion 

Using the data gathered, estimates were prepared for annual traffic volumes, peak hour 

traffic volumes, dwell time distributions, pedestrian characteristics, and vehicle mix 

distributions. 

2.2.1 Annual Traffic Volumes 

Annual traffic volumes were estimated by (a) calculating the historical proportion of public 

parking transactions occurring during the first week of May in relation to annual 

transactions, and (b) applying this ratio to the weekly traffic volumes observed in May 2010 

to estimate the existing annual traffic volumes. Annual traffic volumes were assumed to 

increase in direct proportion to the forecasted growth in originating passengers (Technical 

Memorandum, Aviation Demand Forecasts, Salt Lake City International Airport 

Environmental Assessment, November 2010, LeighFisher), which averaged 2.3% per year. 

Estimated existing and future annual traffic volumes are shown in Figure 4. 




8


Figure 4 

ESTIMATED ANNUAL TRAFFIC VOLUMES 



↑ 

North 

2.2.2 Peak Hour Traffic Volumes 

Peak hour traffic volumes were also derived using both parking data and the observed ATR 

traffic volumes. The peak hour traffic volumes on an average day in the peak month were 

estimated by (a) using the May 2010 traffic survey to identify the morning peak hour (9:30 – 

10:30 AM) and evening peak hour (4:00 – 5:00 PM), (b) analyzing historical parking data to 

develop a ratio of the May morning and evening peak hours to the annual peak hours, 

excluding holiday travel periods, and (c) applying this ratio to the May survey’s morning 

and evening peak hours to create an annual morning and evening peak hour. Estimates of 

future peak hour traffic volumes were prepared assuming traffic would increase in 

proportion to the forecasted growth in originating passengers (Technical Memorandum, 

Aviation Demand Forecasts, Salt Lake City International Airport Environmental 

Assessment, November 2010, LeighFisher). The existing and future peak hour volumes are 

shown in Figures 5 and 6, respectively. 




9


Figure 5 

EXISTING PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUMES 



↑ 

North 




10


Figure 6 

ESTIMATED 2025 PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUMES 



↑ 

North 




11


2.2.3 Dwell Times 

Curbside dwell time data were recorded by location (i.e., the arrivals curbside, the 

departures curbsides, and the garage curbsides at both Terminals 1 and 2), by vehicle type 

(e.g., private vehicle, UTA Bus, Fox Rental Car shuttle, charter bus, taxi drop-off, courtesy 

shuttles, and Airport shuttles), and by morning and evening peak hours. The average dwell 

times as well as the dwell time distribution for each of these classifications were determined. 

For reference, the average dwell time on the arrivals curb was approximately 3:40 (minutes: 

seconds) and 2:35 for the departures curb. Sample dwell time distributions for the morning 

and evening peak hours on the departures curb at Terminal 2 are shown in Figure 7. 

Figure 7 

DWELL TIME DISTRIBUTIONS FOR TERMINAL 2 DEPARTURES CURB 



1.0 

0.9 

0.8 

0.7 

Proportion 

0.6 

0.5 

0.4 

0.3 

0.2 

0.1 

MED AVG 

0.0 

00:00 02:30 05:00 07:30 10:00 12:30 15:00 17:30 20:00 22:30 

Minutes : Seconds 

PM 

AM 

2.2.4 Pedestrian Characteristics 

Using data collected during the traffic surveys, estimates were prepared for (a) the 

percentage of time, during the peak hour, that pedestrians block the flow of through-traffic 

at each curbside crosswalk, (b) the distribution of pedestrian walking speeds at each of the 

crosswalks in front of Terminals 1 and 2, and (c) the number of pedestrians using each 

crosswalk during the peak hour. This analysis was prepared for the annual peak hour 

roadway traffic volumes described in section 2.2.2. It was assumed that pedestrian activity 




12


at the crosswalks in front of the International Terminal would be approximately a third of a 

typical busy crosswalk in front of Terminal 1. 

Estimates of future pedestrian traffic volumes were prepared assuming traffic would 

increase in proportion to the forecasted growth in originating passengers shown in the 

Aviation Demand Forecasts Technical Memorandum; however, it was assumed that 

platoons would increase from 1.75 pedestrians per crossing to 2.25 pedestrians per crossing. 

As a result, while actual crosswalk pedestrian volumes increase at an average of 2.3% per 

year, the actual vehicle traffic volume blocked time increases at a smaller rate. 

2.2.5 Vehicle Mix 

Commercial vehicle traffic volumes recorded during the May traffic survey were compared 

with the Automatic Vehicle Identification system (AVI) data furnished by SLCDA staff. For 

the purpose of this analysis, commercial vehicles were divided into four categories: Employee 

Parking shuttle, Economy Parking shuttle, Taxis, and Courtesy Shuttles. The commercial 

vehicle mix is shown in Table 3. Vehicles originating, terminating, or passing through the 

Employee Lot, Economy Lot, Garage, Garage curb, Arrivals curbs, Departures curbs, and 

rental car ready/return were assumed to be private passenger vehicles. The proportion of 

charter busses, UTA busses, and off-airport parking and rental car shuttles was determined by 

volume counts at their respective curbside stops at the departures or in-garage curbs. 

Table 3 

COMMERCIAL VEHICLE MIX 



Commercial Mode AM PM 

Employee Park Shuttle 6.1% 6.9% 

Economy Park Shuttle 10.1% 11.4% 

Courtesy Shuttles 29.3% 37.7% 

Taxis 54.5% 44.0% 

Notes: 

Employee Park Shuttle and Economy Park Shuttle are 

busses owned and operated by the Airport. 

Courtesy Shuttles include minibuses and vans. 

Taxis include limousines, luxury vehicles, and licensed 

taxi cabs. 

Source: Traffic Survey conducted on May 3rd and 4th, 2010. 

AVI data, provided by the SLCDA, January 2009 and 

March 2009. 




13


2.3 Model Preparation 

In addition to the previously described data preparation, creating the VISSIM model 

required use of a series of assumptions regarding employee parking, public parking, rental 

car facilities, future transit use, vehicle mix, vehicle trip assignments, and model calibration. 

Additional considerations were necessary for the temporary and proposed action roadways. 

2.3.1 Employee Parking 

Volumes of private vehicles using the employee lot, along with vehicles originating/ 

terminating at the golf course, were gathered during the traffic survey. For purposes of 

estimating vehicle miles of travel within the Employee Lot, all private vehicles were 

assumed to drive to/from the center of parking lot. The employee parking shuttle was 

modeled on the existing route with the shuttles making 30 second stops at each of the four 

stops in the Lot. The shuttles’ stops on the curbside were modeled according to its observed 

dwell time distributions. 

2.3.2 Public Parking 

Volumes of private vehicles using the Economy Lot or the garage were recorded during the 

traffic survey. For purposes of estimating vehicle miles traveled within the Economy Lot, 

all private vehicles were assumed to drive to/from the center of the Economy Lot. The 

Economy Lot shuttle was modeled on the existing route with 30 second stops at each of 

twelve shuttle stops in the Lot. The shuttle’s stops on the curbside were modeled according 

to its observed dwell time distributions. 

The traffic volumes entering the Garage were assigned to Hourly - level 2 (short-term) or 

Daily - levels 3 and 4 (long-term) based upon the distribution of hourly and daily parking 

transactions. The traffic volumes entering the Garage were also split between the south and 

north entrances to public parking. All hourly parkers were assumed to drive to/from the 

middle of level 2 of the Garage. Two-thirds of daily parkers were assumed to drive to/from 

the middle of level 3 of the garage, while one-third of the daily parkers were assumed to 

drive to/from the middle of level 4, in accordance with observations made on May 3 and 

September 22, 2010. 

2.3.3 Rental Car Facilities 

The volume of rental car vehicles was recorded at the rental car ready/return entrance and 

exit. RAC vehicle volumes for customers were assumed to end/begin in the middle of level 

1 of the garage. Due to the complexity of the jockey operations, the interactions of the rental 




14


car companies, and lack of data several assumptions were made. The annual number of 

vehicle movements by jockeys was assumed to equal the number of customer transactions. 

Each of these vehicle movements was assumed to be half the length of the jockey road, 

immediately south of the parking garage, and half the width of the east side of the 

QTA/service-area. 

2.3.4 Transit Use 

The Utah Transit Authority (UTA) is currently constructing an Airport TRAX (light rail) 

extension from downtown Salt Lake City to the Airport. Construction for the 6 mile line 

began in late 2009 and is scheduled to be complete in 2015. 

Based upon transit use at other airports, the locations where airline passengers and 

employees working at the Airport are expected to begin their trip to the Airport, and the 

portion of the Region that will be served by TRAX, it is assumed that light rail will attract 

approximately 4% of the airline passengers and employees working at the Airport. It is also 

assumed that most (roughly 75%) of these light rail passengers will be travelers originating 

and/or terminating their trips in downtown Salt Lake City who otherwise travel in taxicabs, 

rental cars, and courtesy shuttles. The remaining 25% of light rail passengers are assumed 

to be passengers who would otherwise park at the Airport. Thus it is estimated that the 

introduction of light rail service will result in a maximum reduction of 2% to 3% in roadway 

traffic volumes, a 1% to 2% maximum reduction in parking requirements, and no change in 

courtesy vehicle traffic (as these vehicles typically operate on schedules rather than based on 

demand). As a result, the planned light rail service is not expected to cause a material effect 

on inbound, outbound, or curbside roadway operations; annual vehicle miles of travel; 

average roadway speeds; or parking requirements. 

2.3.5 Private Vehicle Size 

No data were available regarding private vehicle mix. However, informal observations of the 

private vehicle mix at the Airport indicate that Airport traffic includes a much higher 

proportion of large vehicles than typical U.S. airports. As a result, the default mix of vehicles 

was altered to include more large vehicles, including pick-up trucks, SUVs, and minivans. 

2.3.6 Model Calibration 

The resulting VISSIM model was calibrated by setting speed detectors in the model at the 

points where speeds were recorded during the speed surveys. Using the speed detectors, 

vehicle speed decisions were adjusted accordingly to coincide with those observed during 

the speed surveys. Curbside operations were calibrated against observations made during 




15


the traffic surveys. Screenshots from the VISSIM model of the 2025 AM peak hour are 

shown in Figures 8 and 9. 

2.3.7 QATAR 

Several concerns were noted in the way VISSIM was modeling the curbside operations. As 

a result, QATAR was used to confirm the curbside operations. It was determined that 

QATAR was a more efficient way to analyze the curbside operations. QATAR was 

primarily used to determine curbside level of service (LOS). QATAR was also used to 

confirm the speeds, measured in VISSIM, of vehicles in the ‘thru’ lanes at the curbside. 

2.3.8 Temporary Roadway Considerations 

The most notable change to the roadway network with the temporary roadway layout is the 

extension of the roadway loop to the south of the new terminal construction site (See Figure 2). 

This lengthens the roadway loop and adds a temporary parking exit plaza for parkers using 

the existing Garage. 

Prior to the use of the temporary roadway network, a new RAC QTA and service area will be 

constructed. As a result, the RAC will operate at a new QTA directly south of the site for the 

new Garage, while ready/return spaces temporarily remain in the existing Garage, 

lengthening the jockey driving route. VMT in the Economy Lot also increases because the 

average customer must travel farther from the entrance and exit plazas to find an empty space. 

2.3.9 Proposed Action Roadway Considerations 

In the proposed action, the curbsides are relocated from the existing terminals to the new 

terminal, slightly shortening the roadway loop (See Figure 3). The existing Garage is 

demolished and the new Garage, built directly across from the new terminal building, 

becomes the primary garage where 30% of long-term (Daily and Economy) parkers are 

assumed to park. RAC Ready/return is moved into the new garage, so jockey driving 

returns to current distances. However, economy parker travel distances remain at the same 

length as in the temporary roadway network. 




16


Figure 8 

3D VIEW OF VISSIM MODEL, AM 2025 



← 

North 




17


Figure 9 

VISSIM MODEL OF AIRPORT CURBS, AM 2025 



→ 

North 




18


2.4 Calculations 

The total annual vehicle miles of travel (VMT) for the entire Airport roadway network was 

calculated by multiplying the annual traffic volume on each link in the Airport roadway 

network by the links’ length, and then summing the VMT of all the links. 

The average speed results from the VISSIM and QATAR models were used as major inputs 

to calculate the system-wide average speed. The average speed on each roadway network 

link as well as average time to traverse the individual link was determined using the 

VISSIM model results. The calculated link travel time was used to calculate the total time 

spent by all vehicles traversing the link. The annual travel time spent on each link was 

summed to determine the total amount of time spent traveling on Airport roadways 

annually. This total annual travel time was divided by the VMT to calculate a system-wide 

annual average speed. 

This process for both VMT and average speed was repeated for the existing network in 2009, 

2015, 2020, and 2025. For the temporary roadway network and the proposed action 

roadway network, adjustments were made to link lengths and traffic splits, as well as 

adding or eliminating links when necessary. Calculations for VMT and average speed were 

conducted for the temporary roads in 2015, 2020, and 2025 and the proposed action network 

in 2020 and 2025. 




19


3.0 Results 

The purpose of the exercise detailed above, was to calculate the annual VMT and systemwide 

average speed. A by-product of this exercise was that the expected LOS of the Airport 

roadways was also determined. This section discusses the roadway operations (including 

curbsides) and then the VMT/Average Speed calculations. 

3.1 Roadway Operations 

The existing Airport entry and exit roadways provide adequate capacity to accommodate 

the estimated demand occurring in 2025. All entry and exit roadways are expected to 

operate at LOS C, an acceptable level of service, or better through 2025. 

Currently, LOS D is experienced on the Terminal 2 Arrivals curbside, Terminal 2 Departures 

curbside, and RAC-exit/Arrivals exit road during both AM and PM peak periods. In the 

absence of proposed improvements, those conditions are expected to worsen to LOS E, an 

unsatisfactory operating condition, by 2025. Additionally, the through lanes on the Arrivals 

Roadways at Terminal 2 are expected to experience LOS F conditions during both AM and 

PM peak periods, likely causing traffic queues extending into the Terminal 1 curbsides. The 

LOS analysis for the existing curbsides with traffic volumes for 2009, 2015, 2020, and 2025 

are depicted in Figure 10. 

With the proposed action roadway development, the entry and exit roadways remain 

unchanged and are expected to continue to operate satisfactorily. The proposed future 

terminal and Airport curbside roadways, shown in Figure 3, are expected to operate at LOS 

C or better. 




20


Figure 10 

CURBSIDE LOS FIGURES FOR NO ACTION 



2009 2015 

2020 

2025 




21


3.2 VMT and Average Speed 

The existing and estimated future annual VMT, annual average speeds, and total annual 

travel time are shown in Table 4. Estimates for the existing network are presented for 2009, 

2015, 2020, and 2025. Estimated annual VMT on the existing network is approximately 22.4 

million miles. Average speed on the existing network is approximately 19.5 mph. Annual 

VMT is estimated to increase to 30.9 million miles by 2025 and, in the absence of proposed 

improvements, the average speed is expected to decrease to 19.0 mph. 

Estimates of the VMT and average speed on the temporary roads were developed for 2015, 

2020, and 2025. The temporary roads increase the distance motorists must travel around the 

Airport roadways, increase RAC jockey driving distances, and increase Economy Lot 

driving distances. As a result, in 2015 VMT is estimated to increase from 25.6 million miles 

on the existing network to 27.2 million miles on the temporary roadways. 2015 annual 

average speeds are estimated to increase, however, from 19.3 mph with the existing network 

to 19.7 mph with the temporary roads. If the temporary roads are still operating in 2025 

annual VMT is expected to approach 32.9 million miles while average speed will be 

approximately 19.6 mph. 

The proposed action roadway network was evaluated using in 2020 and 2025 traffic 

volumes. The proposed action slightly shortens the roadway loop and returns RAC jockey 

driving distances to existing conditions. The 2020 VMT decreases from 28.9 million miles 

with the existing network to 27.7 million miles in the 2020 future roadway network. The 

2020 average speeds increase from 19.2 mph with the existing network to 20.2 mph with the 

future network. The increase in average speeds is largely a result of the improved LOS on 

the curbsides. The increased average speed in the proposed action results in a time savings 

of 130,000 annual hours for vehicles using the curbside. The 2025 future roadways are 

expected to have 29.6 million VMT and an average speed of 20.2 mph. 




22


Table 4 

ANNUAL VMT, AVERAGE SPEED RESULTS, AND TOTAL TRAVEL TIME 



Year 

Vehicle Miles Traveled 

(VMT) 

Average Speed 

(MPH) 

Total Travel Time 

(hrs.) 

Existing Network 

2009 22,366,505 19.50 1,146,966 

2015 25,567,151 19.30 1,324,883 

2020 28,868,446 19.24 1,500,742 

2025 30,879,195 19.02 1,623,200 

Temporary Roads 

2015 27,212,201 19.71 1,380,327 

2020 30,754,651 19.66 1,564,442 

2025 32,912,594 19.62 1,677,754 

Future Network 

2020 27,694,864 20.20 1,371,090 

2025 29,613,630 20.15 1,469,352 

Source: Analysis and results prepared by LeighFisher, October 2011. 




23

Technical Memorandum: 

Construction Emissions Calculations

T E C H N I C A L M E M O R A N D U M 

Salt Lake City International Airport - Terminal 

Redevelopment Plan 

Construction Emissions Calculations 

Updated for Revised Phasing and Construction Plan 

PREPARED FOR: 

PREPARED BY: 

COPIES: 

Kevin Robins / SLC Airport 

Patty Nellis / SLC Airport 

Allen McCandless / SLC Airport 

Kevin Luey / FAA 

Hans Anker / FAA 

William VanHercke / CH2M HILL 

Bill Willkie / CH2M HILL 

Suzanne Geckle / CH2M HILL 

Molly Hoppe / CH2M HILL 

DATE: November 29, 2011 

This technical memorandum will discuss the process and results of the Construction 

Emissions analysis for the Terminal Redevelopment Plan (TRP) at the Salt Lake City 

International Airport (SLC). 

CH2M HILL is under contract to perform an Environmental Assessment of the impacts of 

the TRP for Phase 1 Construction only. This memorandum discusses the construction 

emissions anticipated during the Phase 1 build out of the proposed action between the 2 nd 

quarter of 2013 and the 4th quarter of 2024. 

Data Used 

The HOK/Jacobs team has been contracted by SLC to prepare a master plan that includes 

the TRP. As such, the data that was used was provided to the CH2M HILL team by 

HOK/Jacobs. The Construction emission for each individual project associated with the TRP 

was based on the construction quantities provided by the HOK/Jacobs team as part of the 

cost estimate analysis for each project, as updated on September 9, 2011. Information on the 

proposed sequence of construction events was used to determine the Peak Construction 

Emissions based on project overlap, based on the HOK power point titled “Phasing Studies - 

- Construction Sequence” dated August 11, 2011. In instances where an individual project 

was provided to CH2M HILL in one cost estimate but broken into phases for construction, 

such as the new Landside Roads, the Construction quantities were prorated based on area 

into quantities by phase. 

Process Used to Determine Emissions 

UPDATED-PHASING-SLC-EA-TRP-CONSTRUCTION-EMISSIONS-MEMO.DOCX 1 

COPYRIGHT 2011 BY CH2M HILL, INC. • COMPANY CONFIDENTIAL

UPDATED FOR REVISED PHASING AND CONSTRUCTION PLAN 

The TRP includes a series of projects. Each of these projects was analyzed as a stand-alone 

project in terms of the construction emissions. In general, the goal is to break down the work 

items associated with each project into the type of equipment generally used for the 

construction and the hours of work for each equipment type. For instance, on a conservative 

basis, an asphalt paving machine can historically pave 1,320 tons in a 10 hour shift. This 

equates to 132 tons / hour. If 2,000 tons of asphalt paving is required, than the asphalt 

paving machine is expected to be in operation for 16 hours (2,000 tons / 132 tons per hour = 

16 hours rounded up). 

A total of 22 pieces of standard construction equipment were used as a basis of the 

construction activities required, with slightly above average horsepower utilized to ensure a 

conservative approach. In general, the higher the horsepower of the engine, the higher the 

output rate of pollutants. Horsepower was determined from a standard list of Caterpillar 

equipment types as shown at the following link: 

http://www.cat.com/cda/layout?m=37840&x=7 

For many of the projects, such as constructing the new terminal, much of the work is interior 

finishing work. Items such as bathroom finishing, drywall, electrical finishing, etc… are 

considered low emissions type work. The emissions for these types of low emission work 

are calculated by the number of off highway trucks required to bring the materials to the 

site. 

For each major work item, such as demolition, asphalt, concrete, plumbing, etc… a search of 

the major suppliers of this type of construction was conducted. The average haul distance to 

the work site at SLC was then used. Appendix A shows a breakdown of the average haul 

distances for each contractor used. 

Anticipated employee vehicle trips to and from the work site were included as “Light Duty 

Vehicles”, or LDV. The number of trips was assumed to include 10 workers per crew as an 

average. With an average roundtrip distance of 20 miles and an average speed of 30 miles 

per hour, it was determined that 0.67 hours (40 minutes) per vehicle trip would be 

considered a conservative average. 

Dust generated as part of the project from the construction equipment is included with the 

Particulate Matter 10 (PM 10) calculations. Dust from haul roads were determined to be 

negligible primarily due to two factors: 

1. The assumption that all roads traveled on the site and to the site will be paved. The 

existing site is largely paved and ample room on paved surfaces will be available for 

haul roads to the construction site. 

2. As part of the Airport’s Emission Control Plan, the SLC Airport requires the 

Contractors to obtain a “fugitive dust permit” prior to commencing construction on 

the airport. The fugitive dust plan requires the Contractor to keep dust from haul 

roads to a minimum. 

Production rates and equipment types used in this analysis were gathered from the RS 

MEANS Cost Works 2010 program. The RS Means is an industry standard construction 

scheduling and cost estimating tool used by Contractors to analyze projects during bid. 

Production rates and equipment types used for each type of construction item are provided 




by the RS Means program. Many times different pieces of equipment can be used for similar 

construction. For instance, demolition and removal of an existing terminal may be 

accomplished by an excavator or a crane with a demolition ball. In these cases, the method 

that included the higher rate of hourly emissions was used as a conservative way to get the 

worst case emissions. 

Appendix A includes a breakdown of the construction quantities, production rates, total 

operating hours, and type of equipment needed to accomplish each individual project. 

Production rates, haul distances and total quantity of construction are utilized to compile 

the total number of hours of equipment used for each project. 

Once the total number of hours for each piece of equipment is determined, the total 

construction emissions for each project can be calculated. In order to do this, the amount of 

pollutants per hour of equipment operation must be determined. Pollution output for the 

following criteria pollutants is provided: Carbon Monoxide (CO), Hydrocarbons, Nitrogen 

Oxides (NO2), Sulfur Oxides (SO2), and Particulates. Particulate Matter is speciated into two 

types, PM 10 and PM 2.5. PM 10 refers to particulate matter where the aerodynamic 

diameter is less than or equal to 10 micrometers. PM 2.5 refers to particulate matter 

where the aerodynamic diameter is less than or equal to 2.5 micrometers (i.e., primary 

PM 10 and PM 2.5, respectively). 

Construction emissions factors for each equipment type was calculated from the EPA’s 

“NONROAD” model at the following link: http://www.epa.gov/oms/nonrdmdl.htm 

The NONROAD model is continually updated by the EPA with the most current 

information for engines, and is divided into Horsepower (HP) categories. An industry 

accepted grams/Hp-Hour is given. This was then converted to pounds/hour of pollutant 

using the following formula: 

Pounds/HR = grams/HP-HR * Engine HP * 2.204 pounds/1000 grams 

Using the NONROAD model is consistent with the emissions factors determined by the 

FAA and the Utah Department on Environmental Quality for preparing the state’s 

inventory. Emission factors for LDV was also taken from the EPA website for on road 

vehicles at: http://www.epa.gov/oms/hwy.htm 

Appendix B includes the emissions calculations, in tons of each pollutant, for each project. 

Determination of Peak Emissions 

The data obtained by using the process described above provides the total pollutants for 

each project. Through this analysis, it is apparent that four projects have the highest amount 

of pollutants due to construction emissions: Site Work, Landside Roads, the new Terminal 

Building and the Apron Facility. All projects entail a large amount of haul for concrete or 

asphalt paving, usage of cranes and dozers for placing the structure, and a high number of 

contractor employee vehicle trips to the site. 

In order to assess the total pollutants of the entire TRP, a quarterly analysis of the overlap in 

projects was performed. The schedule shown in the HOK power point titled “Phasing 




Studies -- Construction Sequence” dated August 11, 2011 was used as the basis for 

determining the timeframe of construction and the overlap of projects. This Construction 

schedule is also included as Appendix C. 

The project duration as shown in Appendix C was used as the basis for the time frame of 

Construction for each individual project within the TRP. It was assumed that the emissions 

per project would be evenly distributed throughout the project duration. The overlap of 

projects was used to calculate the peak construction emissions by quarter and by calendar 

year, as shown in Appendix D. 

Conclusions 

Appendix D shows the criteria pollutant output by project, quarter and calendar year. 

Highlighted values are the Peak emissions, by total project, quarter, and calendar year. The 

analysis results in the 1 st quarter of 2016 as the period of highest emissions for all six criteria 

pollutants. The values are summarized in Exhibit 1. 

EXHIBIT 1 – Peak Emission Output Summary 

Criteria Pollutant 

Const Quarter & 

Maximum Tons 

Const Year and 

Maximum Tons 

Project and Maximum 

Tons 

Carbon Monoxide Q1 2016 – 4.779 Ton 2016 – 16.159 Ton Roads – 9.364 Ton 

Hydrocarbons Q1 2016 – 3.968 Ton 2016 – 15.30 Ton Roads – 1.619 Ton 

Nitrogen Oxides Q1 2016 – 14.344 

Ton 

2016 – 48.055 Ton Roads – 23.117 Ton 

Sulfur Oxides Q1 2016 – 0.448 Ton 2016 – 1.508 Ton Roads – 0.812 Ton 

Particulate Matter 

10 (PM 10) 

Particulate Matter 

2.5 (PM 2.5) 

Q1 2016 – 0.601 Ton 2016 – 2.013 Ton Roads – 1.073 Ton 

Q1 2016 – 0.526 Ton 2016 – 1.765 Ton Roads – 0.959 Ton 

The Peak emission for each criteria pollutant is in 2016. This is primarily due to the overlap 

of 8 projects in the 1sr quarter of 2016 and 6 projects on-going all of 2016. These projects 

include the highest pollutant projects in the Landside Roads, Terminal Building, Apron 

Facility, RAC building, RAC Service Facility, and Parking Garage. 

The total amount of emissions per calendar year was compared against “de minimis” levels 

of pollutants, in accordance with General Conformity Rule; 40 CFR 93.153(b)(1) and (2). The 

construction emissions never exceed “de minimis” levels during any calendar year of the 

project. This is due to the following factors working in the airports favor: 

1. Minimal haul distance from major suppliers to the airport 

2. Key site location off of major highways, with excellent access to the Airport 




3. Effective scheduling of projects with high emissions that minimizes the overlap 

effect during construction 

4. Large amount of low emissions work involved with building and building finishing 

5. Minimal amounts of earthwork required for the project, as the site is already rough 

graded or being used for other pavements/buildings. 



Attachment A

ASSUMPTIONS 

- 10 hour work days 

- On site batch plant. There will be no accounting for concrete travel. Just time concrete truck is 

being used in construction 

- Any line items in the following quantity spreadsheets marked "included", or similar are assumed 

to be accounted for under more major line items. These cells are highlighted blue. 

- Any line items in the following quantity spreadsheets marked "incidental", or similar are 

assumed to have minor emission output. The only emissions accounted for in these items is the 

truck needed to haul the material to the site or the crane needed to lift some of the heavier items 

into place. These cells are highlighted blue. 

- The construction emissions factors for each piece of equipment came is from the EPA Non-Road Model - 

URL: http://www.epa.gov/oms/nonrdmdl.htm 

- Construction production rates were taken from MEANS CostWorks2010 

- Construction production rates were taken from MEANS CostWorks2010 

Employee vehicle trips assumed at 30 MPH, AVG 20 miles RT = 0.67 hours per trip 

Haul Distances 

Demolition 

Distance (mi) 

Grant Mackay 3.60 

Icon Demolition 4.20 

Impact Contractors 5.00 

Green's Inc 

7.70 Time RT (HR) 

AVERAGE 5.13 0.34 

General Construction 

Distance (mi) 

Garff Construction Corp. 2.10 

Yeagle & Sons Construction 2.10 

Brundle & Brundle Construction 


AVERAGE 2.03 0.14 

Asphalt 

Distance (mi) 

Morgan Asphalt Inc 2.70 

Staker Paving & Construction 3.60 

Purser Paving 2.10 

Century Asphalt Paving 6.20 

Savage Asphalt Paving & Construction 


AVERAGE 5.84 0.39 

Concrete Plant 

Distance (mi) 

Cannon Concrete Pumping 2.10 

Burbidge Concrete Pumping 4.80 

Construction Products Company 3.50 

Staker & Parsons 


AVERAGE 3.50 0.23 

Steel Manufacturer/Facbrication Distance (mi) 

Aluma Steel 2.20 

Blue Star Steel 1.80 

GMAC Steel Inc 2.70 

D&S Fabrication and Machine 4.40 

Rex Industries 


AVERAGE 3.04 0.20 

Plumbing 

Distance (mi) 

2 Ton Plumbing & Construction 10.40 

Hawk Building & Plumbing 7.60 

Whipple Plumbing Heating & AC 3.40 

Shamrock Plumbing 


AVERAGE 6.75 0.45 

Excavation 

Distance (mi) 

Wind River Excavation 4.50 

Grant Mackay Demo & Excavation 3.60 

Harper Excavation 10.30 

Wolff Excavation 


AVERAGE 5.50 0.37 

Electrical 

Distance (mi) 

Peak Power Electric 2.10 

Romaine Electric 1.90 

Wasatch Electric 


AVERAGE 2.57 0.17 

Assumption: Trucks driving at average speed of 30mph

CONCOURSE A RENOVATION 

Line Items and Quantities provided by TBD Consultants Salt Lake City International Airport - Option 1-ET - Concept prepared for HOK September 9, 2011 

Superstructure QUANTITY UNIT PROD. RATE # OF CREWS DAYS HOURS EQUIPMENT HRS of OPERATION Assumptions 

Floor Construction Cement Mixers 84 8 CY per truck 

General Seismic Upgrade Work 43,272 SF 6,760 1 7 70 Skidsteer loader 70 Through duration of footings and slab 

Spray Fire-Proofing 25,675 LF 200 2 65 1300 Cranes - Diesel 70 Through duration of foundations 

Roof Construction Wheeled Dozer 1450 Through duration 

Spray Fire-Proofing 27,160 SF 5,100 4 2 80 Track Type Loader 1450 Through duration 

TOTAL 74 1450 Off Highway Truck 1450 Non PCC materials and dumping 

Exterior Closure QUANTITY UNIT PROD. RATE # OF CREWS DAYS HOURS EQUIPMENT HRS of OPERATION Assumptions 

Exterior Walls Rough Terrain Forklifts 380 2 for duration 

Repair and Upgrade on CMU Wall 11,382 SF 350 4 9 360 Skidsteer loader 380 2 for duration 

Repair and Upgrade Work to Metal Panels 7,215 SF 500 4 4 160 Cranes - Diesel 190 1 for duration 

Soffit to Overhangs 12,098 SF 6,000 1 3 30 Track-type Tractor 190 1 for duration 

Repair and Upgrade Work to Column Covers 193 SF Wheeled Dozer 290 1/2 Duration for loading moving material 

Exterior Windows 0 Off Highway Truck 533.6 Material deliveries - 4 trucks duration 

Metal Panel with Integral Insulated Glazing 7,215 SF 10,000 1 1 10 

Exterior Doors 0 

Single Exterior Door, Frame, Hardware 1 EA 30 1 1 10 

Door at Jet Bridge 8 EA 20 1 1 10 

TOTAL 19 580 

Roofing QUANTITY UNIT PROD. RATE # OF CREWS DAYS HOURS EQUIPMENT HRS of OPERATION Assumptions 

Roof Coverings Crane 10 1 cranes 

Flat Roof Covering 27,160 SF 50,000 1 1 10 Off Highway Truck 4.6 Hauling materials 4 trucks 5 RT/day 

Upstands and Edgings 845 LF NA 

Roof Accessories 939 SF NA 

27,160 TOTAL 1 10 

Interior Construction QUANTITY UNIT PROD. RATE # OF CREWS DAYS HOURS EQUIPMENT HRS of OPERATION Assumptions 

Partitions Off Highway Truck 3.728 4 trucks per day 

Stud Partitions, Drywall, Insulation 17,705 SF 10,000 1 2 20 Wheeled Dozer 2 Duration for loading moving 

Temporary Wall at Concession Area 2,801 SF 10,000 1 1 10 

Interior Doors 2,395 0 

Single Interior Door, Frame, Hardware 13 EA 35 1 1 10 

Specialties 

Restroom Specialties 43,272 GFA NA 5 

Signage 43,272 GFA NA 

Fire Extinguishers 43,272 GFA NA 

General Specialties 43,272 GFA NA 

Miscelaneous Carpentry 43,272 GFA NA 

Miscelaneous Casework 43,272 GFA NA 

Miscelaneous Metalwork 43272 GFA NA 

TOTAL 4 40 

Stairs QUANTITY UNIT PROD. RATE # OF CREWS DAYS HOURS EQUIPMENT HRS of OPERATION Assumptions 

Stair Construction Crane 10 1 crane 1 day 

New Railings etc to Existing Stairs 1 FLT 8 1 1 10 Off Highway Truck 1.165 5 Hauls per day 

TOTAL 1 10 

Interior Finishes QUANTITY UNIT PROD. RATE # OF CREWS DAYS HOURS EQUIPMENT HRS of OPERATION Assumptions 

Wall Finishes Off Highway Truck 9.2 2 trucks per day for duration bringing materials 

Wall Finish to Circulation Areas 12,733 SF NA 10 Wheeled Dozer 80 Moving materal around site 

Wall Finish to Concession Areas 9,866 SF NA 

Wall Finish to Restrooms 4,007 SF NA 

Wall Finish to Offices 9,563 SF NA 

Wall Finish to Service Areas 4,346 SF NA 

Floor Finishes 

Floor Finish to Circulation Area 105,800 SF NA 

Floor Finish to Holdrooms 4,712 SF NA 

Floor Finish to Concession Areas 4,879 SF NA 

Floor Finish to Restrooms 1,982 SF NA 

Floor Finish to Offices 8,030 SF NA 

Floor Finish to Service Areas 13,089 SF NA 

Bases to Circulation Areas 676 LF NA 

Bases to Concession Areas 420 LF NA 

Bases to Restrooms 401 LF NA 

Bases to Offices 956 LF NA 

Bases to Service Areas 1,011 LF NA 

Patch Finishes Re Seismic Work 2,535 SF NA 

Public Walls: Trespa, 25% Wood, 25% Stone 1 LS NA 

Stone and Wood to 20% of Storefront 1 LS NA 

Public Floors: 25% Stone 1 LS NA 

Terrazzo Restroom Floors 1 LS NA 

Public Ceilings: Wood, Specialty Metal 1 LS NA 

Ceiling Finishes 

Ceiling Finish to Circultaion Areas 15,292 SF NA 

Ceiling Finish to Concession Areas 4,879 SF NA 5 

Ceiling Finish to Restrooms 1,982 SF NA 

Ceiling Finish to Offices 8,030 SF NA 

Ceiling Finish to Service Areas 13,089 SF NA 

TOTAL 

Plumbing QUANTITY UNIT PROD. RATE # OF CREWS DAYS HOURS EQUIPMENT HRS of OPERATION Assumptions 

WC, Wall Hung, High Eff. Sensor Op Flush Valve 23 EA NA Off Highway Truck 22.08 3 trucks (1 per trade) 3 RT for about 5 days 

Urinal, Wall Hung, High Eff. Sensor Op Flush Valve 10 EA NA 5 

Plumbing (continued) QUANTITY UNIT PROD. RATE # OF CREWS DAYS HOURS EQUIPMENT HRS of OPERATION Assumptions

Lavatory, with Sensor Faucet 22 EA NA 

Janitors Sink 1 EA NA 

Pumps, Piping, Monitoring 1 EA NA 

General Plumbing 43,272 GFA 11,200 1 4 40 

Utility distribution 43,272 GFA Upgrades NA 

TOTAL 4 40 

OF CREWS DAYS HVAC QUANTITY UNIT PROD. RATE # HOURS EQUIPMENT HRS of OPERATION Assumptions 

Reuse EA Off Highway 10 RT to haul Air handling Units 1 NA 5 Truck 2.3 all materials] 

MCR 1 EA NA 

Satellite Communications Room Cooling 1 EA NA 

Reuse HHWS&R, CHWS&R Piping Distribution 43,272 GFA NA 

Reuse Ductwork, Replace VAV Terminals, Diffusers 43,272 GFA NA 

Geeral Exhaust Serving New Toilet Rooms 1 EA NA 

Concession Areas 1 EA NA 

HVAC Related Items 43,272 GFA NA 

TOTAL 

Fire Protection QUANTITY UNIT PROD. RATE # OF CREWS DAYS HOURS EQUIPMENT HRS of OPERATION Assumptions 

Fire Protection GFA No major equipment Material/equipment minimal/incidental 

43,272 NA needed haul to site 

TOTAL 

Electrical QUANTITY UNIT PROD. RATE # OF CREWS DAYS HOURS EQUIPMENT HRS of OPERATION Assumptions 

Electrical Distribution Off Highway Truck 9.2 Haull all electrical materials to site~40 RT 

Provide Supports for Existing Raceways to Remain 

1 LS 

Provide 208/120V Panel with Meter at Concession Spaces, Allow 10 

5 EA 

Provide Temporary Bridge Wiring to Maintain Essential Circuits during 43,272 SF Construction NA 

Emergency Generators, Existing to Remain, Inspect, Test, Provide Maintenance as Requried 1 LS NA 

New Automatic Transfer Switches with BPIS, Feeders 1 LS NA 

Emergency Distribution, 277/480V 43,272 SF NA 

Transformers, Feeders 43,272 SF NA 


Emergency Lighting Inverters 1 EA NA 

UPS (200kVA, 90 Minutes Battery Time), Feeders 1 EA NA 

UPS Distribution 43,272 SF NA 

Standby Power Connections to MCR, CR Split System AC Units, 5 LS NA 

Lighting & Branch Wiring 

Relocate Existing, Remaining Above Ground Raceways to Facilitate Seismic Activity 43,272 SF NA 

Supply, Install, Connect Lighting Fixtures 43,272 SF NA 

Lighting Controls 17,547 SF NA 

Convenience Power, Allow 43,272 SF NA 

Communication & Security 

Passive Infrastructure - Routing Infrastructure 43,272 SF NA 

Passive Infrastructure - Cabling and Comm. Room Build-Out 43,272 SF NA 

Passive Infrastructure - Cable Management 43,272 SF NA 

Active Infrastructure - Multi-Use Local Area Network 43,272 SF NA 

Telephony System 43,272 SF NA 

Common Use Systems 43,272 SF NA 

Integrated Systems (Resource Management, MUFIDS, Operation database, Dynmic Signage) 43,272 SF NA 

Computerised Maintenance Management 43,272 SF NA 

Radio Communications (Distributed Antenna System) 43,272 SF NA 

Special Electrical Systems 

Master Clock 43,272 SF NA 

Information kiosks 43,272 SF NA 

Access Control System 43,272 SF NA 

CCTV 43,272 SF NA 

Audio Paging System 43,272 SF NA 

Fire Alarm System 43,272 SF NA 

TOTAL 

Special Construction QUANTITY UNIT PROD. RATE # OF CREWS DAYS HOURS EQUIPMENT HRS of OPERATION Assumptions 

Protect Existing Jet EA Off Highway Haull all electrical Bridge During Apron Work 8 NA Truck 2.3 materials to site~10 RT 

Check-in Podiums, South Concourse 8 EA NA 1 

TOTAL 

Selective Building Demolition UNIT OF CREWS QUANTITY PROD. RATE # DAYS HOURS EQUIPMENT HRS of OPERATION Assumptions 

Demolish Interior Construction, GFA Skidsteer loader One for duration 

Finishes 43,272 NA 30 

Remove Exterior Walling/Glazing 7,215 SF Wheeled BH Loader 30 One for Duration 

8000 1 1 10 

Remove Existing Roofing 27,160 SF 20000 1 2 20 Off Highway Truck 13.8 Haull materials to site~40 RT 

Plumbing Demolition 43,272 GFA Broom 100 Clean Up 

NA 

HVAC Demolition 43,272 GFA NA 

Electrical Demolition 43,272 GFA NA 

Hazardous Components Abatement 43,272 

Hazmat Removal 43,272 GFA NA 

TOTAL 3 30 

Equipment type 

Hours of use 

Cement Mixers (350 HP) 84.1 

Soil Compactors (253 HP) 0.0 LDV - Passenger Vehicles 815.39 10 Crew Members per crew 

Rough Terrain Forklifts (66 HP) 380.0 

Concrete-Industrial Saws (46 HP) 0.0 

LDV - Passenger Vehicles 815.4 

Skidsteer loader (47 HP) 480.0 

Cranes - Diesel (75 HP) 280.0 

Pumps (45 HP) 0.0 

Track-type Tractor (160 HP) 190.0 

Wheeled Tractor (58 HP) 0.0 

Wheeled Dozer (498 HP) 1821.7 

Scraper (425 HP) 0.0 

Motor Grader (158 HP) 0.0 

Wheeled Excavator (268 HP) 0.0 

Wheeled BH Loader (93 HP) 30.0 

Track Type Loader (189 HP) 0.0 

Trenchers (54 HP) 0.0 

Off Highway Truck (535 HP) 2052.0 

Roller (55 HP) 0.0 

Track Paver (144 HP) 0.0 

Broom (49 HP) 100.0 

Rotomill (557 HP) 0.0

QTA Structure 


Site Improvements QUANTITY UNIT PROD. RATE # OF CREWS DAYS HOURS EQUIPMENT HRS of OPERATION Assumptions 

AC Paving 96,306 SF 5,000 1 20 200 Cement Mixers 250 Concrete 

Concrete Paving 242,018 SF 10,000 1 25 250 Soil Compactors 10 Prior to Paving 

Footings for Elevated Deck 242,018 SF 10,000 3 9 270 Skidsteer loader 720 Roadway 

Elevated Deck 242,018 SF NA Wheeled Dozer 740 1 dozers during duration 

Ramps to Deck 9,000 SF NA Motor Grader 720 1 during paving 

Staircase 7 EA 8 2 1 20 Off Highway Truck 124.2 Duration 

Chain Link Fence 2,580 LF NA Roller 450 during paving and base 

Double Vehicular Gates 2 EA NA Track Paver 720 During paving 

TOTAL 55 740 

Site Mechanical Utilities 

QUANTITY UNIT PROD. RATE # OF CREWS DAYS HOURS EQUIPMENT HRS of OPERATION Assumptions 

Drainage to Grade Level 338,324 SF NA Trenchers 80 Through duration of footings 

Drainage to Upper Level 242,018 SF NA Off Highway Truck 23 Material to site 10 trips per day 

TOTAL 

Site Electrical Utilities 


Lighting to Grade Level 338,324 SF NA Off Highway Truck 11.5 Material to site 10 trips per day 

Lighting to Upper Level 242,018 SF NA 

TOTAL 

Other Site Construction 


Wash Bay Enclosure 14 EA NA Wheeled Dozer 80 1 dozers during duration 

Wash Bay Equipment 14 EA NA Rough Terrain Forklift 80 1 for duration 

Fuel Nozzle 60 EA NA Off Highway Truck 13.8 6 trucks perday for duration 

Allowance for Tanks and Piping 60 EA NA 

Shelled Office/Ancillary Building 8,137 SF NA 

TOTAL 

LDV - Passenger Vehicles 

57 10 LDV's per working day 

Broom 

40 Clean Up 



Soil Compactors (253 HP) 10.0 






Pumps (45 HP) 0.0 











Roller (55 HP) 450.0 


Broom (49 HP) 40.0 

Rotomill (557 HP) 0.0 

Hours of use

MECHANICAL PLANT 


Foundations QUANTITY UNIT PROD. RATE # OF CREWS DAYS HOURS EQUIPMENT HRS of OPERATION Assumptions 

Standard Foundations Cement Mixers 231 8 CY per truck 

Footings 59,400 SF 6760 1 9 90 Soil Compactors 180 Through duration of footings and slab 

Slab on Grade 59,400 SF 6760 1 9 90 Concrete-Industrial Saws 180 Through duration of footings and slab 

Skidsteer loader 

180 Through duration of footings and slab 

Cranes - Diesel 

90 Through duration of foundations 

TOTAL 18 180 Wheeled Dozer 180 Through duration 

Track Type Loader 

180 Through duration 

Off Highway Truck 

41.4 Material to site 10 trips per day 


Roof Structure 59,400 SF 5100 1 12 120 Rough Terrain Forklift 120 1 for duration 


240 2 Cranes 

Wheeled Dozer 

120 1 Dozer for duration 

TOTAL 12 120 Off Highway Truck 50 6 trucks 3 RT each/ day for duration 


Exterior Walls, Doors, Etc 25,316 SF 1024 1 25 250 Skidsteer loader 500 2 for duration 


250 1 for duration 

Track-type Tractor 

250 1 for duration 

TOTAL 25 250 Wheeled Dozer 60 Duration for loading moving material 


34.5 Material deliveries - 6 trucks duration 


Roof Finishes 59,400 SF 6000 1 10 100 Off Highway Truck 13.8 6 trips per day for duration 

TOTAL 10 100 


Partitions, Doors, Etc 51,921 SF 20000 1 3 30 Off Highway Truck 4.14 6 trucks per day for duration 

Specialties 59,400 SF NA 5 

TOTAL 3 30 


Roof Access Ladder 1 EA NA No major equipment needed Material/equipment haul to site minimal/incidental 

TOTAL 


Wall Finishes Off Highway Truck 16.5 5 trucks per day for duration 

Wall Finishes 128,424 SF 20000 1 7 70 

Floor Finishes 59,400 SF 20000 1 3 30 

Floor Bases 6,421 SF 20000 1 1 10 


Ceiling Finish 59,400 SF NA 

TOTAL 11 110 


Plumbing 59,400 SF NA 5 Wheeled Dozer 160 2 dozers moving material around site and basement excavation 

Rain/Snow Reclaimation System 1 EA NA Off Highway Truck 44.16 3 trucks (1 per trade) 3 RT for about 5 days 

Basement Excavation, Backfill, Disposal 600 CY 2400 1 1 10 Wheel Excavator 10 During basement excavation and backfill 

Shoring to Basement Excavation 2,000 SF 9600 1 1 10 Wheeled Loader 30 Moving materials around site 

Base Slab 400 SF 6760 1 1 10 

Tank Retaining Wall 1,000 SF 2400 1 1 10 

Slab Over Utility Tunnel 400 SF 6760 1 1 10 

Waterproofing Under base 400 SF 11200 1 1 10 

Waterproofing to Wall 1,500 SF 11200 1 1 10 

Waterproofing Over Roof Slab 400 SF 11200 1 1 10 

TOTAL 8 80 

HVAC QUANTITY UNIT PROD. RATE # OF CREWS DAYS HOURS EQUIPMENT HRS of OPERATION Assumptions 

Generating Equipment within Plant Building 5 Off Highway Truck 6 20 RT to haul all materials] 

Steam Boilers, 4 @ 20,000 lbs/hr 4 EA NA 

Pumping Systems 1 LS NA 

Associated Equipment, Exchangers, Tanks, Separators 1 LS NA 

Water Treatment 1 LS NA 

Flues/Chimneys 1 LS NA 

Seismic/Vibration Isolation 1 LS NA 

Chillers, 4 no. @ 1,600 Ton Each 3 EA NA 

Cooling Towers with Non Chemical Treatment 1 LS NA 

Pummping Systems 1 LS NA 

Associated Equipment 1 LS NA 

Water Treatment 1 LS NA 


Chillers, 2 no. @ 600 Ton Each (Pre Condition Air) 2 EA NA 

Cooling Towers with Non Chemical Treatment 1 LS NA 

Pummping Systems 1 LS NA 

Associated Equipment 1 LS NA 

Water Treatment/Storage - Glycol 1 LS NA 


Piping Distribution Systems within Plant Building 

Steam/Condensate Piping Distribution 1 LS NA 5 

Equipment Piping Connections 16 EA NA 

Insulation 1 LS NA 

Accessories&Specialties 1 LS NA 


HVAC (Continued) QUANTITY UNIT PROD. RATE # OF CREWS DAYS HOURS EQUIPMENT HRS of OPERATION Assumptions

Chilled Water Piping Distribution 1 LS NA 

Condenser Water Piping Distribution 1 LS NA 

Equipment Piping Concections 26 EA NA 

Insulation 1 LS NA 

Accessories&Specialties 1 LS NA 


Control/Monitoring Systems 2 

Steam/Condensate 1 LS NA 

Chilled/Condenser Water 1 LS NA 

Low Temp (Glycol) Chilled Water 1 LS NA 

HVAC Related Items 

Balance & Test 1 LS NA 

Supervision Associated with commissioning 1 LS NA 

Supervision - General 1 LS NA 

General Conidtions 1 LS NA 

Start Up/Mobilizing 1 LS NA 

Engineering 1 LS NA 

Detailing, Layout 1 LS NA 

Inserts/Sleeving/Black-outs 1 LS NA 

Documentation/Manuels 1 LS NA 

Building Support HVAC 2 

Air Handling/Exhaust 59,400 SF NA 

Distribution - Wet Side 59,400 SF NA 

Distribution - Dry Side 59,400 SF NA 

Control 59,400 SF NA 

HVAC Related Items 59,400 SF NA 

Miscelaneous Systems (Warehouse/Office) 1 LS NA 

Fire Protection 2 

Fire Protection 59,400 SF NA 

TOTAL 


Electrical Distribution 20 Off Highway Truck 12 40 RT to haul all materials] 

12.47 kV Primary Switchgear Line-Ups 1 EA NA 

2000/266 kVA 12.47-480/277V Padmount Transformers 4 EA NA 

480/277V Main Secondary Switchboards 2 EA NA 

Conduits from Primary Switchgear to Padmount Transformers 400 LF NA 

Feeders from Padmount Transformers to 480/277V Switchgear 200 LF NA 

12.47-4160V Transformers 4 EA NA 

4.16kV Chillers Swithgear, Double-Ended 2 EA NA 

4.16kV Feeders to Chiller Switchgear 4 EA NA 

4.16kVTerminations 24 EA NA 

Motor Control Centers, Feeders 3 EA NA 

Local Normal Power Distribution 59,400 SF NA 

Grounding 59,400 SF NA 

Lightning Protection 59,400 SF NA 

Emergency Distribution, 277/480kV 59,400 SF NA 


Emergency Distribution, 120/208kV 59,400 SF NA 


Housekeeping Pad 1 EA NA 

2500A Swithboard, Feeders, 480/277V 1 EA NA 

Automatic Transformer Switches, Feeders 1 LS NA 

Connect Chillers 6 EA NA 

Connect Boilers 6 EA NA 

Misc Connections 59,400 SF NA 


Supply, Install, Connect Lighting Fixtures 400 EA NA 

Back Boxes 400 EA NA 

Lighting Wiring 6,000 EA NA 




Passive Infrastructure - Routing Infrastructure 59,400 SF NA 2 







Master Clock 59,400 SF NA 2 

Building Automation Control System 59,400 SF NA 




. TOTAL 

Other Site Construction QUANTITY UNIT PROD. RATE # OF CREWS DAYS HOURS EQUIPMENT HRS of OPERATION Assumptions 

Utility Line Cement Mixers 1,096 8 CY per truck 

Standard Footings 21,442 SF 6760 1 4 40 Soil Compactors 740 Through duration of footings and slab 

Slab on Grade Skidsteer loader 740 Through duration of footings and slab 

3'6" Thich Reinforced Concrete Base Slab 21,442 SF 6760 1 4 40 Cranes - Diesel 430 Through duration of foundations 

Under Floor Drainage System 21,442 SF 2000 1 11 110 Wheeled Dozer 740 Through duration 

Other Site Construction (Continued) QUANTITY UNIT PROD. RATE # OF CREWS DAYS HOURS EQUIPMENT HRS of OPERATION Assumptions 

Waterproofing Under Tunnel Slab 21,442 SF 11200 1 2 20 Track Type Loader 740 Through duration 

Permanent Dewatering System 21,442 SF 2000 1 11 110 Off Highway Truck 120 Non PCC materials and dumping

Basement Excavation, Backfill, Disposal 39,487 CY 2400 1 17 170 

Shoring to Basement Excavation 79,154 SF 9600 1 9 90 

2'6" Thick Exterior Concrete Wall 55,112 SF 15000 1 4 40 

Waterproofing Wall 55,112 SF 11200 1 5 50 

Perforated Drain Pipe, Granular Fill, Geofilter Fabric 3,005 LF 1500 1 3 30 

Roof Construction 1 

3'6" Concrete Cover Slab 21,442 SF 6760 1 4 40 

Fire Extinguisher 21,442 GFA NA 


Miscellaneous Carpentry 21,442 GFA NA 

Miscellaneous Casework 21,442 GFA NA 

Miscellaneous Metalwork 21,442 GFA NA 

Wall Finishes 


Floor Finish 

Floor Finish to Service Area 19,539 SF NA 



Ceiling Finish to Service Areas 19,539 SF NA 

Plumbing 

General Plumbing (inc Sump Pumps) 21442 GFA NA 

HVAC 

HVAC Installation, Service Area 21,442 GFA NA 

Utilities Tunnel 

Chilled Water, 24" Dia (1 Set of S&R) 4,205 LF NA 

Chilled Water, 16" Dia (1 Set of S&R) 

4,810 LF 

Chilled Water , 12" Dia (1 Set of S&R) 

1,547 LF 

Chilled Water, 10" Dia (1 Set of S&R) 

2,254 LF 

Glycol Water, 14" Dia (1 Set of S&R) 

4,205 LF 


4,810 LF 


1,547 LF 

Glycol Water, 6" Dia (3 Sets of S&R) 2,254 LF NA 

Steam, 16" Dia (1 Set typical) 2,102 LF NA 

Steam, 14" Dia 2,405 LF NA 

Steam, 12" Dia 774 LF NA 

Steam, 8" Dia 1,127 LF NA 

Condensate, 6" Dia (1 Set typical) 

2,102 LF 

Condensate, 4" Dia 

3,179 LF 

Condensate, 3" Dia 1,127 LF NA 

Fire Protection 

Fire Protection 21,442 GFA NA 

Electrical Distribution 

Electrical Distribution, Service Area 21,442 SF NA 

Lighting&Branch Wiring 

Lighting and Power, Service Area 21,442 SF NA 


Communications and Security, Service Area 21,442 GFA NA 


Special Electrical Systems, Service Area 21,442 GFA NA 

TOTAL 74 740 


Hours of use 


958.1 10 Crew Members per crew 


Soil Compactors (253 HP) 920.0 Broom 60 Clean Up 






Pumps (45 HP) 0.0 













Broom (49 HP) 60.0 


DEMO EXISTING TERMINALS - SITE WORK 


Demolish QUANTITY UNIT PROD. RATE # OF CREWS DAYS HOURS EQUIPMENT HRS of OPERATION Assumptions 

Building Elements Demolition Rough Terrain Forklifts 3720.0 One for demo 

Demolish Concourse E (portion) 30,000 SF 8000 1 4 40 Concrete-Industrial Saws 4050.0 Demo 

Demolish Remainder Concourse E 65,163 SF 8000 2 5 100 Skidsteer loader 3720.0 One for duration 

Demolish International Arrivals Building 154,520 SF 8000 2 10 200 Cranes - Diesel 3720.0 One for demo 

Demolish Terminal 2 287,043 SF 8000 2 18 360 Wheeled Dozer 3720.0 One for demo 

Demolish Connector 50,981 SF 8000 1 7 70 Track Type Loader 3720.0 One for demo 

Demolish Service Building 18,300 SF 8000 1 3 30 Off Highway Truck 855.6 Removal of waste items 10 trips per day 

Demolish Terminal 1 252,659 SF 8000 1 32 320 

Demolish Portion of Concourse D 8,569 SF 8000 1 2 20 

Demolish Portion of Concourse C 3,643 SF 8000 1 1 10 

Demolish portion of Concourse B 52,146 SF 8000 1 7 70 

Demolish Remainder of Concourse B 72,120 SF 8000 1 10 100 

Demolish Pedestrian Bridges 13,630 SF 8000 1 2 20 

Demolish Parking 812,589 SF 3000 1 271 2710 

TOTAL 372 4050 


Site Improvements Skidsteer loader 310.0 One for duration 

Shrubs and Ornamental Grasses 74,761 SF 10000 2 4 80 Cranes - Diesel 310.0 One for demo 

Ground Cover 53,083 SF 10000 2 3 60 Wheeled Dozer 310.0 One for demo 

Formal Planting/Paving Areas 97,353 SF 15000 2 4 80 Track Type Loader 310.0 One for demo 

Native Meadow Landscape 210,021 SF 10000 2 11 220 Off Highway Truck 60 Deliveries 

Ground Cover 122,820 SF 15000 1 9 90 

TOTAL 31 530 

Site Mechanical Utilities QUANTITY UNIT PROD. RATE # OF CREWS DAYS HOURS EQUIPMENT HRS of OPERATION Assumptions 

Site Electrical Utilities Skidsteer loader 270 One for duration 

Duct Bank to New Terminal Building (3 incoming services at 1000ft ea) 3,000 LF 400 1 8 80 Wheeled BH Loader 270 One for Duration 

Duct Bank to New South Concourse West (2 incoming services at 1000ft ea) 2,000 LF 400 1 5 50 Trenchers 35 2,000 LF per day 

Duct Bank to New South Concourse East (1 incoming services at 1000ft ea) 1,000 LF 400 1 3 30 Off Highway Truck 60 Deliveries 

Duct Bank to New South Central Utility Plant (1 incoming services at 1000ft ea) 1,000 LF 400 1 3 30 Broom 60 Cleanup 

Manholes 24 EA 3 1 8 80 

TOTAL 27 270 


3082 10 crew members per crew 

Equipment type - 14% per demo item 

Hours of use 








Pumps (45 HP) 0.0 













Broom (49 HP) 60.0 


Landside Roadways 


Departure Road QUANTITY UNIT PROD. RATE # OF CREWS DAYS HOURS EQUIPMENT HRS of OPERATION Assumptions 

Site improvements Cement Mixers 110 1/2 Duration Sidewalk, C & G 

5" Thick AC Road; Stone Forming Ramp 37,000 SF 1,320 2 15 300 Soil Compactors 40 Prior to Paving 

MSE Retaining Wall at Ramped Roads 2,000 LF 250 1 8 80 Rough Terrain Forklifts 20 Illumination and signs 

Elevated Roadway, Bulb Tee Structure 180,733 SF 10,000 1 19 190 Skidsteer loader 870 Roadway 

Elevated Sidewalk 25,585 SF 1,550 2 9 180 Wheeled Dozer 435 1/2 dozers during duration 

18" Wide Barrier Rail 5,083 LF 3,000 1 2 20 Motor Grader 40 1 during paving 

Railing/Wall Adjacent to Terminal 1,342 LF 250 1 6 60 Off Highway Truck 100.05 1/2 Duration 

Curb and Gutter 3,485 LF 1,000 1 4 40 Roller 300 during paving and base 

Signage and Specialties to Roadway 145,951 SF NA Track Paver 710 During paving 

Drainage to Roadway 145,951 SF NA Broom 40 Clean Up 

Lighting to Roadway 145,951 SF NA 

Drainage Outside Terminal Area 71,904 SF NA 

Lighting Outside Terminal Area 71,904 SF NA 

TOTAL 63 870 

Comercial Vehicle Road QUANTITY UNIT PROD. RATE # OF CREWS DAYS HOURS EQUIPMENT HRS of OPERATION Assumptions 


10" Thick Concrete Road 10,285 SF 1,000 1 11 110 Soil Compactors 40 Prior to Paving 

5" Thick AC Road 46,386 SF 1,320 1 36 360 Rough Terrain Forklifts 20 Illumination and signs 

Concrete Sidewalk 45,555 SF 1,550 2 15 300 Skidsteer loader 560 Roadway - 1/2 time 

Railing/Wall Adjacent to Terminal 1,342 LF 250 1 6 60 Wheeled Dozer 560 1/2 dozers during duration 

Curb and Gutter 8,276 LF 1,000 1 9 90 Motor Grader 40 1 during paving 

Raised Crosswalks 10,261 SF 1,550 2 4 80 Off Highway Truck 128.8 1/2 Duration 

Light AC Paving 14,922 SF 1,320 1 12 120 Roller 470 during paving and base 

Signage and Specialties to Roadway 137,661 SF NA Track Paver 970 During paving 

Drainage to Roadway 137,661 SF NA Broom 40 Clean Up 

Lighting to Roadway 137,661 SF NA 

Drainage Outside Terminal Area 61,770 SF NA 

Lighting Outside Terminal Area 61,770 SF NA 

Canopy 43,850 SF NA 

Fence 1,341 LF NA 

TOTAL 93 1120 

Commercial Vehicle Hold Lot QUANTITY UNIT PROD. RATE # OF CREWS DAYS HOURS EQUIPMENT HRS of OPERATION Assumptions 




Light AC Paving 71,558 SF 1,320 1 55 550 Skidsteer loader 345 Roadway - 1/2 time 

Curb and Gutter 1,480 LF 1,000 1 2 20 Wheeled Dozer 345 1/2 dozers during duration 

Drainage Outside Terminal Area 83,541 SF NA Motor Grader 40 1 during paving 

Lighting Outside Terminal Area 83,541 SF NA Off Highway Truck 79.35 1/2 Duration 

TOTAL 69 690 Roller 670 during paving and base 

Track Paver 

670 During paving 

Broom 

40 Clean Up 

Arrivals Roadway QUANTITY UNIT PROD. RATE # OF CREWS DAYS HOURS EQUIPMENT HRS of OPERATION Assumptions 


5" Thick AC Road 116,160 SF 1,320 1 88 880 Soil Compactors 10 Prior to Paving 

Concrete Sidewalk 29,223 SF 1,550 2 10 200 Rough Terrain Forklifts 20 Illumination and signs 

Curb and Gutter 5,823 LF 1,000 1 6 60 Skidsteer loader 440 Roadway - 1/2 time 

Signage and Specialties to Roadway 98,997 SF NA Wheeled Dozer 570 1/2 dozers during duration 

Drainage to Roadway 98,997 SF NA Motor Grader 40 1 during paving 

Lighting to Roadway 98,997 SF NA Off Highway Truck 131.1 1/2 Duration 

Drainage Outside Terminal Area 46,386 SF NA Roller 880 during paving and base 

Lighting Outside Terminal Area 46,386 SF NA Track Paver 1140 During paving 

Canopy 52,970 SF NA Broom 40 Clean Up 

Fence 1,341 LF NA 

TOTAL 104 1140 

New Inbound & Outbound Roads QUANTITY UNIT PROD. RATE # OF CREWS DAYS HOURS EQUIPMENT HRS of OPERATION Assumptions 



Curb and Gutter 14,481 LF 1,000 1 15 150 Rough Terrain Forklifts 20 Illumination and signs 

Drainage Outside Terminal Area 281,593 SF NA Skidsteer loader 1145 Roadway - 1/2 time 

Lighting Outside Terminal Area 281,593 SF NA Wheeled Dozer 1145 1/2 dozers during duration 

TOTAL 122 2290 Motor Grader 40 1 during paving 


263.35 1/2 Duration 

Roller 

2140 during paving and base 

Track Paver 


Broom 

40 Clean Up 

Parking Access Roads QUANTITY UNIT PROD. RATE # OF CREWS DAYS HOURS EQUIPMENT HRS of OPERATION Assumptions 



Curb and Gutter 2,091 LF 1,000 1 3 30 Rough Terrain Forklifts 20 Illumination and signs 

Drainage Outside Terminal Area 19,847 SF NA Skidsteer loader 95 Roadway - 1/2 time 

Lighting Outside Terminal Area 19,847 SF NA Wheeled Dozer 95 1/2 dozers during duration 

Gate Arm and Ticketing Equipment 3 EA NA Motor Grader 40 1 during paving 

TOTAL 19 190 Off Highway Truck 43.7 Duration 

Roller 


Track Paver 


Broom 

40 Clean Up

Jockey Roads QUANTITY UNIT PROD. RATE # OF CREWS DAYS HOURS EQUIPMENT HRS of OPERATION Assumptions 




Precast Concrete Bridge Structure 2,542 SF 1,400 2 1 20 Skidsteer loader 720 Roadway - 1/2 time 

Precast Concrete Bridge Structure with Imtermediate Supports 7,182 SF 1,400 3 2 60 Wheeled Dozer 720 1/2 dozers during duration 

MSE Retaining Wall at Bridges 500 LF 250 1 2 20 Motor Grader 40 1 during paving 

Curb and Gutter 10,986 LF 1,000 1 11 110 Off Highway Truck 165.6 1/2 Duration 

Drainage Outside Terminal Area 166,069 SF NA Roller 10 during paving and base 

Lighting Outside Terminal Area 166,069 SF NA Track Paver 90 During paving 

TOTAL 139 1440 Broom 40 Clean Up 

Temporary Roadways QUANTITY UNIT PROD. RATE # OF CREWS DAYS HOURS EQUIPMENT HRS of OPERATION Assumptions 

Site improvements Soil Compactors 10 Prior to Paving 

AC Temporary Road 22,892 SF 1,320 1 18 180 Skidsteer loader 465 Roadway - 1/2 time 

Temporary Road on New Apron 98,400 SF 1,320 1 75 750 Wheeled Dozer 465 1/2 dozers during duration 

TOTAL 93 930 Motor Grader 80 1 during paving 


106.95 1/2 Duration 

Roller 


Track Paver 


Broom 

40 Clean Up 

Equipment type - 50% Breakdown 

Hours of use 




Concrete-Industrial Saws (46 HP) 0.0 LDV - Passenger Vehicles 5306.4 10 Crew Members per crew 




Pumps (45 HP) 0.0 











Roller (55 HP) 5560.0 


Broom (49 HP) 320.0 


TERMINAL BUILDING 


Foundations 


Standard Foundations 

Cement Mixers 

1,876 8 CY per truck 

Standard Footings 254,278 SF 6,760 3 13 390 Soil Compactor 460 Through duration of foundations 

Slab On Grade 

Concrete-Industrial Saws 

790 Through duration of footings 

Slab on Grade 254,278 SF 6,760 4 10 400 Motor Grader 390 Through duration of footings 

Waterproofing Under Tunnel Slab 31,252 SF 11,200 2 2 40 Wheel Excavator 20 Elevator Pit 

Elevator Pit 19 EA 160 1 1 10 Trenchers 390 Through duration of footings 

Escalator Pit 36 EA 160 1 1 10 Off Highway Truck 62.1 Material to site 10 trips per day 

Hydrocarbon Remediation, Allow 254,278 SF NA 

TOTAL 27 850 

Basement Construction 


Basement Excavation 

Cement Mixer Truck 

181 8 CY per truck 

Basement Excavation, Backfill, Disposal 24,847 CY 2,400 2 6 120 Skidsteer Loader 840 1/2 for Retaining Walls 

Shoring to Basement Excavation 68,015 SF 9,600 2 4 80 Wheeled Dozer 330 1 dozer for duration 

Dewatering 24,847 CY NA Scraper 120 1 scrapers 

Basement Walls 

0 Wheel Excavator 400 2 Excavators 

Concrete Basement Retaining wall 28,892 SF 295 8 13 1040 Wheeled Loader 330 1 Loader 

Concrete Basement Interior Wall 20,096 SF 350 8 8 640 Off Highway Truck 189.75 5 trucks make 5 RT/day 

Waterproofing to Wall 28,892 SF 11,200 2 2 40 

TOTAL 33 1920 

Superstructure 


Floor Construction 

Cement Mixer Truck 

2,271 8 CY per truck 

Slab Over Utility Tunnel 31,252 SF 6,760 1 5 50 Rough Terrain Forklift 1450 1 for duration 

Upper Floor Construction 235,290 SF 8,000 4 8 320 Crane 800 1 Crane 

Mezzanine Level Structure 148,354 SF 8,000 1 19 190 Wheeled Dozer 725 1/2 Dozer for duration 

Additional Structure Atrium-Type Areas 200,729 SF 8,000 3 9 270 Off Highway Truck 235.98 6 trucks 3 RT each/ day for duration 

Roof Construction 

0 

Roof Construction 305,040 SF 5,100 4 15 600 

Canopy Construction 4,320 SF 5,100 2 1 20 

TOTAL 57 1450 

Exterior Closure 


Exterior Walls 

Cement Mixers 


12" Thick CMU Wall; Drywall Inner Face 10,787 SF 350 4 8 320 Skidsteer Loader 250 1/2 for duration 

Metal Panel Wall/Fascia 22,494 SF 500 4 12 480 Crane 500 1 for duration 

Stone Clad Exterior Wall 34,875 SF 1,024 4 9 360 Wheeled Dozer 500 Duration for loading moving material 

Metal Louvers 5,668 SF 11,000 1 1 10 Wheeled BH Loader 240 windows and door installation 

Soffit to Overhangs 41,332 SF 6,000 3 3 90 Off Highway Truck 207 Haul materials 6 trucks 3RT per day 

Precast Column Covers 1,567 SF 1,400 1 2 20 

Exterior Windows 

Curtain Walling 101,900 SF 10,000 3 4 120 

Curtain Walling - with Exterior Shading 31,860 SF 6,000 1 6 60 

Punched Windows 3,200 SF NA 

Exterior Doors 


Double Exterior Door, Frame, Hardware 7 EA 20 1 1 10 

Automatic Double Entrance doors 12 EA 10 1 2 20 

Roll-Up Exterior Doors 1,344 SF 1,000 2 1 20 

TOTAL 50 1520 

Roofing 


Roof Coverings 

Cement Mixers 


Flat Roofing 297,840 SF 50,000 1 6 60 Crane 170 1 crane 

Roof Deck with Pavers and Raised Planters 7,200 SF 1,500 1 5 50 Off Highway Truck 110.4 Hauling materials 6 trucks 5 RT/day 

Roofing to Canopy 4,320 SF 6,000 2 1 20 

Upstands and Edgings 5,892 LF NA 

Roof Accessories 297,840 SF NA 

Canopy 12,545 SF NA 

Roof Openings 

Monitor Glazing 9,845 SF 6,000 1 2 20 

Skylight 2,700 SF 2,000 1 2 20 

TOTAL 16 170 

Interior Construction 


Partitions 

Crane 

10 1 crane 1 day 


Temporary Wall at Concession Area 24,400 SF 20,000 1 2 20 Off Highway Truck 34.5 6 trucks per day 

Interior Doors 


Double Interior Door, Frame, Hardware 1 EA 30 1 1 10 

Automatic Double Entrance Doors 15 EA 10 1 2 20 

Roll-up Interior Shutter 2,796 SF 1,000 1 3 30 

Stair Construction 

Staircase 19 FLT 8 2 2 

TOTAL 25 330

Interior Finishes 


Wall Finishes 

Wheeled Dozer 

100 Moving materal around site 

Wall Finish to Circulation Areas 296,663 SF NA 10 Off Highway Truck 9.2 2 trucks per day for duration bringing materials 


Wall Finishto Restrooms 30,772 SF NA 




Floor Finish to Circulation Area 321,222 SF NA 10 






Bases to Circulation Areas 13,485 SF NA 

Bases to Concession Areas 2,934 SF NA 

Bases to Restrooms 3,077 SF NA 

Bases to Offices 3,569 SF NA 

Bases to Service Areas 7,598 SF NA 







Ceiling Finish to Circultaion Areas 324,637 SF NA 5 

Ceiling Finish to Concession Areas 53,809 SF NA 



Ceilinig Finish to Service Areas 241,060 SF NA 

TOTAL 

Conveying 


Elevators + Lifts 

Crane 

280 Moving elevators 

Elevator, 2 Stop 10 EA 0.5 2 10 200 Off Highway Truck 8.28 

Elevator, 3 Stop 10 EA 0.5 2 10 200 

Escalators + Moving Walkways 

Escalator, 1 Story 14 EA 1 1 14 140 

Escalator, 2 story 2 EA 1 1 2 20 

TOTAL 36 560 

Plumbing 


WC, Wall Hung, High Eff. Sensor Op Flush Valve 78 EA NA 15 Wheeled Dozer 160 2 doxers moving material around site and basement excavation 

Urinal, Wall Hung, High Eff. Sensor Op Flush Valve 30 EA NA Wheel Excavator 40 During basement excavation and backfill 

Lavatory, with Sensor Faucet 54 EA NA Wheeled Loader 80 Moving materials around site 

Janitors Sink 5 EA NA Off Highway Truck 32.4 3 trucks (1 per trade) 3 RT for duration 


Basement Excavation, Backfill, Disposal 823 CY 2,400 1 1 10 

Shoring to Basement Excavation 2,664 SF 9,600 1 1 10 

Base Slab 493 SF 6,760 1 1 10 

Tank Retaining Wall 1,295 SF 2,400 1 1 10 

Slab Over Utility Tunnel 493 SF 6,760 1 1 10 

Waterproofing Under base 493 SF 11,200 1 1 10 


Waterproofing Over Roof Slab 493 SF 11,200 1 1 10 

General Plumbing 669,174 GFA NA 

TOTAL 8 80 

HVAC 


Wet Side 354,945 GFA NA 10 Off Highway Truck 1.7 10 RT to haul all materials] 

Dry Side 354,945 GFA NA 

Controls 354,945 GFA NA 


Wet Side 314,229 GFA NA 




TOTAL 

Fire Protection 


Fire Protection 669,174 GFA NA No major equipment needed 

Clean Agent for MDF, IDF & Sec Elect rms 669,174 GFA NA Material/equipment haul to site minimal/incidental 

Fire Protection at Canopies 4,320 SF NA 5 

TOTAL 

Electrical 


Electrical Distribution 


6.8 Haull all electrical materials to site~40 RT 

12.47 kV Primary Switchgear Line-Ups 3 EA NA 20 

12.47kV-480/277V Transformers 12 EA NA 

Conduits from Primary Switchgear to Padmount Transformers 1,200 LF NA 

480/277V Main Secondary Switchboards, double ended with Tie Breaker 6 EA NA 


Electrical (Continued) 


Distribution Boards, Panelboards, Feeders 277/480V 669,174 SF NA 

Transformers, Feeders 669,174 SF NA


Baggage Handling Distribution Boards 669,174 SF NA 

Connections to Baggage Handline System 8 EA NA 






UPS Distribution 669,174 EA NA 


Add 1750kW Generators 2 EA NA 

Add Housekeeeping Pads 3 EA NA 

Add Paralleling Switchgear/ATS/S/3400A 1 EA NA 

Connections to HVAC Equipment 669,174 SF NA 

Connections to Signage 669,174 SF NA 

Connect Elevators 10 EA NA 

Connect Escalators 16 EA NA 

Misc Equipment connections 669,174 SF NA 





Trench duct 888 LF NA 

Conduit to Trench duct 1 LS NA 






TelephonY System 669,174 SF NA 












VESDA Systems 8 EA NA 

TOTAL 

Pedestrian Bridges 


Standard Footings 15,000 SF 6,760 1 3 30 Cement Mixers 65 8 CY per truck 

Slab On Grade 2,256 SF 6,760 1 1 10 Crane 170 1/2 on site for duration 

Moving Walkway Pit 480 LF 400 1 2 20 Wheeled Dozer 340 1 on site 

Upper Floor Construction 15,000 SF 8,000 1 2 20 Wheel Excavator 340 1 on site for duration 

Roof Construction 21,150 SF 8,000 1 3 30 Wheeled Loader 340 1 on site for duration 

Stone Clad Exterior Wall 8,826 SF 1,500 2 3 60 Off Highway Truck 36 5 Trucks (for each specialty) avg 30 RT each 

Soffit to Overhangs 20,450 SF 6,000 1 4 40 

Curtain Walling - 8" 17,920 SF 8,000 1 3 30 


Flat Roofing 21,150 SF 50,000 1 1 10 

Upstands and Edgings 2,437 LF NA 10 




Miscellaneous Carpentry 15,000 GFA NA 

Miscellaneous Casework 15,000 GFA NA 

Miscellaneous Metalwork 15,000 GFA NA 

Staircase 2 FLT 8 1 1 10 

Wall finish to Circulation Areas 24,570 SF NA 

Floor Finish to Circulation Areas 15,000 SF NA 

Bases to Circulation Areas 1,410 LF NA 



Public Ceiling: Wood, Specialty Metal 1 LS NA 

Ceiling Finish to Circulation Areas 14,791 SF NA 

Ceiling Finish to Service Areas 209 SF NA 

Moving Walk 48" Wide 480 LF 200 1 3 30 

Elevator, 2 stop 1 EA 0.5 2 1 20 

Elevator, 1 stop 1 EA 0.5 2 1 20 


HVAC Installation 15,000 GFA NA 

Fire Protection 21,814 GFA NA 

Pedestrian Bridges (Continued) 


Electrical Distribution, Allow 15,000 GFA NA 

Supply, Install, Connect, Light Fixtures, Lighting Controls 15,000 GFA NA 

Convenience Power, Allow 15,000 GFA NA

Security/CCTV, Allow 15,000 GFA NA 

Paging System 15,000 GFA NA 

Misc Communications 15,000 GFA NA 

Fire Alarm etc, Allow 15,181 GFA NA 

TOTAL 29 340 


228 10 LDV's per working day 


Hours of 

use 








Pumps (45 HP) 0.0 




Scraper (425 HP) 120.0 









Broom (49 HP) 0.0 






Standard Footings 166,100 SF 6,760 2 13 260 Soil Compactors 520 Through duration of footings and slab 

Slan On Grade Concrete-Industrial Saws 520 Through duration of footings and slab 

Slab on Grade 166,100 SF 6,760 2 13 260 Skidsteer loader 520 Through duration of footings and slab 

Waterproofing Under Tunnel Slab 15,585 SF 11,200 1 2 20 Cranes - Diesel 260 Through duration of foundations 

Elevator Pit 7 EA 160 1 1 10 Wheeled Dozer 560 Through duration 

Escalator Pit 12 EA 160 1 1 10 Track Type Loader 560 Through duration 

TOTAL 30 560 Off Highway Truck 69 Material to site 10 trips per day 

Basement Construction QUANTITY UNIT PROD. RATE # OF CREWS DAYS HOURS EQUIPMENT HRS of OPERATION Assumptions 

Basement Excavation Cement Mixers 956 8 CY per truck 

Basement Excavation, Backfill, Disposal 12,376 CY 2,400 1 6 60 Soil Compactors 100 Through duration of excavation 

Shoring to Basement Excavation 33,271 SF 9,600 1 4 40 Skidsteer loader 1150 Through duration of walls 

Basement Walls 12,376 0 Cranes - Diesel 60 Through duration of basement ex 

Concrete Basement Retaining wall 30,727 SF 295 8 14 1120 Wheeled Dozer 575 Through duration of walls 

Waterproofing to Wall 30,727 SF 11,200 1 3 30 Track Type Loader 62 200 CY loaded per hour 

TOTAL 27 1250 Off Highway Truck 149 Non PCC materials and dumping at 10 CY per load 


Floor Construction Cement Mixers 30 8 CY per truck 


Upper Floor Construction 189,400 SF 8,000 2 12 240 Cranes - Diesel 820 2 Cranes 

Moving Walkway Pit 1,050 LF 200 2 3 60 Wheeled Dozer 205 1/2 Dozer for duration 

Sterile Corridor Structure 26,900 SF 8,000 1 4 40 Off Highway Truck 170 6 trucks 3 RT each/ day for duration 



TOTAL 41 1130 


Exterior Walls Cement Mixers 195 8 CY per truck 

12" Thick CMU Wall; Drywall Inner Face 48,653 SF 350 4 35 1400 Rough Terrain Forklifts 2820 2 for duration 

12" Thick Metal Panel Wall/Fascia 51,401 SF 500 4 26 1040 Skidsteer loader 2820 2 for duration 

Stone Clad Exterior Wall 20,123 SF 1,024 2 10 200 Cranes - Diesel 1410 1 for duration 

Metal Louvers 11,397 SF 11,000 1 2 20 Track-type Tractor 1410 1 for duration 

Soffit to Overhangs 151,233 SF 6,000 1 26 260 Wheeled Dozer 705 1/2 Duration for loading moving material 

Precast Column Covers 8,144 SF 1,400 1 6 60 Off Highway Truck 584 Haul materials 6 trucks 3RT per day 

Exterior Windows 0 


Curtain Walling - 8" Sloped 89,816 SF 8,000 1 12 120 

3' Sunshade 103,440 SF 6,000 1 18 180 

Exterior Doors 23,717 0 




TOTAL 141 3340 



Flat Roofing 304,836 SF 50,000 1 7 70 Off Highway Truck 280.6 Hauling materials 4 trucks 5 RT/day 

Upstands and Edgings 5,939 LS NA 

Monitor Curbs 304,836 SF 6,000 1 51 510 


Roof Openings 


TOTAL 61 610 


Partitions Crane 180 1 crane per day 


Glazed Partition at Sterile Corridor 9,361 SF 25,000 1 1 10 Off Highway Truck 16.56 4 trucks per day 


Interior Doors 0 



Specialties 







Miscelaneous Metalwork 397,985 GFA NA 

TOTAL 18 180 


Stair Construction 0 Crane 10 1 crane 1 day 

Staircase 15 FLT 8 1 2 20 Off Highway Truck 3.45 5 Hauls per day 

Short Steps and Ramp 4 FLT 15 1 1 10 

TOTAL 3 30 







Wall Finish to Service Areas 282,834 SF NA

Interior Finishes (Continued) QUANTITY UNIT PROD. RATE # OF CREWS DAYS HOURS EQUIPMENT HRS of OPERATION Assumptions 










Bases to Restrooms 2,528 LF NA 

Bases to Offices 17,389 LF NA 













TOTAL 

Conveying QUANTITY UNIT PROD. RATE # OF CREWS DAYS HOURS EQUIPMENT HRS of OPERATION Assumptions 

Elevators + Lifts Crane 20 Moving elevators 


Elevator, 3 Stop 1 EA 0.5 1 2 20 

Escalators + Moving Walkways 0 



TOTAL 26 260 


WC, Wall Hung, High Eff. Sensor Op Flush Valve 108 EA NA Wheeled Dozer 80 Dozer moving material around site and basement excavation 

Urinal, Wall Hung, High Eff. Sensor Op Flush Valve 38 EA NA 5 Wheel Excavator 10 During basement excavation and backfill 

Lavatory, with Sensor Faucet 71 EA NA Wheeled Loader 30 Moving materials around site 

Janitors Sink 1 EA NA Off Highway Truck 44.16 3 trucks (1 per trade) 3 RT for about 5 days 


Basement Excavation, Backfill, Disposal 1,114 CY 2,400 1 1 10 


Base Slab 684 SF 6,760 1 1 10 







TOTAL 8 80 


Wet Side 293,088 GFA NA Off Highway Truck 2.3 10 RT to haul all materials] 

Dry Side 293,088 GFA NA 5 







TOTAL 


Fire Protection 397,985 GFA NA No major equipment needed Material/equipment haul to site minimal/incidental 

TOTAL 






Conduits from Primary Switchgear to Padmount Transformers 

800 LF 

Primary conductors from primary Switchgear to Padmount Transformers 3,492 LF NA 





Power to Gates 29 EA NA 












Connections to HVAC Equipment 397,985 SF NA

Electrical Distibution (Continued) QUANTITY UNIT PROD. RATE # OF CREWS DAYS HOURS EQUIPMENT HRS of OPERATION Assumptions 




Connect Walkways 1 EA NA 

Connect PCA Units 25 EA NA 

Connect to Firepump 1 EA NA 
























TOTAL 


Special Airport Features 397,985 GFA NA 1 Off Highway Truck 9.2 Haull materials to site~40 RT 

Jet Bridge, Upper Level, South Concourse 25 EA NA 1 Broom 100 Clean Up 

Baggage Buddy, South Concourse 25 EA NA 1 

400Hz Power South Concourse 

500kVA Converters 4 EA NA 1 

90kVA Line Drop Compensator/Gate Box Combination Units 25 EA NA 1 

16 Zone Distribution Panels 2 EA NA 1 

90kVA Cables with Plugs 25 EA NA 1 

Shipping and Handling 1 EA NA 1 

Start-up and Training 1 EA NA 1 

Feeders to 500kVA Converters 4 EA NA 1 

Feeders to 16 Zone Distribution Panels 2 EA NA 1 

Feeders to Gateboxes 25 EA NA 1 

Pre Conidtioned Air, South Concourse 25 EA NA 1 

Potable Water Cabinets, South Concourse 25 EA NA 1 


TOTAL 



Equipment type - West Half (50% of total) Hours of use Equipment type - East Half (50% of total) Hours of use 

Cement Mixers (350 HP) 913.4 Cement Mixers (350 HP) 

913.4 

Soil Compactors (253 HP) 310.0 Soil Compactors (253 HP) 

310.0 

Rough Terrain Forklifts (66 HP) 1615.0 Rough Terrain Forklifts (66 HP) 

1615.0 

Concrete-Industrial Saws (46 HP) 260.0 Concrete-Industrial Saws (46 HP) 

260.0 

LDV - Passenger Vehicles 1323.3 LDV - Passenger Vehicles 

1323.3 

Skidsteer loader (47 HP) 2245.0 Skidsteer loader (47 HP) 

2245.0 

Cranes - Diesel (75 HP) 1670.0 Cranes - Diesel (75 HP) 

1670.0 

Pumps (45 HP) 0.0 Pumps (45 HP) 

0.0 

Track-type Tractor (160 HP) 705.0 Track-type Tractor (160 HP) 

705.0 

Wheeled Tractor (58 HP) 0.0 Wheeled Tractor (58 HP) 

0.0 

Wheeled Dozer (498 HP) 1147.5 Wheeled Dozer (498 HP) 

1147.5 

Scraper (425 HP) 0.0 Scraper (425 HP) 

0.0 

Motor Grader (158 HP) 0.0 Motor Grader (158 HP) 

0.0 

Wheeled Excavator (268 HP) 5.0 Wheeled Excavator (268 HP) 

5.0 

Wheeled BH Loader (93 HP) 0.0 Wheeled BH Loader (93 HP) 

0.0 

Track Type Loader (189 HP) 310.9 Track Type Loader (189 HP) 

310.9 

Trenchers (54 HP) 0.0 Trenchers (54 HP) 

0.0 

Off Highway Truck (535 HP) 711.2 Off Highway Truck (535 HP) 

711.2 

Roller (55 HP) 0.0 Roller (55 HP) 

0.0 

Track Paver (144 HP) 0.0 Track Paver (144 HP) 

0.0 

Broom (49 HP) 50.0 Broom (49 HP) 

50.0 

Rotomill (557 HP) 0.0 Rotomill (557 HP) 

0.0

MID CONCOURSE TUNNEL 



Standard Footings Cement Mixers 105 8 CY per truck 

Standard Footings, South Portion 14,026 SF 6,760 1 3 30 Soil Compactors 60 Through duration of footings and slab 

Slab on Grade 0 Concrete-Industrial Saws 60 1,000 LF per day 

3'6" Thick reinforced Concrete Base Slab, South Portion 14,026 SF 6,760 1 3 30 Skidsteer loader 160 Through duration of footings and slab 

Watertight Junction with Existing Structure, South Portion 50 LF NA 0 Cranes - Diesel 160 Through duration of foundations 

Moving Walkway Pit, south Portion 795 LF 200 1 4 40 Wheeled Dozer 160 Through duration 

Underfloor Drainage System, South Portion 14,026 SF 11,200 1 2 20 Track Type Loader 160 Through duration 

Waterproofing Under Tunnel Slab, South Portion 14,026 SF 11,200 1 2 20 Off Highway Truck 120 Non PCC materials and dumping 

Permanent Dewatering System, South Portion 14,026 SF 11,200 1 2 20 

TOTAL 16 160 



Basement Excavation, Backfill, Disposal 23,245 CY 2,400 1 10 100 Soil Compactors 130 Through duration of excavation 

Shoring to Basement Excavation 24,515 SF 9,600 1 3 30 Skidsteer loader 790 Through duration of walls 

Basement Walls 0 Cranes - Diesel 100 Through duration of basement ex 

2'6" Thck Exterior Concrete Wall, South Portion 23,670 SF 300 1 79 790 Wheeled Dozer 790 Through duration of walls 

Watertight Junction with Existing Structure, South Portion 36 LF NA 0 Track Type Loader 116 200 CY loaded per hour 

12" Thick Interior Concrete Wall, South Portion 5,916 SF 350 1 17 170 Off Highway Truck 534.635 Non PCC materials and dumping at 10 CY per load 

Waterproofing to Walls, South Porion 23,670 SF 11,200 1 3 30 

Perforated Drain Pipe, Granular Fill, Geofilter Fabric, South Portion 1,742 LF 1,500 1 2 20 

TOTAL 114 1140 


Roof Construction Rough Terrain Forklift 40 1 for duration 

3'6" Concrete Cover Slab, South Portion 14,026 SF 6,760 1 3 30 Cranes - Diesel 80 2 Cranes 

Watertight Junction with Existing Structre, South Portion 50 LF 300 1 1 10 Wheeled Dozer 40 1 Dozer for duration 

TOTAL 4 40 Off Highway Truck 17 6 trucks 3 RT each/ day for duration 


General Plumbing, South Portion 14,026 GFA NA 1 Off Highway Truck 10.35 3 trucks (1 per trade) 3 RT for about 5 days 

TOTAL 









Pumps (45 HP) 0.0 













Broom (49 HP) 0.0 


Hours of use 


911.2 10 Crew Members per crew





Standard Footings 130,600 SF 6,760 2 10 200 Soil Compactors 400 Through duration of footings and slab 

Slan On Grade Concrete-Industrial Saws 400 Through duration of footings and slab 

Slab on Grade 130,600 SF 6,760 2 10 200 Skidsteer loader 400 Through duration of footings and slab 

Waterproofing Under Tunnel Slab 9,371 SF 11,200 1 1 10 Cranes - Diesel 200 Through duration of foundations 


TOTAL 22 420 Track Type Loader 420 Through duration 


50.6 Material to site 10 trips per day 


Basement Excavation Cement Mixer Truck 172 8 CY per truck 

Basement Excavation, Backfill, Disposal 7,451 CY 2,400 1 4 40 Skidsteer Loader 670 1 for Retaining Walls 

Shoring to Basement Excavation 20,395 SF 9,600 1 3 30 Wheeled Dozer 360 2 dozers for duration 

Basement Walls Scraper 70 1 scrapers 

Concrete Basement Retaining wall 18,639 SF 295 8 8 640 Wheel Excavator 140 2 Excavators 

Concrete Basement Interior Wall 9,319 SF 11,200 1 1 10 Wheeled Loader 360 2 Loaders 

Waterproofing to Wall 18,639 SF 11,200 1 2 20 Off Highway Truck 103.5 5 trucks make 5 RT/day 

TOTAL 18 740 


Floor Construction Cement Mixer Truck 588 8 CY per truck 


Upper Floor Construction 149,900 SF 8,000 2 10 200 Crane 800 2 Cranes 

Moving Walkway Pit 1,050 LF 200 2 3 60 Wheeled Dozer 620 1 Dozer for duration 

Sterile Corridor Structure 10,600 SF 8,000 1 2 20 Off Highway Truck 103.5 6 trucks 3 RT each/ day for duration 



TOTAL 25 620 


Exterior Walls Cement Mixers 61 8 CY per truck 

12" Thick CMU Wall; Drywall Inner Face 28,054 SF 350 4 21 840 Skidsteer Loader 1880 1 for duration 

12" Thick Metal Panel Wall/Fascia 29,639 SF 500 4 15 600 Crane 740 1 for duration 

Stone Clad Exterior Wall 11,603 SF 1,024 2 6 120 Wheeled Dozer 740 Duration for loading moving material 

Metal Louvers 6,572 SF 11,000 1 1 10 Wheeled BH Loader 140 windows and door installation 

Soffit to Overhangs 75,977 SF 6,000 1 13 130 Off Highway Truck 306 Haul materials 6 trucks 3RT per day 

Precast Column Covers 4,697 SF 1,400 1 4 40 

Exterior Windows 


Curtain Walling - 8" Sloped 51,789 SF 8,000 1 7 70 

3' Sunshade 13,676 SF 6,000 1 3 30 

Exterior Doors 23,717 0 




TOTAL 74 1880 




Upstands and Edgings 6,244 LS NA 0 

Monitor Curbs 232,925 SF 6,000 1 39 390 

Roof Accessories 232,925 SF NA 0 

Roof Openings 


TOTAL 47 470 


Partitions Wheeled Dozer 60 Duration for loading moving 

Stud Partitions, Drywall, Insulation 131,306 SF 20,000 1 7 70 Off Highway Truck 11.04 4 trucks per day 





Specialties 








TOTAL 12 120 



Staircase 3 FLT 8 1 1 10 Off Highway Truck 2.3 5 Hauls per day 

Short Steps and Ramp 4 FLT 15 1 1 10 

TOTAL 2 20 







Interior Finishes (Continued) 32,234 UNIT PROD. RATE # OF CREWS DAYS HOURS EQUIPMENT HRS of OPERATION Assumptions


Floor Finishes 34,949 








Bases to Concession Areas 3,115 LF NA 

Bases to Restrooms 2,972 LF NA 














TOTAL 




Escalators + Moving Walkways 0 

Moving Walk 48" Wide 1,050 LF 200 1 6 60 

TOTAL 8 80 


WC, Wall Hung, High Eff. Sensor Op Flush Valve 82 EA NA Wheeled Dozer 80 Dozer moving material around site and basement excavation 

Urinal, Wall Hung, High Eff. Sensor Op Flush Valve 31 EA NA 5 Off Highway Truck 44.16 3 trucks (1 per trade) 3 RT for about 5 days 

Lavatory, with Sensor Faucet 57 EA NA Wheel Excavator 10 During basement excavation and backfill 

Janitors Sink 1 EA NA Wheeled Loader 30 Moving materials around site 


Basement Excavation, Backfill, Disposal 1,376 CY 2,400 1 1 10 


Base Slab 845 SF 6,760 1 1 10 







TOTAL 8 80 










TOTAL 



TOTAL 






Conduits from Primary Switchgear to Padmount Transformers 

400 LF 




















Electrical Distibution (Continued) QUANTITY UNIT PROD. RATE # OF CREWS DAYS HOURS EQUIPMENT HRS of OPERATION Assumptions



Connect to Firepump 1 EA NA 
























TOTAL 


Jet Bridge, Upper Level, South Concourse 15 EA NA 1 Off Highway Truck 9.2 Haull materials to site~40 RT 

Baggage Buddy, South Concourse 15 EA NA 1 Broom 100 Clean Up 

400Hz Power South Concourse 

500kVA Converters 2 EA NA 1 

90kVA Line Drop Compensator/Gate Box Combination Units 15 EA NA 1 

16 Zone Distribution Panels 1 EA NA 1 

90kVA Cables with Plugs 15 EA NA 1 

Shipping and Handling 1 EA NA 1 

Start-up and Training 1 EA NA 1 

Feeders to 500kVA Converters 2 EA NA 1 

Feeders to 16 Zone Distribution Panels 1 EA NA 1 

Feeders to Gateboxes 15 EA NA 1 

Pre Conidtioned Air, South Concourse 15 EA NA 1 

Potable Water Cabinets, South Concourse 15 EA NA 1 


TOTAL 

Equipment type Hours of use Equipment type - East Half (50% of total) Hours of use 

Cement Mixers (350 HP) 664.1 Cement Mixers (350 HP) 

664.1 

Soil Compactors (253 HP) 200.0 Soil Compactors (253 HP) 

200.0 LDV - Passenger Vehicles 1715.2 10 Crew Members per crew 

Rough Terrain Forklifts (66 HP) 310.0 Rough Terrain Forklifts (66 HP) 

310.0 

Concrete-Industrial Saws (46 HP) 200.0 Concrete-Industrial Saws (46 HP) 

200.0 

LDV - Passenger Vehicles 857.6 LDV - Passenger Vehicles 

857.6 

Skidsteer loader (47 HP) 1475.0 Skidsteer loader (47 HP) 

1475.0 

Cranes - Diesel (75 HP) 1105.0 Cranes - Diesel (75 HP) 

1105.0 

Pumps (45 HP) 0.0 Pumps (45 HP) 

0.0 

Track-type Tractor (160 HP) 0.0 Track-type Tractor (160 HP) 

0.0 

Wheeled Tractor (58 HP) 0.0 Wheeled Tractor (58 HP) 

0.0 

Wheeled Dozer (498 HP) 1180.0 Wheeled Dozer (498 HP) 

1180.0 

Scraper (425 HP) 0.0 Scraper (425 HP) 

0.0 

Motor Grader (158 HP) 0.0 Motor Grader (158 HP) 

0.0 

Wheeled Excavator (268 HP) 75.0 Wheeled Excavator (268 HP) 

75.0 

Wheeled BH Loader (93 HP) 530.0 Wheeled BH Loader (93 HP) 

530.0 

Track Type Loader (189 HP) 15.0 Track Type Loader (189 HP) 

15.0 

Trenchers (54 HP) 0.0 Trenchers (54 HP) 

0.0 

Off Highway Truck (535 HP) 437.2 Off Highway Truck (535 HP) 

437.2 

Roller (55 HP) 0.0 Roller (55 HP) 

0.0 

Track Paver (144 HP) 0.0 Track Paver (144 HP) 

0.0 

Broom (49 HP) 50.0 Broom (49 HP) 

50.0 

Rotomill (557 HP) 0.0 Rotomill (557 HP) 

0.0

Apron Work 


Selective Building Demolition QUANTITY UNIT PROD. RATE # OF CREWS DAYS HOURS EQUIPMENT HRS of OPERATION Assumptions 

Site Preparation Cement Mixer 62 8 CY per truck 

Sawcut Existing Apron (South Concourse West) 5,033 LF 1000 2 3 60 Soil Compactors 696 50,000 SF per day 

Remov Existing Apron (South Concourse West) 1,135,232 SF 6500 4 44 1760 Rough Terrain Forklifts 3940 One for demo 

Sawcut Existing Apron (South Concourse East) 2,879 LF 1000 2 2 40 Concrete-Industrial Saws 218 1,000 LF per day 

Remov Existing Apron (South Concourse East) 99,951 SF 6500 4 4 160 Skidsteer loader 1970 1/2 for duration 

Sawcut Existing Apron (Concourses A&B) 13,903 LF 1000 2 7 140 Cranes - Diesel 1460 1/2 for demo 

Remov Existing Apron (Concourses A&B) 482,672 SF 6500 4 19 760 Wheeled Dozer 2920 One for demo 

Site Improvements Track Type Loader 1460 1/2 for demo 

New Apron Paving, 16" Concrete, 7.5" Lean mix, 18" Stone (South Concourse West) 1,417,615 SF 4000 4 89 3560 Roller 303 Duration Paving 

New Apron Paving, 12" Concrete, 7.5" Lean Mix, 18" Stone (South Concourse West) 113,966 SF 4000 1 29 290 Track Paver 303 Duration Paving 

Tie Apron Paving to Existing (South Concourse West) 9,696 LF 2000 1 5 50 Off Highway Truck 1440 10 CY material delivery-non PCC 

New Apron Paving, 16" Concrete, 7.5" Lean mix, 18" Stone (South Concourse East) 1,176,307 SF 4000 4 74 2960 Rotomill 790 Duration Demo 

New Apron Paving, 12" Concrete, 7.5" Lean Mix, 18" Stone (South Concourse East) 211,110 SF 4000 1 53 530 

Tie Apron Paving to Existing (South Concourse East) 6,937 LF 2000 1 4 40 

New Apron Paving, 16" Concrete, 7.5" Lean mix, 18" Stone (Concourse B) 411,083 SF 4000 4 26 1040 

New Apron Paving, 12" Concrete, 7.5" Lean Mix, 18" Stone (Concourse B) 88,179 SF 4000 1 23 230 

Tie Apron Paving to Existing (Concourse B) 2,547 LF 2000 1 2 20 

New Apron Paving, 16" Concrete, 7.5" Lean mix, 18" Stone (Concourse A) 37,855 SF 4000 4 3 120 

New Apron Paving, 12" Concrete, 7.5" Lean Mix, 18" Stone (Concourse A) 21,886 SF 4000 1 6 60 

Tie Apron Paving to Existing (Concourse A) 212 LF 2000 1 1 10 

TOTAL 394 11830 


Site mechanical Utilities Soil Compactors 675 50,000 SF per day 

Adjustments to Site Utilities 3,375,059 SF 50000 5 14 700 Skidsteer loader 170 1/2 for duration 

Hydrant Fueling Line 6,682 LF 750 1 9 90 Wheeled BH Loader 170 1/2 for Duration 

Hydrant Fueling Outlet 63 EA 3 2 11 220 Trenchers 33 2,000 LF per day 

Site Electrical Utilities 0 Off Highway Truck 60 Deliveries 

Apron Light Fixtures 20 EA NA Broom 60 Cleanup 

TOTAL 34 1010 


Hours of use 








Pumps (45 HP) 0.0 











Roller (55 HP) 303.0 


Broom (49 HP) 60.0 



2867.6 10 Crew Members per crew

RAC BUILDING 




Standard Footings 20,244 SF 6760 1 3 30 Soil Compactors 60 Through duration of footings and slab 

Slab On Grade Concrete-Industrial Saws 91.96 1,000 LF per day 

Slab on Grade 20,244 SF 6760 1 3 30 Skidsteer loader 90 Through duration of footings and slab 

Waterproofing Under Tunnel Slab 9,196 SF 11200 1 1 10 Cranes - Diesel 90 Through duration of foundations 


Escalator Pit 8 EA 160 1 1 10 Track Type Loader 90 Through duration 

TOTAL 9 90 Off Highway Truck 120 Non PCC materials and dumping 



Basement Excavation, Backfill, Disposal 7315 CY 2400 1 4 40 Soil Compactors 70 Through duration of excavation 

Shoring to Basement Excavation 20022 SF 9600 1 3 30 Skidsteer loader 890 Through duration of walls 

Basement Walls Cranes - Diesel 40 Through duration of basement ex 

Concrete Basement Retaining wall 18290 SF 295 1 62 620 Wheeled Dozer 890 Through duration of walls 

Concrete Basement Interior Wall 9151 SF 350 1 27 270 Track Type Loader 37 200 CY loaded per hour 

Waterproofing to Wall 18290 SF 11200 1 2 20 Off Highway Truck 168 Non PCC materials and dumping at 10 CY per load 

TOTAL 98 980 


Floor Construction Rough Terrain Forklift 120 1 for duration 

Slab Over Utility Tunnel 9196 SF 6760 1 2 20 Cranes - Diesel 100 2 Cranes for roof 

Upper Floor Construction 39414 SF 8000 1 5 50 Wheeled Dozer 120 1 Dozer for duration 

Roof Construction Off Highway Truck 50 6 trucks 3 RT each/ day for duration 

Roof Construction 21,053 SF 5100 1 5 50 

TOTAL 12 120 



Soffit to Overhangs 809 SF 6000 1 1 10 Skidsteer loader 140 2 for duration 

Exterior Windows Cranes - Diesel 70 1 for duration 

Curtain Wall 22,694 SF 10000 1 3 30 Track-type Tractor 70 1 for duration 

Exterior Doors Wheeled Dozer 70 Duration for loading moving material 

Single Exterior Door, Frame, Hardware 1 EA 30 1 1 10 Off Highway Truck 96.6 Material deliveries - 6 trucks duration 


Automatic Double Entrance doors 4 EA 15 1 1 10 

TOTAL 7 70 



Flat Roofing 21,053 SF 50000 1 1 10 Off Highway Truck 6.9 Hauling materials 6 trucks 5 RT/day 



TOTAL 1 10 



Stud Partitions, Drywall, Insulation 20,212 SF 20000 1 2 20 Wheeled Dozer 70 Duration for loading moving 

Storefront at Junction with Garage 16,170 SF 15000 1 2 20 





Specialties 








TOTAL 7 70 



Staircase 4 EA 8 1 1 10 Off Highway Truck 1.15 5 Hauls per day 

TOTAL 1 10 







Floor Finish to Circulation Area 47,712 SF NA 4 



Floor Finish to Service Areas 3,340 SF NA



Bases to Service Areas 132 LF NA 


Ceiling Finish to Circultaion Areas 47,712 SF NA 5 



TOTAL 






TOTAL 6 80 


WC, Wall Hung, High Eff. Sensor Op Flush Valve 12 EA NA Wheeled Dozer 160 2 dozers moving material around site and basement excavation 

Urinal, Wall Hung, High Eff. Sensor Op Flush Valve 4 EA NA 5 Off Highway Truck 44.16 3 trucks (1 per trade) 3 RT for about 5 days 

Lavatory, with Sensor Faucet 12 EA NA Wheel Excavator 10 During basement excavation and backfill 

Janitors Sink 1 EA NA Wheeled Loader 40 Moving materials around site 


Basement Excavation, Backfill, Disposal 600 CY 2400 1 1 10 

Shoring to Basement Excavation 2,000 SF 9600 1 1 10 

Base Slab 400 SF 6760 1 1 10 

Tank Retaining Wall 1,000 SF 2400 1 1 10 

Slab Over Utility Tunnel 400 SF 6760 1 1 10 

Waterproofing Under base 400 SF 11200 1 1 10 

Waterproofing to Wall 1,500 SF 11200 1 1 10 

Waterproofing Over Roof Slab 400 SF 11200 1 1 10 


TOTAL 8 80 


Conventional Overhead for B/House & Consessions 9,823 GFA NA 10 Off Highway Truck 2.3 10 RT to haul all materials] 









TOTAL 



TOTAL 



Distribution Boards, Panelboards, Feeders 277/480V 68,854 SF NA 20 










UPS Distribution 1 EA NA 











Supply, Install, Connect Lighting Fixtures Atrium 5,653 SF NA 


Convenience Power, Allow 68,854 SF NA

Electrical (Continued) QUANTITY UNIT PROD. RATE # OF CREWS DAYS HOURS EQUIPMENT HRS of OPERATION Assumptions 



















TOTAL 


Special Airport Features 38,854 GFA NA Off Highway Truck 1.15 Haull materials to site 5 RT 

Ticket Counters, RAC Building 196 LF NA 

TOTAL 


Hours of use 










Pumps (45 HP) 0.0 













Broom (49 HP) 60.0 


RAC Service Facility 


Site Preparation 


Demolish Existing RAC Service Facility 1 LS NA Rough Terrain Forklifts 40.0 One for demo 

TOTAL Skidsteer loader 40.0 One for duration 


40.0 One for demo 

Wheeled Dozer 





6.9 6 trucks per day for 5 days 


2" AC Overlay 1,090,866 SF 100,000 1 11 110 Cement Mixers 10 Concrete 

Entrance Drive 11,923 SF 32,280 1 1 10 Soil Compactors 10 Prior to Paving 

Rental Truck Route 6,740 SF 32,280 3 1 30 Skidsteer loader 180 Roadway 

Curb and Gutter 2,471 LF 1,000 1 3 30 Wheeled Dozer 180 1 dozers during duration 

Fencing 7,481 LF NA Motor Grader 180 1 during paving 

Site Access Control 1 LS NA Off Highway Truck 41.4 Duration 

TOTAL 16 180 Roller 150 during paving and base 

Track Paver 


Site Mechanical Utilities 


Site Utilities 1 LS NA Off Highway Truck 11.5 Material to site 10 trips per day 

TOTAL 

Site Electrical Utilities 


Site Lighting 1 LS NA Off Highway Truck 11.5 Material to site 10 trips per day 

TOTAL 

Other Site Construction 


Medium Service Buildings 40,000 SF NA Off Highway Truck 11.5 Material to site 10 trips per day 

TOTAL 


Hours of use 


Cement Mixers (350 HP) 10.0 Broom 20 Cleanup 







Pumps (45 HP) 0.0 











Roller (55 HP) 150.0 


Broom (49 HP) 20.0 


241 10 LDV's per working day

NEW PARKING GARAGE 


SUPERSTRUCTURE QUANTITY UNIT PROD. RATE # OF CREWS DAYS HOURS EQUIPMENT HRS of OPERATION Assumptions 

Floor Construction Cement Mixers 210 Duration concrete 

Concrete Upper Floor Slabs (6" Slabs) 2,025,162 SF 6760 2 150 3000 Skidsteer loader 2200 Duration 

Concrete Columns (6" Slabs) 137,646 SF 6760 1 21 210 Cranes - Diesel 1100 1/2 for duration 

Concrete Beams (6" Slabs) 104,922 SF 6760 1 16 160 Wheeled Dozer 1100 1/2 duration 

Concrete Girders (6" Slabs) 151,200 SF 6760 1 23 230 Track Type Loader 1100 1/2 duration 

Rebar Epoxy Coated - Upper Floor Slabs 3,750,300 LB NA Off Highway Truck 800 Non PCC materials and dumping 

Rebar Epoxy Coated - Columns 1,911,750 LB NA 

Rebar Epoxy Coated - Beams 582,900 LB NA 

Rebar Epoxy Coated - Girders 840,000 LB NA 

Post Tensioning 1,305,873 LB NA 

Formwork - Upper Floor Slabs 1,745,820 SF NA 

Formwork - Columns (Circular) 81,038 SF NA 

Formwork - Beams 87,420 SF NA 

Formwork - Girders 72,000 SF NA 

Float Finish to Slab 1,745,820 SF NA 

Suspended Elevator Pit 12 EA 15 1 1 10 

Moving Walkway Pit 936 LF 1000 1 1 10 

Expansion Joint covers and Miscellaneous 1,745,820 SF NA 

Helical Ramp 8 FLT 1 1 8 80 

TOTAL 220 3700 

Exterior Wall QUANTITY UNIT PROD. RATE # OF CREWS DAYS HOURS EQUIPMENT HRS of OPERATION Assumptions 

Exterior Wall Rough Terrain Forklifts 300 2 for duration 

Exterior Walling, Garage 12,256 LF 1500 4 3 120 Crane 150 1 cranes 

Exterior Walling, Stair Towers 20,921 SF 2000 1 11 110 Off Highway Truck 69 Hauling materials 4 trucks 5 RT/day 

Exterior Doors 

Exterior Single Door, Frame, and Hardware 7 EA 30 1 1 10 

Roof Openings 0 

Skylight (Kallwall) 35,195 SF NA 

TOTAL 15 240 


Partitions Crane 70 1 cranes 

CMU Partitions 29,234 SF 10000 1 3 30 Off Highway Truck 32.2 Hauling materials 4 trucks 5 RT/day 

Aluminum Panels, Punched Windows 33,963 SF 10000 1 4 40 


Interior Single Door, Frame, Hardware 43 EA NA 

Specialties 

Signage and Other Specialties 1,745,820 GFA NA 

Parking Space Marking 3,588 EA NA 

Handicap Parking Space Marking 64 EA NA 

TOTAL 7 70 

Interior Construction EQUIPMENT HRS of OPERATION Assumptions 

Stair Construction Crane 50 1 cranes 

Stairs 40 FLT 8 1 5 50 Off Highway Truck 23 Hauling materials 4 trucks 5 RT/day 

Wall Finishes 

Paint Walls 29,234 SF NA 


Seal Floors 1,745,820 SF NA 


Paint Structural Soffit 1,745,820 SF NA 

TOTAL 5 50 

Conveying EQUIPMENT HRS of OPERATION Assumptions 

Elevators + L:ifts Crane 50 1 move elevators 

Elevator, 4 Stop, 3500 lb, 150 fpm, 2 Glass Sides 12 EA 0.5 2 12 240 Off Highway Trucks 14.95 5 trips per day 



TOTAL 13 250 


Plumbing 1,745,820 GFA NA Off Highway Truck 5.75 About 25 trips 

TOTAL 


HVAC 1,745,820 GFA NA Off Highway Truck 5.75 About 25 trips 

TOTAL 


Fire Protection 1,745,820 GFA NA Off Highway Truck 5.75 About 25 trips 

TOTAL 


Electrical Distribution Off Highway Truck 11.5 About 50 trips 

Electrical Installations 1,745,820 GFA NA 5 


Dynamic Signage 1,745,820 SF NA 

Single Space Parking Detectors 3,652 EA NA 

TOTAL 


Roadways Cement Mixers 40.00 Duration concrete 

2" AC Overlay 507,374 SF 10,000 1 51 510 Skidsteer loader 590 Roadway 

Entrance Drive 13,765 SF 3,587 1 4 40 Wheeled Dozer 295 1/2 dozers during duration 

Curb and Gutter 1,321 LF 1,000 1 2 20 Off Highway Truck 13.57 Duration 

Concrete Island at Entrances 4,104 SF 3,587 1 2 20 Roller 550 during paving and base 

TOTAL 59 590 Track Paver 590 During paving 

Site Mechanical Utilities QUANTITY UNIT PROD. RATE # OF CREWS DAYS HOURS EQUIPMENT HRS of OPERATION Assumptions 

Mechanical Utilities 1,745,820 GFA NA Off Highway Truck 5.75 About 25 trips 

TOTAL 

Site Electrical Utilities QUANTITY UNIT PROD. RATE # OF CREWS DAYS HOURS EQUIPMENT HRS of OPERATION Assumptions

Site Electric 1,745,820 GFA NA Off Highway Truck 5.75 About 25 trips 

TOTAL 


Hours of use 

Cement Mixers (350 HP) 250.0 LDV - Passenger Vehicles 2204.3 10 Crew Members per crew 







Pumps (45 HP) 0.0 











Roller (55 HP) 550.0 


Broom (49 HP) 80.0 


CONNECTORS RENOVATION 




Structural Adjustments to Structure 21,230 SF 6,760 1 4 40 Cranes - Diesel 80 2 Cranes 

TOTAL 4 40 Wheeled Dozer 20 1/2 Dozer for duration 


17 6 trucks 3 RT each/ day for duration 



Structural work to Column Covers 234 SF 1,400 1 1 10 Crane 30 1 cranes 

Exterior Windows 0 Off Highway Truck 13.8 Hauling materials 4 trucks 5 RT/day 


TOTAL 3 30 




Upstands and Edgings 1,911 LF NA 


TOTAL 1 10 


Specialties Off Highway Truck 9.2 4 trucks per day 

Signage 21,230 GFA NA Wheeled Dozer 50 Duration for loading moving 






TOTAL 








TOTAL 


General Plumbing 300,471 GFA NA Off Highway Truck 2.3 10 RT to haul all materials] 

TOTAL 






TOTAL 



TOTAL 



































Electrical Distibution (Continued) QUANTITY UNIT PROD. RATE # OF CREWS DAYS HOURS EQUIPMENT HRS of OPERATION Assumptions


TOTAL 

Selectiv Building Demolition QUANTITY UNIT PROD. RATE # OF CREWS DAYS HOURS EQUIPMENT HRS of OPERATION Assumptions 

Demolish Interior Construction, Finishes 21,230 GFA NA 1 Skidsteer loader 70 One for duration 

Remove Exterior Walling/Glazing 32,175 SF 8000 1 5 50 Wheeled BH Loader 70 One for Duration 


Plumbing Demolition 21,230 GFA NA Broom 100 Clean Up 



Hazardous Components Abatement 


TOTAL 7 70 


Hours of use 








Pumps (45 HP) 0.0 













Broom (49 HP) 100.0 


CONCOURSE C RENOVATION 




Adjust Footings for Seismic 53,636 SF 6,760 2 4 80 Soil Compactors 160 Through duration of footings and slab 

Slan On Grade Skidsteer loader 160 Through duration of footings and slab 

Adjust Slab on Grade Re Seismic 43,780 SF 6,760 2 4 80 Cranes - Diesel 80 Through duration of foundations 

Adjust Paving Under Covered Area 14,398 SF 11,200 1 2 20 Wheeled Dozer 180 Through duration 



80 Non PCC materials and dumping 



General Seismic Upgrade Work 97,416 SF 6,760 1 15 150 Cranes - Diesel 860 2 Cranes 

Adjust Upper Floor Construction Re Seismic 53,636 SF 8,000 2 4 80 Wheeled Dozer 415 1/2 Dozer for duration 

Spray Fire-Proofing 53,636 LF 1,500 2 18 360 Off Highway Truck 178 6 trucks 3 RT each/ day for duration 


Adjust Roof Construction Re Seismic 58,178 SF 5,100 4 3 120 

Spray Fire-Proofing 58,178 SF 5,100 4 3 120 

TOTAL 43 830 



Seismic and Upgrade on CMU Wall 14,310 SF 350 4 11 440 Skidsteer loader 520 2 for duration 

Seismic and Upgrade Work to Metal Panels 11,700 SF 500 4 6 240 Cranes - Diesel 260 1 for duration 


Precast Column Covers 854 SF 1,400 1 1 10 Wheeled Dozer 385 1/2 Duration for loading moving material 

Seismic and Upgrade Work to Column Covers 461 SF Off Highway Truck 708.4 Material deliveries - 4 trucks duration 







TOTAL 26 770 






TOTAL 2 20 








Specialties 








TOTAL 5 50 




TOTAL 1 10 














Bases to Concession Areas 1,010 LF NA 








Public Ceilings: Wood, Specialty Metal 1 LS NA







TOTAL 


Fixtures & Local Piping 81,740 GFA 11,200 1 8 80 Off Highway Truck 132.48 3 trucks (1 per trade) 3 RT for about 5 days 

Instantaneous Water Heaters/Inceptors Etc 81,740 GFA 11,200 1 8 80 


Utility distribution Upgrades 97,416 GFA NA 

TOTAL 24 240 


Reuse Air handling Units 3 EA NA 5 Off Highway Truck 2.3 10 RT to haul all materials] 

MCR 1 EA NA 







TOTAL 



TOTAL 



Repair, Replace Distribution Boards, Panelboards, Motor Control Centers, Feeders etc 97,416 SF NA 10 


Distribution Boards, Panelboards, Feeders, 120/280V 97,416 SF NA 


Provide Flexible Conduit at Seismic Joints 

1 LS 


1 LS 


10 EA 


Provide Temporary Bridge Wiring to Maintain Essential Circuits during Construction 97,416 SF NA 






Electrical Distibution (Continued) QUANTITY UNIT PROD. RATE # OF CREWS DAYS HOURS EQUIPMENT HRS of OPERATION Assumptions 




Provide Seismic Bracing for Existing UPS 1 LS NA 



Connect Elevators 97,416 SF NA 


























TOTAL 


Jet Bridge, Upper Level 9 EA NA 1 Off Highway Truck 9.2 Haull materials to site~40 RT 

Jet Bridge Footing 9 EA NA 1 Broom 100 Clean Up 

Protect Existing Jet Bridge During Apron Work 3 EA NA 

Baggage Buddy 9 EA NA 1 

New Point-of-Use Systems at New Gates 9 EA NA 1 

150A Receptacles, Feeders 9 EA NA 1 

Feeders to Converters 9 EA NA 1 

Pre Conidtioned Air 9 EA NA 1 

Special Construction (Continued) QUANTITY UNIT PROD. RATE # OF CREWS DAYS HOURS EQUIPMENT HRS of OPERATION Assumptions

Potable Water Cabinets 9 EA NA 1 


TOTAL 


Demolish Interior Construction, Finishes 97,416 GFA NA Skidsteer loader 60 One for duration 








TOTAL 6 60 


Hours of use 

Cement Mixers (350 HP) 189.4 LDV - Passenger Vehicles 817 10 Crew Members per crew 







Pumps (45 HP) 0.0 













Broom (49 HP) 100.0 


CONCOURSE D RENOVATION 





Slan On Grade 0 Skidsteer loader 180 Through duration of footings and slab 


Adjust Paving Under Covered Area 13,483 SF 11,200 1 2 20 Wheeled Dozer 200 Through duration 








Spray Fire-Proofing 54,562 LF 3,000 2 10 200 Off Highway Truck 145 6 trucks 3 RT each/ day for duration 




TOTAL 35 670 





Metal Panel Wall/Fascia 1,316 SF 1,024 2 1 20 Track-type Tractor 270 1 for duration 

Soffit to Overhangs 13,492 SF 6,000 1 3 30 Wheeled Dozer 395 1/2 Duration for loading moving material 

Precast Column Covers 834 SF 1,400 1 1 10 Off Highway Truck 726.8 Material deliveries - 4 trucks duration 

Seismic and Upgrade Work to Column Covers 

449 SF 







TOTAL 27 790 






TOTAL 2 20 








Specialties 








TOTAL 6 60 




TOTAL 1 10 























Public Floors: 25% Stone 1 LS NA










TOTAL 






TOTAL 21 210 



MCR 1 EA NA 







TOTAL 



TOTAL 



Repair, Replace Distribution Boards, Panelboards, Motor Control Centers, Feeders etc 95,641 SF NA 10 



Provide Flexible Conduit at Seismic Joints 

1 LS 


1 LS 


10 EA 











Provide Seismic Bracing for Existing UPS 1 LS NA 



Connect Elevators 95,641 SF NA 


























TOTAL 



Jet Bridge Footing 4 EA NA 1 





Feeders to Converters 4 EA NA 1

Special Construction (Continued) QUANTITY UNIT PROD. RATE # OF CREWS DAYS HOURS EQUIPMENT HRS of OPERATION Assumptions 




TOTAL 










TOTAL 6 60 


Hours of use 

Cement Mixers (350 HP) 186.0 LDV - Passenger Vehicles 783.9 10 Crew Members per crew 







Pumps (45 HP) 0.0 













Broom (49 HP) 100.0 


CONCOURSE B RENOVATION 





Slan On Grade Skidsteer loader 80 Through duration of footings and slab 


TOTAL 4 80 Wheeled Dozer 80 Through duration 


80 Through duration 







Spray Fire-Proofing 49,160 LF 200 2 123 2460 Off Highway Truck 592 6 trucks 3 RT each/ day for duration 




TOTAL 143 2820 






Precast Column Covers 679 SF 1,400 1 1 10 Wheeled Dozer 270 1/2 Duration for loading moving material 

Seismic and Upgrade Work to Column Covers 366 SF Off Highway Truck 496.8 Material deliveries - 4 trucks duration 






TOTAL 18 540 






TOTAL 1 10 








Specialties 








TOTAL 4 40 




TOTAL 1 10 

























Ceiling Finish to Concession Areas 7,466 SF NA 5

Interior Finishes (continued) QUANTITY UNIT PROD. RATE # OF CREWS DAYS HOURS EQUIPMENT HRS of OPERATION Assumptions 



TOTAL 






TOTAL 21 210 



MCR 1 EA NA 







TOTAL 



TOTAL 




1 LS 


10 EA 

Demolish Existing Bus Duct, Replace with conduit, Wire 600 LF NA 










Standby Power Connections to MCR, CR Split System AC Units, 15 LS NA 























TOTAL 



Jet Bridge, Upper Level - Relocating Existing 2 EA NA 2 

Jet Bridge Footing 3 EA NA 1 





Feeders to Converters 1 EA NA 1 




TOTAL 










TOTAL 4 40


Hours of use 








Pumps (45 HP) 0.0 













Broom (49 HP) 100.0 


Attachment B

SPREAD SHEEET FOR CALCULATIONS OF CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT EMISSIONS 

CONCOURSE A RENOVATION 

Location: Salt Lake City International Airport 

Project: Airport Expansion Program - Phase 1 

Emissions Source: EPA "NONROAD" Model: http://www.epa.gov/oms/nonrdmdl.htm. LDV from EPA "OnROAD" Model: http://www.epa.gov/oms/hwy.htm 

Equipment type - All Equipment 

Assumed to Operate at Full Load 

Hours of 

use 

CO Emissions 

Rate lb/hr 

CARBON 

MONOXIDE 

(CO) TONS 

HC Emission 

Rate lb/hr. 

HYDROCARBON 

TONS 

NO2 

Emission 

Rate lb/hr 

NITROGEN 

OXIDES 

(NO2) TONS 

SO2 

Emission 

Rate lb/hr 

SULFUR 

OXIDES 

(SO2) TONS 

PARTICULATE 

PM 10 Emission 

Rate lb/hr 

PARTICULATE 

PM 10 TONS 

PARTICULATE 

PM 2.5 

Emission Rate 

lb/hr 

Cement Mixers (Gas-350 HP) 84.1 0.648 0.027 0.128 0.005 3.3380 0.140 0.0640 0.003 0.1010 0.004 0.0585 0.002 

Soil Compactors (Diesel-253 HP) 0.0 0.4160 0.000 0.172 0.000 3.1040 0.000 0.0860 0.000 0.1403 0.000 0.1214 0.000 

Rough Terrain Forklifts (Diesel-66 HP) 380.0 0.3430 0.065 0.076 0.014 0.8130 0.154 0.0380 0.007 0.0687 0.013 0.0603 0.011 

Concrete-Industrial Saws (Gas-46 HP) 0.0 0.1582 0.000 0.028 0.000 0.4699 0.000 0.0140 0.000 0.0342 0.000 0.0181 0.000 

LDV - Passenger Vehicles (Gas) 815.4 1.3790 0.562 0.185 0.075 0.0920 0.038 0.0930 0.038 0.0000 0.000 0.0000 0.000 

Skidsteer loader (Diesel-47 HP) 480.0 0.1587 0.038 0.029 0.007 0.4897 0.118 0.0150 0.004 0.0351 0.008 0.0318 0.008 

Cranes (Diesel-75 HP) 280.0 0.3909 0.055 0.086 0.012 0.9250 0.130 0.0430 0.006 0.0782 0.011 0.0698 0.010 

Pumps (Gas-45 HP) 0.0 0.1519 0.000 0.028 0.000 0.4689 0.000 0.0140 0.000 0.0336 0.000 0.0178 0.000 

Track-type Tractor (Diesel-160 HP) 190.0 0.305 0.029 0.119 0.011 1.989 0.189 0.060 0.006 0.099 0.009 0.089 0.008 

Wheeled Tractor (Diesel-58 HP) 0.0 0.302 0.000 0.067 0.000 0.715 0.000 0.033 0.000 0.061 0.000 0.054 0.000 

Wheeled Dozer (Diesel-498 HP) 1821.7 0.923 0.841 0.183 0.167 4.749 4.326 0.091 0.083 0.144 0.131 0.133 0.121 

Scraper (Diesel-425 HP) 0.0 0.788 0.000 0.156 0.000 4.053 0.000 0.078 0.000 0.123 0.000 0.113 0.000 

Motor Grader (Diesel-158 HP) 0.0 0.303 0.000 0.117 0.000 1.951 0.000 0.058 0.000 0.097 0.000 0.085 0.000 

Wheeled Excavator (Diesel-268 HP) 0.0 0.4190 0.000 0.176 0.000 3.1120 0.000 0.0880 0.000 0.1413 0.000 0.1210 0.000 

Wheeled BH Loader (Diesel-93 HP) 30.0 0.484 0.007 0.106 0.002 1.145 0.017 0.053 0.001 0.097 0.001 0.087 0.001 

Track Type Loader (Diesel-189 HP) 0.0 0.311 0.000 0.128 0.000 2.319 0.000 0.064 0.000 0.105 0.000 0.095 0.000 

Trenchers (Gas-54 HP) 0.0 0.297 0.000 0.062 0.000 0.698 0.000 0.031 0.000 0.057 0.000 0.038 0.000 

Off Highway Truck (Diesel-535 HP) 2052.0 0.992 1.018 0.197 0.202 5.102 5.235 0.097 0.100 0.155 0.159 0.138 0.142 

Roller (Diesel-55 HP) 0.0 0.301 0.000 0.064 0.000 0.711 0.000 0.032 0.000 0.059 0.000 0.053 0.000 

Track Paver (Diesel-144 HP) 0.0 0.4761 0.000 0.087 0.000 1.4690 0.000 0.0440 0.000 0.1053 0.000 0.0943 0.000 

Broom (Diesel-49 HP) 100.0 0.1590 0.008 0.030 0.002 0.4920 0.025 0.0150 0.001 0.0357 0.002 0.0310 0.002 

Rotomill (Diesel-557 HP) 0.0 1.033 0.000 0.205 0.000 5.312 0.000 0.102 0.000 0.161 0.000 0.145 0.000 

PARTICULATE 

PM 2.5 TONS 

SUB-TOTAL EMISSIONS 2.650 0.497 10.370 0.247 0.339 0.305 

TOTAL CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT 

EMISSIONS 

CARBON MONOXIDE (CO) TONS 

HYDROCARBON TONS 

NITROGEN OXIDES (NO2) 

TONS 

SULFUR OXIDES (SO2) 

TONS 

PARTICULATE PM 10 TONS 

PARTICULATE PM 2.5 TONS 

2.650 0.497 10.370 0.247 0.339 0.305 

Emissions Calcs-v3.xls


QTA STRUCTURE 






Hours of 

use 

CO Emissions 

Rate lb/hr 

CARBON 

MONOXIDE 

(CO) TONS 

HC Emission 

Rate lb/hr. 

HYDROCARBON 

TONS 

NO2 

Emission 

Rate lb/hr 

NITROGEN 

OXIDES 

(NO2) TONS 

SO2 

Emission 

Rate lb/hr 

SULFUR 

OXIDES 

(SO2) TONS 

PARTICULATE 


Rate lb/hr 

PARTICULATE 

PM 10 TONS 

PARTICULATE 

PM 2.5 

Emission Rate 

lb/hr 








Pumps (Gas-45 HP) 0.0 0.1519 0.000 0.028 0.000 0.4689 0.000 0.0140 0.000 0.0336 0.000 0.0178 0.000 















PARTICULATE 

PM 2.5 TONS 



EMISSIONS 




TONS 


TONS 



1.020 0.219 4.460 0.109 0.190 0.167 



MECHANICAL PLANT 






Hours of 

use 

CO Emissions 

Rate lb/hr 

CARBON 

MONOXIDE 

(CO) TONS 

HC Emission 

Rate lb/hr. 

HYDROCARBON 

TONS 

NO2 

Emission 

Rate lb/hr 

NITROGEN 

OXIDES 

(NO2) TONS 

SO2 

Emission 

Rate lb/hr 

SULFUR 

OXIDES 

(SO2) TONS 

PARTICULATE 


Rate lb/hr 

PARTICULATE 

PM 10 TONS 

PARTICULATE 

PM 2.5 

Emission Rate 

lb/hr 








Pumps (Gas-45 HP) 0.0 0.1519 0.000 0.028 0.000 0.4689 0.000 0.0140 0.000 0.0336 0.000 0.0178 0.000 















PARTICULATE 

PM 2.5 TONS 



EMISSIONS 




TONS 


TONS 



2.573 0.550 9.820 0.275 0.384 0.323 



SITE WORK 






Hours of 

use 

CO Emissions 

Rate lb/hr 

CARBON 

MONOXIDE 

(CO) TONS 

HC Emission 

Rate lb/hr. 

HYDROCARBON 

TONS 

NO2 

Emission 

Rate lb/hr 

NITROGEN 

OXIDES 

(NO2) TONS 

SO2 

Emission 

Rate lb/hr 

SULFUR 

OXIDES 

(SO2) TONS 

PARTICULATE 


Rate lb/hr 

PARTICULATE 

PM 10 TONS 

PARTICULATE 

PM 2.5 

Emission Rate 

lb/hr 








Pumps (Gas-45 HP) 0.0 0.1519 0.000 0.028 0.000 0.4689 0.000 0.0140 0.000 0.0336 0.000 0.0178 0.000 















PARTICULATE 

PM 2.5 TONS 



EMISSIONS 




TONS 


TONS 



7.258 1.458 22.435 0.729 1.023 0.898 



LANDSIDE ROADWAYS 






Hours of 

use 

CO Emissions 

Rate lb/hr 

CARBON 

MONOXIDE 

(CO) TONS 

HC Emission 

Rate lb/hr. 

HYDROCARBON 

TONS 

NO2 

Emission 

Rate lb/hr 

NITROGEN 

OXIDES 

(NO2) TONS 

SO2 

Emission 

Rate lb/hr 

SULFUR 

OXIDES 

(SO2) TONS 

PARTICULATE 


Rate lb/hr 

PARTICULATE 

PM 10 TONS 

PARTICULATE 

PM 2.5 

Emission Rate 

lb/hr 








Pumps (Gas-45 HP) 0.0 0.1519 0.000 0.028 0.000 0.4689 0.000 0.0140 0.000 0.0336 0.000 0.0178 0.000 















PARTICULATE 

PM 2.5 TONS 



EMISSIONS 

CARBON MONOXIDE (CO) 

TONS 



TONS 


TONS 



9.364 1.619 23.117 0.812 1.073 0.959 



TERMINAL BUILDING 






Hours of 

use 

CO Emissions 

Rate lb/hr 

CARBON 

MONOXIDE 

(CO) TONS 

HC Emission 

Rate lb/hr. 

HYDROCARBON 

TONS 

NO2 

Emission 

Rate lb/hr 

NITROGEN 

OXIDES 

(NO2) TONS 

SO2 

Emission 

Rate lb/hr 

SULFUR 

OXIDES 

(SO2) TONS 

PARTICULATE 


Rate lb/hr 

PARTICULATE 

PM 10 TONS 

PARTICULATE 

PM 2.5 

Emission Rate 

lb/hr 








Pumps (Gas-45 HP) 0.0 0.1519 0.000 0.028 0.000 0.4689 0.000 0.0140 0.000 0.0336 0.000 0.0178 0.000 















PARTICULATE 

PM 2.5 TONS 



EMISSIONS 




TONS 


TONS 



4.563 0.961 20.295 0.479 0.779 0.621 



SOUTH CONCOURSE WEST - Part 1 






Hours of 

use 

CO Emissions 

Rate lb/hr 

CARBON 

MONOXIDE 

(CO) TONS 

HC Emission 

Rate lb/hr. 

HYDROCARBON 

TONS 

NO2 

Emission 

Rate lb/hr 

NITROGEN 

OXIDES 

(NO2) TONS 

SO2 

Emission 

Rate lb/hr 

SULFUR 

OXIDES 

(SO2) TONS 

PARTICULATE 


Rate lb/hr 

PARTICULATE 

PM 10 TONS 

PARTICULATE 

PM 2.5 

Emission Rate 

lb/hr 








Pumps (Gas-45 HP) 0.0 0.1519 0.000 0.028 0.000 0.4689 0.000 0.0140 0.000 0.0336 0.000 0.0178 0.000 















PARTICULATE 

PM 2.5 TONS 



EMISSIONS 




TONS 


TONS 



3.118 0.615 9.727 0.308 0.423 0.363 



MID CONCOURSE TUNNEL 






Hours of 

use 

CO Emissions 

Rate lb/hr 

CARBON 

MONOXIDE 

(CO) TONS 

HC Emission 

Rate lb/hr. 

HYDROCARBON 

TONS 

NO2 

Emission 

Rate lb/hr 

NITROGEN 

OXIDES 

(NO2) TONS 

SO2 

Emission 

Rate lb/hr 

SULFUR 

OXIDES 

(SO2) TONS 

PARTICULATE 


Rate lb/hr 

PARTICULATE 

PM 10 TONS 

PARTICULATE 

PM 2.5 

Emission Rate 

lb/hr 








Pumps (Gas-45 HP) 0.0 0.1519 0.000 0.028 0.000 0.4689 0.000 0.0140 0.000 0.0336 0.000 0.0178 0.000 















PARTICULATE 

PM 2.5 TONS 



EMISSIONS 




TONS 


TONS 



1.857 0.346 6.184 0.173 0.215 0.184 



SOUTH CONCOURSE EAST - Part 1 






Hours of 

use 

CO Emissions 

Rate lb/hr 

CARBON 

MONOXIDE 

(CO) TONS 

HC Emission 

Rate lb/hr. 

HYDROCARBON 

TONS 

NO2 

Emission 

Rate lb/hr 

NITROGEN 

OXIDES 

(NO2) TONS 

SO2 

Emission 

Rate lb/hr 

SULFUR 

OXIDES 

(SO2) TONS 

PARTICULATE 


Rate lb/hr 

PARTICULATE 

PM 10 TONS 

PARTICULATE 

PM 2.5 

Emission Rate 

lb/hr 








Pumps (Gas-45 HP) 0.0 0.1519 0.000 0.028 0.000 0.4689 0.000 0.0140 0.000 0.0336 0.000 0.0178 0.000 















PARTICULATE 

PM 2.5 TONS 



EMISSIONS 




TONS 


TONS 



2.162 0.410 6.871 0.205 0.282 0.242 



APRON WORK 






Hours of 

use 

CO Emissions 

Rate lb/hr 

CARBON 

MONOXIDE 

(CO) TONS 

HC Emission 

Rate lb/hr. 

HYDROCARBON 

TONS 

NO2 

Emission 

Rate lb/hr 

NITROGEN 

OXIDES 

(NO2) TONS 

SO2 

Emission 

Rate lb/hr 

SULFUR 

OXIDES 

(SO2) TONS 

PARTICULATE 


Rate lb/hr 

PARTICULATE 

PM 10 TONS 

PARTICULATE 

PM 2.5 

Emission Rate 

lb/hr 








Pumps (Gas-45 HP) 0.0 0.1519 0.000 0.028 0.000 0.4689 0.000 0.0140 0.000 0.0336 0.000 0.0178 0.000 















PARTICULATE 

PM 2.5 TONS 



EMISSIONS 


TONS 



TONS 


TONS 



6.326 1.257 20.220 0.628 0.835 0.746 



RAC BUILDING 






Hours of 

use 

CO Emissions 

Rate lb/hr 

CARBON 

MONOXIDE 

(CO) TONS 

HC Emission 

Rate lb/hr. 

HYDROCARBON 

TONS 

NO2 

Emission 

Rate lb/hr 

NITROGEN 

OXIDES 

(NO2) TONS 

SO2 

Emission 

Rate lb/hr 

SULFUR 

OXIDES 

(SO2) TONS 

PARTICULATE 


Rate lb/hr 

PARTICULATE 

PM 10 TONS 

PARTICULATE 

PM 2.5 

Emission Rate 

lb/hr 








Pumps (Gas-45 HP) 0.0 0.1519 0.000 0.028 0.000 0.4689 0.000 0.0140 0.000 0.0336 0.000 0.0178 0.000 















PARTICULATE 

PM 2.5 TONS 



EMISSIONS 




TONS 


TONS 



2.181 0.395 7.031 0.197 0.245 0.209 



RAC SERVICE FACILITY 






Hours of 

use 

CO Emissions 

Rate lb/hr 

CARBON 

MONOXIDE 

(CO) TONS 

HC Emission 

Rate lb/hr. 

HYDROCARBON 

TONS 

NO2 

Emission 

Rate lb/hr 

NITROGEN 

OXIDES 

(NO2) TONS 

SO2 

Emission 

Rate lb/hr 

SULFUR 

OXIDES 

(SO2) TONS 

PARTICULATE 


Rate lb/hr 

PARTICULATE 

PM 10 TONS 

PARTICULATE 

PM 2.5 

Emission Rate 

lb/hr 








Pumps (Gas-45 HP) 0.0 0.1519 0.000 0.028 0.000 0.4689 0.000 0.0140 0.000 0.0336 0.000 0.0178 0.000 















PARTICULATE 

PM 2.5 TONS 



EMISSIONS 




TONS 


TONS 



0.433 0.082 1.240 0.041 0.052 0.047 



PARKING GARAGE 






Hours of 

use 

CO Emissions 

Rate lb/hr 

CARBON 

MONOXIDE 

(CO) TONS 

HC Emission 

Rate lb/hr. 

HYDROCARBON 

TONS 

NO2 

Emission 

Rate lb/hr 

NITROGEN 

OXIDES 

(NO2) TONS 

SO2 

Emission 

Rate lb/hr 

SULFUR 

OXIDES 

(SO2) TONS 

PARTICULATE 


Rate lb/hr 

PARTICULATE 

PM 10 TONS 

PARTICULATE 

PM 2.5 

Emission Rate 

lb/hr 








Pumps (Gas-45 HP) 0.0 0.1519 0.000 0.028 0.000 0.4689 0.000 0.0140 0.000 0.0336 0.000 0.0178 0.000 















PARTICULATE 

PM 2.5 TONS 



EMISSIONS 




TONS 


TONS 



3.688 0.673 9.750 0.337 0.411 0.367 



CONNECTORS RENOVATION 






Hours of 

use 

CO Emissions 

Rate lb/hr 

CARBON 

MONOXIDE 

(CO) TONS 

HC Emission 

Rate lb/hr. 

HYDROCARBON 

TONS 

NO2 

Emission 

Rate lb/hr 

NITROGEN 

OXIDES 

(NO2) TONS 

SO2 

Emission 

Rate lb/hr 

SULFUR 

OXIDES 

(SO2) TONS 

PARTICULATE 


Rate lb/hr 

PARTICULATE 

PM 10 TONS 

PARTICULATE 

PM 2.5 

Emission Rate 

lb/hr 








Pumps (Gas-45 HP) 0.0 0.1519 0.000 0.028 0.000 0.4689 0.000 0.0140 0.000 0.0336 0.000 0.0178 0.000 















PARTICULATE 

PM 2.5 TONS 



EMISSIONS 


TONS 



TONS 


TONS 



0.374 0.062 0.683 0.031 0.029 0.026 



SOUTH CONCOURSE EAST - Part 2 






Hours of 

use 

CO Emissions 

Rate lb/hr 

CARBON 

MONOXIDE 

(CO) TONS 

HC Emission 

Rate lb/hr. 

HYDROCARBON 

TONS 

NO2 

Emission 

Rate lb/hr 

NITROGEN 

OXIDES 

(NO2) TONS 

SO2 

Emission 

Rate lb/hr 

SULFUR 

OXIDES 

(SO2) TONS 

PARTICULATE 


Rate lb/hr 

PARTICULATE 

PM 10 TONS 

PARTICULATE 

PM 2.5 

Emission Rate 

lb/hr 








Pumps (Gas-45 HP) 0.0 0.1519 0.000 0.028 0.000 0.4689 0.000 0.0140 0.000 0.0336 0.000 0.0178 0.000 















PARTICULATE 

PM 2.5 TONS 



EMISSIONS 




TONS 


TONS 



2.162 0.410 6.871 0.205 0.282 0.242 



SOUTH CONCOURSE WEST - Part 2 






Hours of 

use 

CO Emissions 

Rate lb/hr 

CARBON 

MONOXIDE 

(CO) TONS 

HC Emission 

Rate lb/hr. 

HYDROCARBON 

TONS 

NO2 

Emission 

Rate lb/hr 

NITROGEN 

OXIDES 

(NO2) TONS 

SO2 

Emission 

Rate lb/hr 

SULFUR 

OXIDES 

(SO2) TONS 

PARTICULATE 


Rate lb/hr 

PARTICULATE 

PM 10 TONS 

PARTICULATE 

PM 2.5 

Emission Rate 

lb/hr 








Pumps (Gas-45 HP) 0.0 0.1519 0.000 0.028 0.000 0.4689 0.000 0.0140 0.000 0.0336 0.000 0.0178 0.000 















PARTICULATE 

PM 2.5 TONS 



EMISSIONS 




TONS 


TONS 



3.118 0.615 9.727 0.308 0.423 0.363 



CONCOURSE C RENOVATION 






Hours of 

use 

CO Emissions 

Rate lb/hr 

CARBON 

MONOXIDE 

(CO) TONS 

HC Emission 

Rate lb/hr. 

HYDROCARBON 

TONS 

NO2 

Emission 

Rate lb/hr 

NITROGEN 

OXIDES 

(NO2) TONS 

SO2 

Emission 

Rate lb/hr 

SULFUR 

OXIDES 

(SO2) TONS 

PARTICULATE 


Rate lb/hr 

PARTICULATE 

PM 10 TONS 

PARTICULATE 

PM 2.5 

Emission Rate 

lb/hr 








Pumps (Gas-45 HP) 0.0 0.1519 0.000 0.028 0.000 0.4689 0.000 0.0140 0.000 0.0336 0.000 0.0178 0.000 















PARTICULATE 

PM 2.5 TONS 



EMISSIONS 


TONS 



TONS 


TONS 



2.326 0.450 7.748 0.224 0.314 0.278 



CONCOURSE D RENOVATION 






Hours of 

use 

CO Emissions 

Rate lb/hr 

CARBON 

MONOXIDE 

(CO) TONS 

HC Emission 

Rate lb/hr. 

HYDROCARBON 

TONS 

NO2 

Emission 

Rate lb/hr 

NITROGEN 

OXIDES 

(NO2) TONS 

SO2 

Emission 

Rate lb/hr 

SULFUR 

OXIDES 

(SO2) TONS 

PARTICULATE 


Rate lb/hr 

PARTICULATE 

PM 10 TONS 

PARTICULATE 

PM 2.5 

Emission Rate 

lb/hr 








Pumps (Gas-45 HP) 0.0 0.1519 0.000 0.028 0.000 0.4689 0.000 0.0140 0.000 0.0336 0.000 0.0178 0.000 















PARTICULATE 

PM 2.5 TONS 



EMISSIONS 


TONS 



TONS 


TONS 



2.256 0.444 7.722 0.221 0.311 0.276 



CONCOURSE B RENOVATION 






Hours of 

use 

CO Emissions 

Rate lb/hr 

CARBON 

MONOXIDE 

(CO) TONS 

HC Emission 

Rate lb/hr. 

HYDROCARBON 

TONS 

NO2 

Emission 

Rate lb/hr 

NITROGEN 

OXIDES 

(NO2) TONS 

SO2 

Emission 

Rate lb/hr 

SULFUR 

OXIDES 

(SO2) TONS 

PARTICULATE 


Rate lb/hr 

PARTICULATE 

PM 10 TONS 

PARTICULATE 

PM 2.5 

Emission Rate 

lb/hr 








Pumps (Gas-45 HP) 0.0 0.1519 0.000 0.028 0.000 0.4689 0.000 0.0140 0.000 0.0336 0.000 0.0178 0.000 















PARTICULATE 

PM 2.5 TONS 



EMISSIONS 




TONS 


TONS 



3.094 0.591 9.072 0.295 0.404 0.362 


Attachment C

ID Task Name Duration Start Finish 

1 Step 1 387 days Mon 4/1/13 Tue 9/23/14 

2 Concourse A renovation 15.05 mons Tue 7/30/13 Tue 9/23/14 

3 QTA 12.95 mons Mon 4/1/13 Thu 3/27/14 

4 Step 2 259 days Fri 3/28/14 Wed 3/25/15 

5 C.U.P. 12.95 mons Fri 3/28/14 Wed 3/25/15 

6 Demolish portion of Concourse E 3.2 mons Fri 3/28/14 Wed 6/25/14 

7 Demolish existing QTA facilities 3.25 mons Fri 3/28/14 Thu 6/26/14 

8 Temporary Roads 3.2 mons Fri 3/28/14 Wed 6/25/14 

9 Step 3 772 days Thu 6/26/14 Fri 6/9/17 

10 New Terminal 38.55 mons Fri 6/27/14 Fri 6/9/17 

11 South Concourse West pt1 20.35 mons Thu 6/26/14 Fri 1/15/16 

12 Mid-Concourse Tunnel 9.6 mons Thu 6/26/14 Fri 3/20/15 

13 South Concourse East pt1 10.7 mons Mon 3/23/15 Thu 1/14/16 

14 Boarding corridor SCW 10.75 mons Fri 1/15/16 Thu 11/10/16 

15 Step 4 365 days Mon 1/18/16 Fri 6/9/17 

16 RAC building 18.25 mons Mon 1/18/16 Fri 6/9/17 

17 Parking Structure 17.2 mons Mon 1/18/16 Thu 5/11/17 

18 Step 5 344 days Fri 1/15/16 Wed 5/10/17 

19 New roads 17.2 mons Fri 1/15/16 Wed 5/10/17 


21 Demolish Terminals 1&2 7.5 mons Mon 6/12/17 Fri 1/5/18 

22 Renovate part of connector 6.4 mons Mon 6/12/17 Wed 12/6/17 

23 Demolish Parking Structure 3.2 mons Mon 6/12/17 Thu 9/7/17 

24 Demolish remainder on Concourse E 4.27 mons Fri 9/8/17 Fri 1/5/18 


26 Activate additional gates, SCW 0.5 mons Mon 1/8/18 Fri 1/19/18 

27 Step 8 386 days Mon 1/8/18 Mon 7/1/19 

28 South Concourse East pt2 19.3 mons Mon 1/8/18 Mon 7/1/19 

29 Connector to Concourse C 10.7 mons Mon 5/7/18 Thu 2/28/19 

30 Step 9 10 days Tue 7/2/19 Mon 7/15/19 

31 Activate gates, S side of SCE 0.5 mons Tue 7/2/19 Mon 7/15/19 

32 Step 10 86 days Tue 7/2/19 Tue 10/29/19 

33 Demolish connectors 3.29 mons Tue 7/2/19 Tue 10/1/19 

34 Demolish Existing CUP 4.3 mons Tue 7/2/19 Tue 10/29/19 

35 Step 11 10 days Wed 10/30/19 Tue 11/12/19 

36 Activate gates, N side of SCE 0.5 mons Wed 10/30/19 Tue 11/12/19 

37 Step 12 236 days Wed 10/30/19 Wed 9/23/20 

38 South Concourse West pt2 11.8 mons Wed 10/30/19 Wed 9/23/20 

39 Step 13 364 days Thu 9/24/20 Tue 2/15/22 

40 Concourse C renovation 18.2 mons Thu 9/24/20 Tue 2/15/22 

41 Step 14 364 days Wed 2/16/22 Mon 7/10/23 

42 IAB demolition 4.3 mons Wed 2/16/22 Wed 6/15/22 

43 Concourse D renovation 18.2 mons Wed 2/16/22 Mon 7/10/23 

44 Step 15 300 days Tue 7/11/23 Mon 9/2/24 

45 Concourse B renovation 15 mons Tue 7/11/23 Mon 9/2/24 

46 Demolish Concourse B Lower 4.35 mons Tue 7/11/23 Wed 11/8/23 

47 Step 16 64 days Tue 9/3/24 Fri 11/29/24 

48 Demolish Concourse A 3.2 mons Tue 9/3/24 Fri 11/29/24 

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2 

2nd Half 1st Half 2nd Half 1st Half 2nd Half 1st Half 2nd Half 1st Half 2nd Half 1st Half 2nd Half 1st Half 2nd Half 1st Half 2nd Half 1st Half 2nd Half 1st Half 2nd Half 1st Half 2nd Half 1st Half 2nd Half 1st Half 2nd Half 1 

J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D J 

Project: SLCIA Option 1-ET 

Date: Wed 8/17/11 

Task Split Progress Milestone Summary Project Summary External Tasks External Milestone Deadline 

TBD Consultants Page 1

Attachment D

PEAK EMISSION ACTIVITIES BY CONSTRUCTION QUARTER 

CARBON MONOXIDE 

Activity Description 

Start 

Construction 

End 

Construction 

# Construction 

Quarters 

Total CO Emissions 

(tons) 

Q2 - 

2013 

Q3 - 

2013 

Q4 - 

2013 

Q1 - 

2014 

Q2 - 

2014 

Q3 - 

Q2 - 

2014 Q4 - 2014 Q1 - 2015 2015 

Q3 - 

Q1 - 

2015 Q4 - 2015 2016 

Q2 - 

2016 

Q3 - 

2016 Q4 - 2016 

Q1 - 

2017 

Q2 - 

2017 

Q3 - 

Q1 - 

2017 Q4 - 2017 2018 

Q2 - 

2018 

Q3 - 

2018 

Q4 - 

2018 

Q1 - 

2019 

Q2 - 

2019 

Q3 - 

2019 

Q4 - 

2019 

Q1 - 

2020 

Q2 - 

2020 

Q3 - 

2020 

Q4 - 

2020 

Q1 - 

2021 

Q2 - 

2021 

Q3 - 

2021 

Q4 - 

2021 

Q1 - 

2022 

Q2 - 

2022 

Q3 - 

2022 

Q4 - 

2022 

Q1 - 

2023 

Q2 - 

2023 

Q3 - 

Q1 - 

2023 Q4 - 2023 2024 

Q2 - 

2024 

Q3 - 

2024 

Q4 - 

2024 

Concourse A Renovation 7/30/2013 9/23/2014 5 2.650 0.530 0.530 0.530 0.530 0.530 

QTA Structure 4/1/2013 3/27/2014 4 1.020 0.255 0.255 0.255 0.255 

Mechanical Plant 3/28/2014 3/25/2015 4 2.573 0.643 0.643 0.643 0.643 

Site Work 3/28/2014 6/15/2022 11 7.258 1.320 1.979 0.660 0.660 1.320 0.660 0.660 

Landside Roads 3/28/2014 5/10/2017 7 9.364 1.338 1.338 1.338 1.338 1.338 1.338 1.338 

Terminal Building 6/27/2014 6/9/2017 13 4.563 0.351 0.351 0.351 0.351 0.351 0.351 0.351 0.351 0.351 0.351 0.351 0.351 0.351 

South Concourse West - pt1 6/26/2014 1/15/2016 7 3.118 0.445 0.445 0.445 0.445 0.445 0.445 0.445 

Mid Concourse Tunnel 6/26/2014 3/20/2015 3 1.857 0.619 0.619 0.619 

South Concourse East - pt1 3/23/2015 1/14/2016 4 2.162 0.540 0.540 0.540 0.540 

Apron Facility 1/15/2016 11/10/2016 6 6.326 1.054 1.054 1.054 1.054 1.054 1.054 

RAC Building 1/18/2016 6/9/2017 6 2.181 0.364 0.364 0.364 0.364 0.364 0.364 

RAC Service Facility 1/18/2016 6/9/2017 6 0.433 0.072 0.072 0.072 0.072 0.072 0.072 

Parking Garage 1/18/2016 5/11/2017 6 3.688 0.615 0.615 0.615 0.615 0.615 0.615 

Connectors Renovation 6/12/2017 2/28/2019 6 0.374 0.062 0.062 0.062 0.062 0.062 0.062 

South Concourse East - pt2 1/8/2018 7/1/2019 6 2.162 0.360 0.360 0.360 0.360 0.360 0.360 

South Concourse West - pt2 10/30/2019 9/23/2020 4 3.118 0.780 0.780 0.780 0.780 

Concourse C Renovation 9/24/2020 2/15/2022 6 2.326 0.388 0.388 0.388 0.388 0.388 0.388 

Concourse D Renovation 2/16/2022 7/10/2023 6 2.256 0.376 0.376 0.376 0.376 0.376 0.376 

Concourse B Renovation 7/11/2023 9/2/2024 5 3.094 0.619 0.619 0.619 0.619 0.619 

TOTAL BY QUARTER - TONS/QUARTER 0.255 0.785 0.785 0.785 3.831 2.589 2.059 2.059 1.337 1.337 2.675 4.779 3.793 3.793 3.793 2.739 1.401 2.393 0.722 1.020 0.423 0.423 0.423 0.423 0.360 1.320 1.439 0.780 0.780 1.167 0.388 0.388 0.388 0.388 0.388 0.376 1.036 0.376 0.376 0.376 0.376 1.673 0.619 0.619 0.619 0.619 1.054 

TOTAL BY CALENDAR YEAR - TONS/YEAR 2013 = 1.825 2014 = 9.263 2015 = 7.407 2016 = 16.159 2017 = 7.255 2018 = 2.288 2019 = 3.542 2020 = 3.114 2021 = 1.551 2022 = 2.164 2023 = 3.044 2024 = 2.911 

TOTAL OF ENTIRE TRP IN TONS OF CARBON MONOXIDE 60.523 

HYDROCARBONS 


Start 

Construction 

End 

Construction 


Quarters 


(tons) 

Q2 - 

2013 

Q3 - 

2013 

Q4 - 

2013 

Q1 - 

2014 

Q2 - 

2014 

Q3 - 

Q2 - 

2014 Q4 - 2014 Q1 - 2015 2015 

Q3 - 

Q1 - 

2015 Q4 - 2015 2016 

Q2 - 

2016 

Q3 - 

2016 Q4 - 2016 

Q1 - 

2017 

Q2 - 

2017 

Q3 - 

Q1 - 

2017 Q4 - 2017 2018 

Q2 - 

2018 

Q3 - 

2018 

Q4 - 

2018 

Q1 - 

2019 

Q2 - 

2019 

Q3 - 

2019 

Q4 - 

2019 

Q1 - 

2020 

Q2 - 

2020 

Q3 - 

2020 

Q4 - 

2020 

Q1 - 

2021 

Q2 - 

2021 

Q3 - 

2021 

Q4 - 

2021 

Q1 - 

2022 

Q2 - 

2022 

Q3 - 

2022 

Q4 - 

2022 

Q1 - 

2023 

Q2 - 

2023 

Q3 - 

Q1 - 

2023 Q4 - 2023 2024 

Q2 - 

2024 

Q3 - 

2024 

Q4 - 

2024 


QTA Structure 4/1/2013 3/27/2014 4 0.219 0.055 0.055 0.055 0.055 


Site Work 3/28/2014 6/15/2022 11 1.458 0.265 0.398 0.133 0.133 0.265 0.133 0.133 







RAC Building 1/18/2016 6/9/2017 6 0.395 0.066 0.066 0.066 0.066 0.066 0.066 











TOTAL OF ENTIRE TRP IN TONS OF HYDROCARBONS 11.651 

NITROGEN OXIDES 


Start 

Construction 

End 

Construction 


Quarters 


(tons) 

Q2 - 

2013 

Q3 - 

2013 

Q4 - 

2013 

Q1 - 

2014 

Q2 - 

2014 

Q3 - 

Q2 - 

2014 Q4 - 2014 Q1 - 2015 2015 

Q3 - 

Q1 - 

2015 Q4 - 2015 2016 

Q2 - 

2016 

Q3 - 

2016 Q4 - 2016 

Q1 - 

2017 

Q2 - 

2017 

Q3 - 

Q1 - 

2017 Q4 - 2017 2018 

Q2 - 

2018 

Q3 - 

2018 

Q4 - 

2018 

Q1 - 

2019 

Q2 - 

2019 

Q3 - 

2019 

Q4 - 

2019 

Q1 - 

2020 

Q2 - 

2020 

Q3 - 

2020 

Q4 - 

2020 

Q1 - 

2021 

Q2 - 

2021 

Q3 - 

2021 

Q4 - 

2021 

Q1 - 

2022 

Q2 - 

2022 

Q3 - 

2022 

Q4 - 

2022 

Q1 - 

2023 

Q2 - 

2023 

Q3 - 

Q1 - 

2023 Q4 - 2023 2024 

Q2 - 

2024 

Q3 - 

2024 

Q4 - 

2024 


QTA Structure 4/1/2013 3/27/2014 4 4.460 1.115 1.115 1.115 1.115 


Site Work 3/28/2014 6/15/2022 11 22.435 2.040 0.199 0.066 0.066 0.133 0.066 0.066 







RAC Building 1/18/2016 6/9/2017 6 7.031 1.172 1.172 1.172 1.172 1.172 1.172 











TOTAL OF ENTIRE TRP IN TONS OF NITROGEN OXIDES 193.341 

SULFUR OXIDES 


Start 

Construction 

End 

Construction 


Quarters 


(tons) 

Q2 - 

2013 

Q3 - 

2013 

Q4 - 

2013 

Q1 - 

2014 

Q2 - 

2014 

Q3 - 

Q2 - 

2014 Q4 - 2014 Q1 - 2015 2015 

Q3 - 

Q1 - 

2015 Q4 - 2015 2016 

Q2 - 

2016 

Q3 - 

2016 Q4 - 2016 

Q1 - 

2017 

Q2 - 

2017 

Q3 - 

Q1 - 

2017 Q4 - 2017 2018 

Q2 - 

2018 

Q3 - 

2018 

Q4 - 

2018 

Q1 - 

2019 

Q2 - 

2019 

Q3 - 

2019 

Q4 - 

2019 

Q1 - 

2020 

Q2 - 

2020 

Q3 - 

2020 

Q4 - 

2020 

Q1 - 

2021 

Q2 - 

2021 

Q3 - 

2021 

Q4 - 

2021 

Q1 - 

2022 

Q2 - 

2022 

Q3 - 

2022 

Q4 - 

2022 

Q1 - 

2023 

Q2 - 

2023 

Q3 - 

Q1 - 

2023 Q4 - 2023 2024 

Q2 - 

2024 

Q3 - 

2024 

Q4 - 

2024 


QTA Structure 4/1/2013 3/27/2014 4 0.109 0.027 0.027 0.027 0.027 


Site Work 3/28/2014 6/15/2022 11 0.729 0.066 0.199 0.066 0.066 0.133 0.066 0.066 







RAC Building 1/18/2016 6/9/2017 6 0.197 0.033 0.033 0.033 0.033 0.033 0.033 











TOTAL OF ENTIRE TRP IN TONS OF SULFUR OXIDES 5.823

PARTICULATES PM 10 


Start 

Construction 

End 

Construction 


Quarters 


(tons) 

Q2 - 

2013 

Q3 - 

2013 

Q4 - 

2013 

Q1 - 

2014 

Q2 - 

2014 

Q3 - 

Q2 - 

2014 Q4 - 2014 Q1 - 2015 2015 

Q3 - 

Q1 - 

2015 Q4 - 2015 2016 

Q2 - 

2016 

Q3 - 

2016 Q4 - 2016 

Q1 - 

2017 

Q2 - 

2017 

Q3 - 

Q1 - 

2017 Q4 - 2017 2018 

Q2 - 

2018 

Q3 - 

2018 

Q4 - 

2018 

Q1 - 

2019 

Q2 - 

2019 

Q3 - 

2019 

Q4 - 

2019 

Q1 - 

2020 

Q2 - 

2020 

Q3 - 

2020 

Q4 - 

2020 

Q1 - 

2021 

Q2 - 

2021 

Q3 - 

2021 

Q4 - 

2021 

Q1 - 

2022 

Q2 - 

2022 

Q3 - 

2022 

Q4 - 

2022 

Q1 - 

2023 

Q2 - 

2023 

Q3 - 

Q1 - 

2023 Q4 - 2023 2024 

Q2 - 

2024 

Q3 - 

2024 

Q4 - 

2024 


QTA Structure 4/1/2013 3/27/2014 4 0.190 0.048 0.048 0.048 0.048 


Site Work 3/28/2014 6/15/2022 11 1.023 0.186 0.279 0.093 0.093 0.186 0.093 0.093 







RAC Building 1/18/2016 6/9/2017 6 0.245 0.041 0.041 0.041 0.041 0.041 0.041 











TOTAL OF ENTIRE TRP IN TONS OF PARTICULATES 8.015 

PARTICULATES PM 2.5 


Start 

Construction 

End 

Construction 


Quarters 


(tons) 

Q2 - 

2013 

Q3 - 

2013 

Q4 - 

2013 

Q1 - 

2014 

Q2 - 

2014 

Q3 - 

Q2 - 

2014 Q4 - 2014 Q1 - 2015 2015 

Q3 - 

Q1 - 

2015 Q4 - 2015 2016 

Q2 - 

2016 

Q3 - 

2016 Q4 - 2016 

Q1 - 

2017 

Q2 - 

2017 

Q3 - 

Q1 - 

2017 Q4 - 2017 2018 

Q2 - 

2018 

Q3 - 

2018 

Q4 - 

2018 

Q1 - 

2019 

Q2 - 

2019 

Q3 - 

2019 

Q4 - 

2019 

Q1 - 

2020 

Q2 - 

2020 

Q3 - 

2020 

Q4 - 

2020 

Q1 - 

2021 

Q2 - 

2021 

Q3 - 

2021 

Q4 - 

2021 

Q1 - 

2022 

Q2 - 

2022 

Q3 - 

2022 

Q4 - 

2022 

Q1 - 

2023 

Q2 - 

2023 

Q3 - 

Q1 - 

2023 Q4 - 2023 2024 

Q2 - 

2024 

Q3 - 

2024 

Q4 - 

2024 


QTA Structure 4/1/2013 3/27/2014 4 0.167 0.042 0.042 0.042 0.042 


Site Work 3/28/2014 6/15/2022 11 0.898 0.163 0.245 0.082 0.082 0.163 0.082 0.082 







RAC Building 1/18/2016 6/9/2017 6 0.209 0.035 0.035 0.035 0.035 0.035 0.035 











TOTAL OF ENTIRE TRP IN TONS OF PARTICULATES 6.982

Appendix E 

Technical Memorandum: Salt Lake City 

International Airport – Drainage Impacts

TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM 

Salt Lake City International Airport—Environmental 

Assessment and Drainage for Phase I 

PREPARED FOR: 

PREPARED BY: 


Brad Hartman, PE 

DATE: December 21, 2010 

PROJECT NUMBER: 399292 

Introduction 

The Salt Lake City International Airport (SLCIA) maintains an extensive network of 

drainage infrastructure including catch basins, manholes, trunk line and lateral pipes, 

ditches and swales, detention ponds, pump stations, subdrains, diversion and overflow 

structures, outfalls, and water quality treatment facilities (e.g., oil-water separators). In 1997, 

CH2M HILL completed a Master Drainage Study for the SLCIA. This master plan 

recommended improvements to address deficiencies in the then-existing airport drainage 

system as well as those required by ultimate buildout plans. Per the current scope of work, 

the purposes and objectives of this memorandum are: 

 

 

 

To summarize the conditions and assumptions outlined in the 1997 report, and in 

particular. 

Identify existing deviations from the 1997 report. 

Evaluate whether or not additional facilities will be required to support the 

proposed action so that the associated environmental impacts can be quantified. 

Special attention is directed toward significant changes or deviations to physical 

disturbances, building footprints, facility impacts, impervious area, general drainage 

patterns, and discharge rates and volume at key outfalls. 

The Salt Lake City Department of Airports (SLCDA) provided much of the data and 

information used for this evaluation. In addition to meetings and workshops, SLCDA 

supplied computer-aided drafting (CAD) and geographic information system (GIS) data as 

well as project and phasing plans. Although long-term ultimate buildout plans show several 

new concourses (four total), it is noted that this effort applies only to Phase I of the Terminal 

Redevelopment Program. Phase I includes the construction of a new rental car and quick 

turnaround facility, a parking garage, the west portion of the south concourse, a portion of 

the north concourse, the central utility plant, the main terminal, various roadways, and the 

IAB connecter. Phase I also involves the demolition and reconstruction of various aprons 

and the demolition of existing Terminals 1 and 2. Therefore, all analysis is being performed 

with respect to the proposed action only (Phase I). 

TBG121710172649SLC/SLCDA EA MEMO 20101221.DOCX 1 

COPYRIGHT 2010 BY CH2M HILL, INC.

SALT LAKE CITY INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT—ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DRAINAGE FOR PHASE I 

Summary of 1997 Master Drainage Study 

Extensive efforts were made in 1997 to help SLCDA better understand and document the 

drainage system that existed at the time. Numerous meetings, interviews, site visits, and 

surveys were conducted to assemble an inventory of the existing system. Aerial 

photographs, design drawings, and as-builts were also studied. A GIS database and base 

map was assembled and delivered to SLCDA for future use and benefit. CH2M HILL also 

helped SLCDA develop and refine their drainage design standards. Hydrologic and 

hydraulic models were developed in the Hydrologic Engineering Center (HEC)-1 model as 

well as the United States Environmental Protection Agency Stormwater Management 

Model, respectively. Using the established drainage standards, these numeric models were 

used to simulate the system’s performance during specific design storm events. Issues and 

problems were noted and solutions were proposed. A few key points from the 1997 study 

are as follows: 

 

 

 

 

The airport receives 15.3 inches of average annual precipitation (water equivalent), 

3.5 inches of which occur during the summer months (June through September). 

Average annual snowfall depth was estimated at 59.3 inches. 

The 10-year 3-hour storm event was allowed to surcharge (pressurize) the storm drain 

system up to but not above rim and grate elevations. The 100-year 72-hour storm event 

was allowed to flood the storm drain network but not inundate runways, taxiways, or 

main concourse aprons. 

For modeling purposes, the airport was customarily divided into several drainage 

basins in order to properly associate surface flows with various portions of the drainage 

network. 

Most of the lands in and around the airport are classified as hydrologic soil group C or 

D. These classifications represent poorly drained soils which are only worsened by the 

relatively flat relief of the airport. 

An estimated 1,284 acres of impervious area existed at the airport in 1997. 

 

 

 

The airport employed the use of several detention ponds, stormwater pump stations, 

and storm drains varying from 4 to 72 inches in diameter. 

The airport discharged stormwater to nearby canals located on the south, east, and west 

sides of the airport. Nearly 2,386 acres drained to the City Drain from areas generally on 

the east portions of the airport; 403 acres drained to the Surplus Canal from areas 

generally on the south portions of the airport; and 2,337 acres drained to the Surplus 

Canal from areas generally on the west portions of the airport. 

Due to the flat topography of the airport and limited options for outfalls, discharges to 

the canals require the pumping of stormwater flows from detention ponds to the canals. 

Flat slopes in the storm drain system require surcharging the pipes. 

Final recommendations included the upsizing of several pipe segments, the addition or 

expansion of detention and pumping facilities, and improvements to receiving canals. A 

prioritized Capital Improvement Plan, complete with estimated cost, was also included as 




part of the 1997 study. Although several improvements were proposed as a result of the 

1997 study, approximately $22 million of the improvements are directly associated with the 

current proposed action. These particular improvements were primarily associated with 

new or upsized trunk lines and new or enlarged detention and pumping facilities. 

Existing Conditions Drainage 

Conditions described in the 1997 drainage master plan were compared with existing 

conditions (2010), with a primary focus on any significant changes or concerns regarding 

overall drainage patterns, physical disturbances, proposed buildings and footprints, 

impervious area, drainage facilities, and discharge rates and volume at outfalls. 

Several detention facilities and pump stations that were proposed in the 1997 study have 

since been constructed and are in operation. This includes the southwest and mid-field 

detention ponds and pump stations that were constructed around 2000. In other cases, 

drainage facilities such as the northwest and northeast detention ponds/pump stations are 

associated with future phases of airport expansion and have not yet been constructed due to 

a lack of need. General drainage basins and patterns do not appear to have significantly 

changed with what was proposed in 1997. 

The airport maintains a Utah Pollution Discharge Elimination System (UPDES) permit with 

the State of Utah Department of Environmental Quality, Division of Water Quality. Permit 

No. UT0024988 regulates and limits the rate of stormwater discharge from the airport and 

sets forth guidelines for stormwater quality monitoring, sampling, and effluent limitations 

for various constituents. All stormwater generated and collected on airport property 

discharges to either the Surplus Canal or the City Drain via five outfall locations included in 

the existing UPDES permit (see Figure 1). The UPDES permit restricts the airport to a total 

allowable discharge of 9.8 cubic feet per second at any given time. 

Although the 1997 drainage study used the 10-year 3-hour storm as a design event, SLCDA 

has indicated that the 25-year storm was used instead to design and construct drainage 

facilities. A minimum pipe diameter of 15 inches was also subsequently established by the 

SLCDA. It is also noted that the SLCDA designed detention facilities for the 100-year event 

to limit outfall discharges to levels at or below those established by permit. A 48-hour drain 

time was also incorporated into the design of the detention ponds to help mitigate bird 

attraction issues. A few other design changes (improvements) have also occurred over the 

past 14 years that differ from that which was proposed in the 1997 master drainage study. 

Examples of these design changes include the following: 

 

 

A trunk line, proposed as a 54-inch pipe in the 1997 study, was upsized to 66 inches. 

This line diverts surface runoff from the northwest portions of the proposed action 

footprint to the south instead of to the north. 

An upsized 84-inch trunk line conveys stormwater flows to the midfield detention 

facility. Nuisance flows are pumped from this pond to the east to the City Drain. All 

other stormwater flows are pumped to the south via a 36-inch line to the Surplus Canal. 




Drainage and the Proposed Action 

Relative to the proposed action (Phase I only), the following conclusions have been made: 

 

 

 

 

The major drainage facilities (i.e., trunk lines and detention ponds) that are necessary to 

support both the existing airport operation as well as the drainage needs of the proposed 

action appear to already be in place. 

The proposed action appears to be consistent and compatible with the drainage basins 

and conveyance network proposed in the 1997 study that has been constructed in recent 

years. 

The current drainage system accommodates impervious area added since 1997 as well as 

other impervious areas which are known to be planned for the future. Proposed 

footprints for new terminals, buildings, or other structures per the proposed action are 

located on existing impervious area or areas that were considered to be impervious per 

the 1997 study. Therefore, the airport drainage trunk lines should be able to 

accommodate the flows and runoff volumes for these areas even as new terminals and 

buildings are constructed. 

Some areas that are not currently paved are being converted to parking or apron 

facilities, either as a part of the proposed action or to accommodate other airport needs. 

These unpaved areas already produce high levels of runoff as they consist of impervious 

soils and clays. The existing drainage system has already been sized to accommodate 

these areas. Examples of these areas include the following: 

 

 

 

Two unpaved areas located northwest of the existing terminals and covering 

approximately 28 acres will be converted to apron areas or new terminal. This 

paving is a direct result of the proposed action. 

Deicing pads, which are currently planned in existing infield areas near the south 

end of Runway 34 L, will impact approximately 17 acres. Deicing pads are also 

planned to be constructed northwest of Runway 14/32, impacting approximately 

9 acres. This paving is not a result of the proposed action. 

The “coat-hanger” area located south of the existing economy parking lot will be 

paved to serve the needs of the rental car operation and impacts approximately 

42 acres. This paving is not a result of the proposed action. 

 

 

SLCDA continues to use and maintain the five existing outfalls to convey airport 

stormwater offsite. Existing detention and pumping facilities are designed to limit 

discharge to levels at or below allowable rates. SLCDA appears to be operating these 

outfalls in compliance with the conditions of the existing UPDES permit. SLCDA has full 

intention of designing, constructing, and operating all new facilities so as to continue 

their compliance with the conditions and discharge limitations of the UPDES permit. It 

is noted that the permit is being renewed in May 2011. 

As mentioned, SLCDA has deviated in a few cases from that which was proposed in the 

1997 drainage master study. However, these differences appear to either be 




inconsequential, at a more detailed level than the 1997 master drainage study addressed, 

or an improvement to what was proposed in 1997. 

FIGURE 1 

UPDES Outfall Locations for Airport Drainage 

OUTFALL 003A 

OUTFALL 001 

OUTFALL 005 

OUTFALL 002 

OUTFALL 004 



Appendix F 

Historic, Architectural, Archaeological, and 

Cultural Resources

Technical Memorandum

TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM 

Historical/Architectural, Archaeological, and Cultural 

Resources Technical Memorandum 

PREPARED FOR: 

PREPARED BY: 


Aaron Fergusson - CH2M HILL 

DATE: January 20, 2012 

This technical memorandum has been prepared to discuss the potential effects to Cultural 

Resources from the Salt Lake City Airport Terminal Redevelopment Program. The cultural 

resources studies were conducted by CH2M HILL archaeologist Aaron Fergusson, M.A., 

RPA, who meets the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualification Standards in 

Archaeology and Elizabeth Calvit, who meets the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional 

Qualification Standards in Architectural History. 

In order to assess and understand the potential effects, a brief archaeological and historical 

context of the SLC Airport property and surrounding area has been included to evaluate 

individual cultural resources within the overall historical context of the area. The results of 

an archaeological literature review are provided, as well as the results of interviews with the 

SLC Airport architect for architectural resources found on the airport property. 

Archaeological Context 

The Salt Lake City Airport is located within the eastern portion of the Great Basin culture 

area, and for the purposes of discussion, the chronology will follow the overall framework 

utilized by Jennings (1986), which includes the Pre-Archaic or Paleoindian Period, the 

Archaic Period, the Late Archaic/Fremont Period, and the Late Prehistoric Period. 

Paleoindian Period (Approximately 12,000-7000 B.P./5000 B.C.) 

Although the precise timing and nature of human entry into North America is currently a 

matter of considerable debate (e.g. Dillehay 1997, 2000; Swedlund and Anderson 1999), the 

first period of significant recognized human occupation of the continent occurs toward the 

end of the Pleistocene (Cordell 1984). Human populations over much of the continent 

appear to have concentrated on the exploitation of large game mammals such as the 

mammoth during this period. The characteristic artifacts associated with this period are the 

lanceolate and fluted lanceolate projectile points known as Clovis, Folsom, and Lake 

Mojave; as well as stemmed points, such as points associated with the Western Stemmed 

Complex. Paleo-indian Period occupation in the Great Basin is primarily known from 

surface artifacts rather than excavated contexts (Jones and Beck 1999:83). Surface finds of 

fluted and stemmed points are fairly common in Utah (Copeland and Fike 1988). 

Archaic Period (5000 B.C. - A.D. 300) 

The close of the Pleistocene and the onset of the Holocene are defined in North America by 

a warming and drying trend that resulted in the retreat of the glaciers and a series of 

1

HISTORICAL/ARCHITECTURAL, ARCHAEOLOGICAL, AND CULTURAL RESOURCES TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM 

changes in flora and fauna (Grayson 1993). The large mammals exploited previously became 

extinct, and were replaced by increased numbers of medium- and smaller-sized mammals 

such as artiodactyls and lagomorphs (Grayson 1993). Major shifts in material culture at this 

time include a reliance on smaller projectile points such as Humboldt, Pinto, Gatecliff, and 

Elko points. These points were mounted as a dart points and delivered with spear and atlatl 

(Holmer 1978). The Archaic Period is also characterized by an increase in the frequency and 

type of grinding and milling stones, such as manos and metates, used for seed processing 

(Grayson 1993:244-246). 

Formative Period (A.D. 300-1200) 

In the project area, during the latter portion of the first millennium A.D., populations 

developed horticulture and shifted to more sedentary lifeways. Fremont occupations most 

commonly date from A.D. 300 to 1300 (Madsen 1989). The material culture that characterizes 

the Fremont include pottery, agriculture, particular types of figurines, pit structure 

dwellings, basketry, ground stone pestles, carved stone tablets, and slate knives. Along the 

margins of the Great Salt Lake, the area is traditionally defined as the “Great Salt Lake” 

Fremont variant (Marwitt 1986:167-169). Major sites along the margins of the Great Salt Lake 

appear to be primarily situated along the deltas of the Bear, Ogden/Weber, and Jordan 

Rivers, built on natural levees above the surrounding wetlands (Madsen 1986). Known 

Fremont Complex multi-household occupations along the margins of the Great Salt Lake are 

also characterized by a general lack of stone masonry architecture, with shallow pit 

structures most common. Based on features and artifacts present, occupations in rock 

shelters appear to represent seasonal occupations (Marwitt 1986:169). 

Late Prehistoric Period (A.D. 1200-1826) 

Beginning at around A.D. 1200 throughout the Great Basin, small triangular arrow points 

(Desert Side-notched and Cottonwood Triangular) along with a distinctive brownware 

pottery called “Intermountain Brownware” or “Shoshonean Ware” became more common. 

The sudden appearance of these ceramics and other aspects of material culture has been 

taken as evidence of an expansion of Numic-speaking peoples into the region from the 

Mojave Desert area (Bettinger and Baumhoff 1982). Perhaps the most significant difference 

between occupations of the Formative and Late Prehistoric Periods is the abandonment of 

maize agriculture and a return to a hunter-gatherer lifeway. 

By the period of historical contact with Euro-American cultures in the late 1700s, the present 

ethnographically known groups inhabited the region. These primarily consisted of the Ute, 

Shoshone, and the Paiute (Newton 2001), all groups that speak Numic languages. The early 

contact period is poorly known, and the record becomes primarily historical at that point. 

Historic Context 

The history of Salt Lake City begins over 1,200 miles east in the city of Nauvoo, Illinois. 

Under the guidance of Brigham Young, then leader of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latterday 

Saints (LDS) or “Mormons,” a large group of pioneers left Nauvoo and the Midwest. On 

July 24, 1847, the Mormons arrived in the Salt Lake Valley. Shortly thereafter, the Territory 

of Deseret and the City of Zion were established, known later as Utah and Salt Lake City, 

respectively. “The city was laid out in plats, one plat in each of the first three years. Within 

2


each plat, buildings, roads, and ditches grew with astonishing speed” (Sillitoe 1996:33). 

Agricultural production was key to the survival of the burgeoning population 

The Compromise of 1850 granted territorial status to the recently established communities 

in region. Although Brigham Young was declared the governor of the new Utah Territory, 

in late 1857, U.S. President James Buchanan appointed new territorial officers and stripped 

Young of his title as governor. In Young’s place, Buchanan designated Alfred Cumming of 

Georgia. Buchanan dispatched the new governor and territorial officers to Utah with orders 

to quell a so-called rebellion and remove Young from office. As many as 2,500 federal troops 

were ordered to accompany the group on the expedition and to assist in the suppression 

(Leonard 1999:70). 

Shortly before Johnston and his troops made it to the territorial capital an agreement was 

reached between Young and Cumming, resolving the “conflict” and absolving Young of any 

wrong-doing. Included in this agreement was a provision to establish a federal presence in 

the territory, at least 40 miles away from the capital city (Leonard 1999:72-78). Johnston’s 

troops marched through nearly deserted valley cities during June of 1858 and set up camp 

in Cedar Valley within Utah County. Their establishment soon became known as Camp 

Floyd (Sillitoe 1996:54). 

Salt Lake City became one of the few major urban centers between the Mississippi River and 

the West Coast along the northern immigration corridor. As such, the town was a natural 

stopping-off location for travelers between the two areas. The introduction of the railroad in 

the West was one of the foremost events of the nineteenth century. In 1869, railroading 

entered the area with the completion of the first transcontinental line running through 

Promontory and Corinne, north of Salt Lake City. 

Mining was also important in contributing to the growth of Salt Lake City; “suburbs” of the 

city such as Sandy, Bingham Canyon, and Alta prospered from the mines. Mining was so 

prevalent along the Wasatch Front that one visitor to Salt Lake City in 1880 described the 

area along Main Street as, “one large mining camp” (Sillitoe 1996:65). 

As the nineteenth century came to a close, the successes of mining, railroading, and 

commerce foreshadowed of the destiny of Salt Lake County and the State of Utah as a 

commercially and industrially formidable force in the western United States. By 1896, after 

the official renunciation of polygamy by the Mormon Church, the Utah Territory was 

granted statehood. 

In 1911 an isolated and desolate area was set aside for a landing strip called Basque Flats. 

The small landing strip was initially covered in cinders and soon after hosted the Great 

International Aviation Carnival. The landing strip remained a small field used mainly for 

training for most of the decade, until the U.S. Postal Service began air mail service to Salt 

Lake City in 1920. Air mail service prompted the strip to grow into an air field with 

associated hangers and commercial buildings. The field also was renamed the Woodward 

Field in honor of a local aviator, John P. Woodward. 

By 1925 Western Air Express began contracting for the Postal Service to fly mail along 

routes between Salt Lake City, Las Vegas, and Los Angeles. Within a year passenger service 

began along the same routes and Western Air Express became Western Airlines with a 

major hub in Salt Lake City. As the airport traffic grew, Salt Lake City soon acquired over 

3


400 acres for the airfield, added an additional runway, and renamed it again to the Salt Lake 

City Municipal Airport. The first official terminal was built in 1933 and United Airlines 

began stopping in Salt Lake City en-route between New York and San Francisco. 

As the airport continued to grow, in part from the addition of a third runway to meet the 

demands of the United States Air Force during World War II, a new terminal was planned 

and eventually constructed to the west of the existing terminals. The new Terminal 1 was 

opened in 1961 resulting in the creation of the Salt Lake City International Airport. 

Terminal 2 was constructed and opened in 1978, and since then the airport has gone 

through extensive growth and remodeling. 

Literature Review 

A literature review was conducted by CH2M HILL archaeologist Aaron Fergusson, M.A., 

RPA at the Utah Division of State History. The files contained in both the Antiquities Section 

and the Historic Preservation Office were examined. The Antiquities Section focused on the 

archaeological resources known within a one-mile radius of the airport terminals and 

concourses. The Historic Preservation Office contains files on historic buildings and 

structures, and the search through these files also focused on a one-mile buffer around the 

airport. 

The entire airport property has been surveyed for cultural resources. The pedestrian 

inventory can only identify artifacts or cultural resource sites that are visible on the surface, 

and much of the airport property has been developed and covered with concrete or asphalt. 

The Airport property is known to contain sensitive cultural resources, and many of the sites 

have been found during various construction projects. One cultural resource site, 42SL302, is 

located within one-mile of the Airport terminals. 42SL302 is the Surplus Canal and has been 

considered eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) under 

Criterion A and C due to the canal’s importance in the growth and development of Salt 

Lake City. The canal has been modified and rerouted several times, most recently in the 

1990s to accommodate Runway 16R/34L. This site is outside of the Area of Potential Effect 

(APE) for this project and would not be affected. 

Significant archaeological testing and research has been conducted at another site (42SL230), 

located 1.9 miles northeast of the terminals, near the eastern edge of the airport property. 

This site is a large, open site with evidence of occupation from the Archaic, Fremont, and 

Late Prehistoric periods (Allison 2002). The site was discovered in 1994, tested in 1995, and 

then subject to more extensive surface collection and testing in 1996 and 1997. This site is 

considered eligible for listing on the NRHP under Criterion D, but is well outside of the 

APE and will not be affected by construction at the terminals. 

Architectural Field Visit 

The architectural field visit focused on an interview with the Salt Lake City Department of 

Airports staff architect Daniel Spader on May 11, 2009. The interview with Mr. Spader 

concluded that Terminal 1, Concourse A and B, and the Mechanical plant were all built in 

1958 and therefore have reached the 50 year threshold for consideration as a historic 

resource under the National Historic Preservation Act. Exhibit 1 shows the façade of 

Terminal 1 shortly after its dedication. Exhibit 2 shows a current view of Terminal 1. 

4


All of the potentially historic buildings have been extensively remodeled, starting in 1978 

and have been under constant remodeling since then. For example, Concourses A and B 

were originally constructed as a single level building with access to the planes from the 

ground level. The 1978 remodeling efforts constructed the second level and moved all 

passenger access to the second level. Terminal 1 has been remodeled, added on to, and 

changed so significantly that the only portion of the building that remains from the original 

construction is the world map in the floor (Exhibit 3). 

Exhibit 1. Terminal 1 Circa 1960 

5


Exhibit 2. Terminal 1 Roadway Circa 2010 

Exhibit 3. View of World Map in Floor 

6


The Mechanical Plant, likewise has changed so dramatically from its original construction 

that almost nothing remains from the original building. The last original air handler is slated 

to be replaced this year. 

Recommendations 

The only known archaeological site within the study area is 42SL302. This site, the Surplus 

Canal, is considered eligible for listing on the NRHP, however it would not be affected by 

this project. Other significant sites are on the airport property, but not with the APE and 

would not be affected. 

The integrity of Terminal 1, Concourse A, Concourse B, and the Mechanical Plant has been 

so dramatically affected as a result of the extensive remodeling changes to the buildings 

over the last 30 years that they cannot be considered for nomination to the National Register 

of Historic Places (NRHP). The remodeling and construction program of the Salt Lake City 

International Airport has removed all of the original elements of the buildings so that 

nothing of the historic building remains. Therefore, Terminal 1, Concourse A, Concourse B, 

and the Mechanical Plant are recommended to be not eligible for listing on the NRHP. 

There are no known cultural resources that would be affected by the Salt Lake City Airport 

Terminal Redevelopment Program. As with any ground-disturbing project, there remains a 

potential for the accidental discovery of buried cultural resources not detected through a 

surface inventory, or even through shovel testing. If cultural resources or materials were to 

be discovered during ground-disturbing activities, the work in the vicinity of the discovery 

should cease and the area be protected until the find can be evaluated by a qualified 

archaeologist. Depending on the nature of the find, additional consultation with the SHPO 

or Tribal leaders may be necessary before work could resume in the area of the find. 

References 

Allison, James R. 

2002 Archaeological Excavations at the Salt Lake Airport, Baseline Data, Inc. for the Salt 

Lake City Department of Airports. 

Bettinger, R.L. and M.A. Baumhoff 

1982 The Numic Spread: Great Basin Cultures in Competition. American Antiquity 

47:485-503. 

Copeland, James M., and Richard E. Fike 

1988 Fluted Projectile Points in Utah. Utah Archaeology 1988:5-28. 

Cordell, Linda 

1984 Prehistory of the Southwest. Academic Press, New York. 

Dillehay, Tom D., ed. 

1997 Monte Verde: A Late Pleistocene Settlement in Chile : The Archaeological Context 

and Interpretation (Vol 2). Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington. 

2000 The Settlement of the Americas: A New Prehistory. Basic Books, New York. 

Grayson, Donald K. 

7


1993 The Desert’s Past: A Natural Prehistory of the Great Basin. Smithsonian Institution 

Press, Washington. 

Holmer, Richard G. 

1978 A Mathematical Typology for Archaic Projectile Points of the Eastern Great Basin. 

Unpublished Ph.D. Dissertation, Department of Anthropology, University of Utah. 

Jennings, Jesse D. 

1986 Prehistory: Introduction. In Handbook of North American Indians, Volume 11:Great 

Basin, edited by Warren L. D=Azevedo, pp 113-119. Smithsonian Institution Press, 

Washington. 

Madsen, David B. 

1986 Exploring the Fremont. University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City. 

Marwit, John P. 

1986 Fremont Cultures. In Handbook of North American Indians Vol. 11: Great Basin, 

edited by W.L. D=Azevedo, pp.161-172. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington. 

Newton, Ginny 

2001 The Questar, Williams, and Kern River Pipeline Project: Native American 

Consultation and Identification of Traditional Cultural Places. SWCA, Inc. Cultural 

Resources Report No. 00-206. Salt Lake City. 

Swedlund, Alan, and Duane Anderson 

1999 Gordon Creek Woman Meets Kennewick Man: New Interpretations and Protocols 

Regarding the Peopling of the Americas. American Antiquity 64:569-576. 

8

FAA Section 106 Coordination Letter

Wilson Martin 

Associate Director 

Utah State Historic Preservation Officer 

300 S. Rio Grande Street 


Re: Salt Lake City International Airport Terminal Redevelopment Program Section 106 Consultation 

Dear Mr. Martin: 

The Salt Lake City Department of Airports plans to redevelop the existing terminal complex at Salt Lake 

City International Airport, which includes some structures built over 50 years ago. As the responsible 

Federal Agency, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Denver Airports District Office is providing 

the following information to facilitate your review of the project. 

Project Description 

As shown on Exhibit A, the Terminal Redevelopment Program would consolidate separate passenger 

processing facilities into a single facility serving all concourses and gates. The program includes the 

following components: 

 


 

 

 

 

 

Reconstruction of taxiways and ramps in the terminal complex as required to accommodate aircraft 

circulation in the reconfigured terminal area 


Replacement rental car facilities, including a new, consolidated rental car building (ConRAC) and a 

quick‐turn‐around (QTA) facility 


New mechanical plant located to the west of the replacement parking garage 

Project Location 

Exhibit 1 shows the location of the Terminal Development Program at Salt Lake City International 

Airport. The Area of Potential Effect includes the existing terminal complex and associated parking areas 

that would be redeveloped as described above. One cultural resource site, the Surplus Canal, site 

42SL302, is located within one‐mile of the Airport terminals. The Surplus Canal has been considered 

eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) under Criterion A and C due to the 

canal’s importance in the growth and development of Salt Lake City. This site is outside of the APE for 

this project and would not be affected. 

Construction Dates 

Construction of the Proposed Action would entail redevelopment of the existing terminal complex at 

over an extended period commencing in 2013. The redevelopment program is expected to completed in 

2024.

Applicant’s Determination of Eligibility/Finding of Effect 

The attached technical memorandum documents the applicant’s determination of No Historic 

Properties Affected. The analysis documented in the memorandum shows that the initial terminal 

facilities have been so dramatically altered by remodeling and renovation over the last 30 years that 

they cannot be considered eligible for nomination to the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP). The 

remodeling and construction program of the Salt Lake City International Airport has removed all of the 

original elements of the buildings so that nothing of the historic building remains. There are no other 

known cultural resources that would be affected by the Salt Lake City Airport Terminal Redevelopment 

Program. 

As with any ground‐disturbing project, there remains a potential for the accidental discovery of buried 

cultural resources not detected through a surface inventory, or even through shovel testing. If cultural 

resources or materials were to be discovered during ground‐disturbing activities, the work in the vicinity 

of the discovery should cease and the area be protected until the find can be evaluated by a qualified 

archaeologist. Depending on the nature of the find, additional consultation with the SHPO or Tribal 

leaders may be necessary before work could resume in the area of the find. 

Signature

Utah SHPO Concurrence

Appendix G 

Agency and Public Involvement

APPENDIX G 


This appendix contains the following agency scoping and public involvement materials: 

1. Agency and public scoping meeting presentation, and agency sign-in sheet 

2. Agency scoping letters 

3. Public information meeting notices, combined public hearing and public meeting 

presentation, and sign-in sheets 

4. Agency and public comments, and responses 

RDD\121070001 (CLR4916.DOC) G-1 

TBG012712153950RDD

Agency and Public Scoping 

Meeting Presentation 

and Agency Sign-in Sheet




Project Scoping Meeting 

June 8, 2010

Why is this Environmental Assessment 

Being Prepared? 

• The Terminal Redevelopment Program (TRP) has been 

proposed to replace the existing airport terminals and 

associated facilities, many of which are nearing the end of 

their design life and are in need of major maintenance or 

upgrades. 

• An Environmental Assessment (EA) will be prepared in 

accordance with Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) 

Orders 1050.1E and 5050.4B implementing the National 

Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) 

2

Why is the Terminal Redevelopment 

Program being proposed? 

Existing terminals are old 

and require expensive 

ongoing maintenance and 

are not energy efficient 

Concourse layout contributes to 

airfield congestion, increased 

aircraft emissions, and fuel use 

Terminal layout is not 

conducive to efficient 

passenger transfer, has 

limited space for 

concessions 

Terminal road 

reconfigured to 

serve redeveloped 

terminal 

3



Annual Airport Operations 

Preliminary Aircraft Operations Estimates 

Estimated Runway Capacity – Annual 

Service Volume (ASV) 

Potential Aircraft Operations at End of Phase 1 (NBE Gates = 87)* 

Current Aircraft Operations (NBE Gates = 87)* 

Total Operations** 

Historic Operations 

Forecast Operations 

* Aircraft Operations at 6.7 percent/gate/day, NBE = Narrow-Body Equivalent 

** FAA Terminal Area Forecast 

4


• Provide terminal facilities to efficiently accommodate 

existing and forecast passenger activity 

• Reduce vehicular congestion and delay on the Airport 

road system 

• Reduce aircraft congestion and delay in the terminal area 

• Provide adequate, convenient parking facilities to meet 

existing and forecast demand 

• Reduce long-term maintenance and operating costs 

• Accommodate forecast growth 

• Reduce costs of maintaining existing structure 

5

Proposed Action: 

Terminal Redevelopment Plan 

• Phased replacement of the terminal and concourses 

• Automated people mover and tunnels connecting 

concourses 

• Road improvements to accommodate the proposed 

terminals and reduce congestion 

• New parking garage and rental car facilities 

• Ramp modifications to accommodate the proposed 

terminal footprint and reduce congestion 

• Upgraded mechanical plant and utilities 

• Demolition of existing facilities to accommodate new 

facilities 

• New mechanical plant and utilities 

6


Terminal Redevelopment Plan – Opt 1 

7


Terminal Redevelopment Plan – Opt 2 

8

Environmental Resource Categories 

– Noise & Compatible Land 

Use 

– Energy Supplies, Natural 

Resources and 

Sustainable Design 

– Light Emissions and 

Visual Effects 

– Social Impacts 

– Induced Socioeconomic 

Impacts 

– Coastal Barriers 

– Coastal Resources 

– Wild & Scenic Rivers 

– Farmlands 

– Air Quality 

– Floodplains 

– Water Quality 

– Wetlands 

– Biotic Resources 

– Federally Listed Endangered 

& Threatened Species 

– Historic and Archaeological 

– Department of Transportation 

Act: Section 4(f) 

– Hazardous Materials 

– Solid Waste 

– Construction Impacts 

– Cumulative Impacts 

9

Schedule – Key dates 

Public/Agency Scoping: June 2010 

Environmental Analyses: July to November 2010 

Draft EA Publication: Spring/Summer 2011 

Public Hearing: Summer 2011 

Final EA Publication: Fall 2011 

10

Agency Scoping Letters

June 1, 2010 

Scott Baird, Division Director 

Salt Lake County Flood Control 

Government Center 

2001 South State Street N3100 

Salt Lake City, UT84190 

Re: 


Environmental Assessment for Terminal Redevelopment Program 

Dear Mr. Baird: 

The Salt Lake City Department of Airports (SLCDA) plans to conduct an Environmental Assessment (EA) 

in accordance with FAA Orders 1050.1E and 5050.4B implementing the National Environmental Policy 

Act (NEPA) for the Terminal Redevelopment Program (TRP) at Salt Lake City International Airport. The 

TRP would replace the existing airport terminals and associated facilities, many of which are nearing the 

end of their design life and are in need of major maintenance or upgrades. 

The existing terminals and concourses were originally built as much as 50 years ago to accommodate 

passengers originating and terminating travel in the Salt Lake City region. Changes in the airline industry 

have increased the importance of accommodating transfer as well as origin/destination passengers. 

Other changes in passenger security, on‐line ticketing, and concessions requirements have contributed 

to the obsolescence of the existing facilities. In addition, the current layout of terminal facilities is 

inefficient in terms of accommodating aircraft circulation in the terminal area, leading to increased fuel 

consumption and associated air pollutant emissions. 

The proposed improvements include a replacement terminal and concourses, an automated people 

mover and tunnels connecting the concourses, roadway improvements, a new parking garage and car 

rental facilities, apron modifications to accommodate the proposed terminal, an new mechanical plant 

and utilities, demolition of existing facilities, and construction of supporting facilities and systems. The 

proposed improvements addressed in this EA would have approximately the same passenger 

throughput capacity as the existing terminal. While the proposed layout will also accommodate future 

expansion when the need for additional passenger capacity is identified, any such expansion will be 

subject to a future NEPA process. Exhibit 1 shows the preliminary layout of the major components of the 

TRP. 

SLCDA will conduct an agency scoping meeting on Tuesday, June 8th from 1:30‐3 pm at the Salt Lake City 

International Airport Kibbie Executive Terminal, 337 North 2370 West, Salt Lake City, to gather input 

from federal, state and local agencies regarding the scope of this project and analyses to be completed 

for the Environmental Assessment. Comments will also be accepted through Tuesday, June 22nd, and 

can be provided to Patty Nelis at patty.nelis@slcgov.com or (801) 575‐3472. For questions or further 

information, please contact Patty Nelis. 

Sincerely, 


Director, Planning & Environment

Terminal Redevelopment Plan-Option 1 


Exhibit 1 

Salt Lake City Airport Terminal Redevelopment Program

June 1, 2010 

Walter Baker, Division Director 


288 North 1460 West 

P.O. Box 144870 

Salt Lake City, UT84114‐4870 

Re: 



Dear Mr. Baker: 





















TRP. 







Sincerely, 





Exhibit 1 


June 1, 2010 

Darin Bird, Deputy Director 

Utah Department of Natural Resources (UDNR) 

1594 West North Temple 

P.O. Box 145610 


Re: 



Dear Mr. Bird: 





















TRP. 







Sincerely, 





Exhibit 1 


June 1, 2010 

Chuck Chappell 

Executive Director 

Wasatch Front Regional Council (WFRC) 

295 N. Jimmy Doolittle Rd 


Re: 



Dear Mr. Chappell: 





















TRP. 







Sincerely, 





Exhibit 1 


June 1, 2010 

Larry Crist, Field Supervisor 

US Fish and Wildlife Service, Utah Ecological 

Services Field Office 

2369 W Orton Circle, Suite 50 

West Valley City, UT84119‐7603 

Re: 



Dear Mr. Crist: 





















TRP. 







Sincerely, 





Exhibit 1 


June 1, 2010 

Forrest Cuch 

Executive Director 

Utah Division of Indian Affairs 

324 South State Street, Suite 500 


Re: 



Dear Mr. Cuch: 





















TRP. 







Sincerely, 





Exhibit 1 


June 1, 2010 

Royal DeLegge 

Director Environmental Health 

Salt Lake Valley Health Department (SLVHD) 

787 East Woodoak Lane 

Murray, UT84190 

Re: 



Dear Mr. DeLegge: 





















TRP. 







Sincerely, 





Exhibit 1 


June 1, 2010 

Royal DeLegge 

SLVHD Environmental Health Services 

Bureau of Air Pollution Control 



Re: 



Dear Mr. Delegge: 





















TRP. 







Sincerely, 





Exhibit 1 


June 1, 2010 

Royal DeLegge 

SLVHD Environmental Health Services 

Bureau of Water Quality and Hazardous Waste 



Re: 



Dear Mr. Delegge: 





















TRP. 







Sincerely, 





Exhibit 1 


June 1, 2010 

Mary DeLoretto 

Environmental Studies Manager 

Utah Transit Authority (UTA) 

699 West 200 South 


Re: 



Dear Ms. DeLoretto: 





















TRP. 







Sincerely, 





Exhibit 1 


June 1, 2010 

Mike George, Environmental Scientist 



P.O. Box 144870 


Re: 



Dear Mr. George: 





















TRP. 







Sincerely, 





Exhibit 1 


June 1, 2010 

Cheryl Heying 

Division Director 

UDEQ Division of Air Quality 



Re: 



Dear Ms. Heying: 





















TRP. 







Sincerely, 





Exhibit 1 


June 1, 2010 

Hollis Jencks 

Project Manager 

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACOE) 

533 West 2600 South, Suite 150 

Bountiful, UT84010‐7744 

Re: 



Dear Hollis: 





















TRP. 







Sincerely, 





Exhibit 1 


June 1, 2010 

Charmaine Knighton 

Deputy Regional Administrator, FTA Region VIII 

Federal Transit Administration (FTA) 

12300 W. Dakota Ave. Suite 310 

Lakewood, CO80228‐2583 

Re: 



Dear Charmaine: 





















TRP. 







Sincerely, 





Exhibit 1 


June 1, 2010 

Kevin Luey, Northwest Mountain Region 

Denver Airports District Office 

Federal Aviation Administration 

26805 E. 68th Avenue, Suite 224 

Denver, CO80249‐6361 

Re: 



Dear Mr. Luey: 





















TRP. 







Sincerely, 





Exhibit 1 


June 1, 2010 

Wilson Martin 

Associate Director / SHPO 

Utah State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO) 

300 S. Rio Grande Street 


Re: 



Dear Mr. Martin: 





















TRP. 







Sincerely, 





Exhibit 1 


June 1, 2010 


Director ‐ Capital Planning & Programming 


776 North Terminal Drive 


Re: 



Dear Mr. McCandless: 





















TRP. 







Sincerely, 





Exhibit 1 


June 1, 2010 

Jeff Niermeyer 

Director of Public Utilities 

1530 South West Temple 


Re: 



Dear Mr. Niermeyer: 





















TRP. 







Sincerely, 





Exhibit 1 


June 1, 2010 

Randy Park 

Region Director 

Utah Department of Transportation (UDOT) 

2010 South 2760 West 


Re: 



Dear Mr. Park: 





















TRP. 







Sincerely, 





Exhibit 1 


June 1, 2010 

Matthew Sibul 

Senior Program Manager 

Utah Transit Authority (UTA) 

699 West 200 South 


Re: 



Dear Mr. Sibul: 





















TRP. 







Sincerely, 





Exhibit 1 


June 1, 2010 

Amanda Smith, Executive Director 

Utah Department of Environmental Quality (UDEQ) 


P.O. Box 144810 

Salt Lake City, UT 84114‐4810 

Re: 



Dear Mr. Sinclair: 





















TRP. 







Sincerely, 





Exhibit 1 


June 1, 2010 

Ed Woolford 

Environmental Program Manager 

Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) 

2520 West 4700 South, Suite 9A 


Re: 



Dear Mr. Woolford: 





















TRP. 







Sincerely, 





Exhibit 1 


Public Information Meeting Notices, Combined 

Public Hearing and Public Meeting Presentation, 

and Sign-in Sheets

Ad published May 25, 2010

Ad published June 7, 2010

PUBLIC OPEN HOUSE 

SALT LAKE CITY INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT 

TERMINAL REDEVELOPMENT PROGRAM 

E 

A 

ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 

YOU ARE INVITED 

Please plan to attend a public open house to 

discuss the Terminal Redevelopment 

Program Environmental Assessment (EA) 

for the Salt Lake City International Airport. 

This program replaces existing airport 

terminals and associated facilities. 

PUBLIC OPEN HOUSE 

WHEN: TUESDAY, JUNE 8TH 

5:00 - 6:30 PM 

WHERE: KIBBIE EXECUTIVE 

TERMINAL 


SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 

• Comments will be solicited at the 

meeting. 

• Comments may also be mailed to: 

Patty Nelis 


PO Box 145550 

SLC, UT 84114-5550 or 

Patty.Nelis@slcgov.com 

COMMENTS MUST BE RECEIVED 

BY JUNE 22 

CURRENT SITUATION 

The existing terminals and concourses were 

originally i built as much as 50 years ago to 

accommodate passengers originating and 

terminating travel in the Salt Lake City 

region. Changes in the airline industry have 

increased the importance of accommodating 

transfer as well as origin/destination 

passengers. Other changes in passenger 

security, on-line ticketing, and concessions 

requirements have contributed to the 

obsolescence of the existing facilities. In 

addition, the current layout of terminal 

facilities is inefficient in terms of 

accommodating aircraft circulation in the 

terminal area, leading to increased fuel 

consumption and associated air pollutant 

emissions. 

PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS 

The proposed improvements addressed in 

this EA would replace obsolescent and 

inefficient facilities. The proposed layout 

would also accommodate future expansion 

when the need for additional passenger 

capacity is identified but any such expansion 

would be subject to a future National 

Environmental Policy Act (NEPA ) process. 

The proposed improvements include: 

• A replacement terminal and concourses 

• An automated people mover and tunnels 

connecting the concourses 

• Roadway improvement 

• A new parking garage 

• New car rental facilities 

• Terminal apron modifications to 

accommodate the proposed terminal 

• A new mechanical 

plant and utilities 

• Demolition of existing 

facilities



Environmental lA Assessment 

Public Hearing 

June 26, 2012

Goals of this Hearing 

• Present results of the Environmental 

Assessment 

• Solicit comments from public 

2

Today’s Presentation 

• What is the Terminal Redevelopment Program 

(TRP)? 

• Why is it being proposed? 

• What alternatives have been considered? 

• Comparison of alternatives 

• Environmental impacts 

• Next steps 

3

What is the Terminal Redevelopment 

Program? 

• Phased replacement of 

terminals and concourses 

(72-74 contact gates). 

• Reconstruction of taxiways 

and ramps in the 

reconfigured terminal area. 

• Replacement parking garage. 

• Replacement rental facilities 

in the new parking garage: 

rent-a-car counters (RAC), 

ready-return spaces, and 

quick turnaround (QTA) 

facility. 

4

What is the Terminal Redevelopment 

Program? (cont.) 

• New remote service site 

(RSS) for rental car offices 

and car storage areas south 

of the economy parking lot. 

• New terminal roadways and 

improvements within the 

terminal complex. 

• New Central Utility Plant 

(CUP) west of the 

replacement parking garage. 

5





maintenance, is not energy efficient, 

and does not provide current industry 


Concourse layout contributes to airfield 

congestion, increased aircraft 

emissions, and increased fuel use. 

Terminal configuration requires 

redundant facilities for passenger 

check-in, passenger and baggage 

screening, baggage claim, 

enplaning and deplaning 

curbsides, and associated 

mechanical systems. 

Terminal road reconfigured to 

serve redeveloped terminal 

6

What Alternatives Were Considered? 

A 

B 

C 

D 

E 

Existing Terminal Area 

North of Existing Terminal between 

the primary parallel runways 

Between Runways 16L/34R and 

17/35 East of Existing Terminal 

West of Runway 16R/34L and the 

Surplus Canal 

Existing GA development area 

between Runway 17/35 and I-215 

F South of I-80 

7

What Alternatives Were Considered? 

8

Comparison of Alternatives: 


Criterion No Action Alternative Proposed TRP 

Replace Aging 

Infrastructure 

Respond to Changes 

in the Air 

Transportation 

S t 

No. Substantial renovation 

and rehabilitation would be 

required. 

No. Would not reconfigure 

terminals to support current 

and future air service 

tt 

Yes. Would replace existing 



Yes. Would provide flexible 

facilities to meet functional 

needs of the current air 

System patterns. transportation t ti system and 

avoid functional obsolescence 

in the future. 

Enhance Operational 

No. Would continue 

Yes. Would reduce redundancy 

Efficiency 

redundancy in passenger 

handling facilities and 

inefficient aircraft circulation 

in passenger handling facilities 

and enhance the efficiency of 

aircraft circulation in the 

in the terminal area. terminal area. 

9

Comparison of Alternatives: Technical 

and Economic Factors 


Average Aircraft Delay 

4.55 minutes per operation 

(2025) 

4.04 minutes per operation 

(2025) 

Annual Cost of Aircraft 

$153 million (2025) $145 million (2025) 

Delay and Taxi In and 

Out Time 

10

Comparison of Alternatives: 

Levels of Service 


Peak period LOS on arrival 

and departure roadways 

Public Circulation Areas 

(Industry Standard = 20.5 sq. 

ft. per peak hour passenger) 

Baggage Claim Areas 

(Industry Standard = 17.2 sq. 

ft. per peak hour passenger) 

Concessions (Industry 

Standard = 10,000 sq. ft. per 

million enplaned passengers) 

Level of Service E or F 

(2025) 

LOS E/F = very poor 

Level of Service A or B 

(2025) 

LOS A/B=excellent 

15.7 sq. ft. (2025) 35.0 sq. ft. (2025) 

6.4 sq. ft. (2025) 9.3 sq. ft. (2025) 

4,950 sq. ft. (2025) 7,640 sq. ft. 

11

Environmental Resources Evaluated 

Include: 

 

 

 

Not Applicable 

No Potential Impact 

No Significant 

Adverse Effect 

12

Findings: No Significant Adverse 

Impacts 

Resource 

Category 

Air Quality 

Water Quality 

Floodplains 

Wetlands 

Biotic Resources 

Summary of Project Effects 

The TRP would reduce congestion and air emissions from aircraft 

and surface vehicles compared to the No Action Alternative. 

Construction emissions would not require detailed evaluation. 

Minimal new impervious surface. Continued compliance with water 

discharge permit requirements would maintain water quality 

standards. 

No development in floodplains. Stormwater runoff would remain 

within the permitted water discharge volume. 

No development in wetlands. The TRP would not materially alter 

the volume or quality of water flowing into surrounding waterways. 

The project area is largely developed, contains little or no natural 

vegetation, and limited landscaped vegetation. Newly ypaved 

areas have been graded and are surrounded by active aircraft 

movement areas and/or roadways. The TRP would not, therefore, 

materially affect biotic resources. 

13


Impacts 

Resource Category 

Federally Listed 

Endangered or 

Threatened Species 

Hazardous Materials 

Solid Waste 

Energy Supply and 

Natural Resources & 

Sustainable Design 


The project area is largely developed , contains little or no 

natural vegetation and limited landscaped vegetation. The 

project area does not contain federally designated critical 

habitat t for any listed species. 

One known contaminated site near the TRP remains open. If 

excavation activities encounter soil or groundwater 

contamination, best management practices and complying 

with FAA Order 1050.10C, Prevention, Control and 

Abatement would minimize potential impacts. 

No change in the total volume of passenger, aircraft, and 

vehicular activity; therefore, no change in solid waste 

generation. Construction waste would be minimized by 

reusing building materials whenever possible. 

Would increase building envelope, but would also increase 

energy efficiency – new facilities to be built to Leadership in 

Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) Silver standard. 

14


Impacts 

Resource Category 

Historic Properties 

Noise 

Compatible Land 

Use 

Light Emissions & 

Visual Impacts 

DOT Section 4(f) 

resources 


Potential impacts to historic resources are limited because the 

potentially historic Airport buildings were extensively remodeled 

in the past and almost nothing remains from the original 

structures. 

t 

No change in runway use or aircraft activity levels; therefore, no 

potential changes in off-airport noise exposure. 

No change in off-airport noise exposure or off-airport 

development; therefore, no potential compatible land use 

impacts. 

The TRP would be completely within Airport property and 

surrounded by existing Airport development that includes a wide 

variety of aeronautical related light sources. Light sources of the 

TRP would be similar to existing conditions. 

No off-airport noise impacts or off-airport development that could 

affect protected resources 

15


Impacts 

Resource Category Summary of Project Effects 

Social Impacts 

Environmental 

Justice 

Induced 

Socioeconomic 

Impacts 

Cumulative Effects 

No residential or business relocation; no division or disruption of 

established communities; no change in off-airport surface 

transportation patterns; no disruption of orderly, planned 

development; no notable change in employment. 

No off-airport development or changes in noise exposure that 

would affect minority or low income populations. 

The TRP would accommodate the same level of passenger, 

aircraft, and vehicular activity as the No Action Alternative, thus 

the impact on the regional economy would be similar. The 

proposed TRP would increase terminal concession space by 

about 10 percent. Assuming the same level of employment and 

revenue per square foot, the additional economic impact would 

be beneficial, but have no material effect on the region. 

The TRP would not contribute to significant impacts when 

considered in combination with other past, present or reasonably 

foreseeable actions. 

16

Schedule 

• Draft EA published – May 25, 2012 

• Public comment period ends – July 13, 2012 

• Comments will be incorporated in final EA and 

submitted to FAA 

• Federal finding prepared by FAA 

17

How to comment . . . 

• Written comments can be submitted to: 

– Patty Nelis, Environmental Programs Manager 


PO Box 145550 

SLC, UT 84114-5550 

– All mailed comments must received by July 13, 2012 

• E-mail to: 

– Patty.Nelis@slcgov.com 

– All comments submitted via e-mail must be received by 

5 p.m. on July 13, 2012 

• Court reporter available tonight for public 

testimony 18

Agency and Public Comments, and Responses

From: 

To: 

Subject: 

Date: 

Swank, Alisa/SEA 

Geckle, Suzanne/CIN 

FW: SLC Terminal Redevelopment Project 

Wednesday, June 30, 2010 4:13:58 PM 

From: Nelis, Patty [mailto:Patty.Nelis@slcgov.com] 

Sent: Wednesday, June 23, 2010 2:31 PM 

To: 'wdamery@utah.gov' 

Cc: McCandless, Allen; Willkie, Bill/BAO; Swank, Alisa/SEA 

Subject: SLC Terminal Redevelopment Project 

Hi Bill, 

Thank you for your interest in the Airport’s Terminal Redevelopment Program. I hope I was able 

to answer your questions regarding water quality impacts during the construction phase of this 

long term project. Based on our conversation, it is my understanding that the Division of Water 

Quality will not be responding with a formal comment at this time. 

Again, thank you for your time and please feel free to call with any further questions or concerns. 

Best Regards, 

Patty Nelis 

Patty M. Nelis 



p (801) 575-3472 

f (801) 575-2395

From: 

To: 

Subject: 

Date: 



FW: Salt Lake City Airport Terminal Redevelopment Plan Environmental Assessment Scoping Letter 


From: Nathan_Darnall@fws.gov [mailto:Nathan_Darnall@fws.gov] 

Sent: Monday, June 14, 2010 8:04 AM 

To: Swank, Alisa/SEA 

Cc: Patty.Nelis@slcgov.com; Betsy_Herrmann@fws.gov 

Subject: Fw: Salt Lake City Airport Terminal Redevelopment Plan Environmental Assessment Scoping 

Letter 

Alisa, 

We have reviewed the presentation for the Salt Lake City International Airport Terminal 

Redevelopment Program Environmental Assessment and do not have any significant 

comments at this time. Based on information in the presentation, we understand the 

redevelopment project will occur entirely within the footprint of existing airport facilities and 

that no wetlands will be affected. In addition, the project does not involve runway expansion. 

If the redevelopment project impacts wetlands, or expands the existing footprint closer to 

wetlands, or involves new utilities that might affects wildlife (pipelines, powerlines), we 

would like an opportunity to submit additional comments. Please consider the following: 

1. Use green roofs or rooftop gardens to reduce stormwater runoff which might otherwise 

impact the Great Salt Lake and migratory birds; 

2. Add pervious surfaces to increase infiltration and reduce stormwater runoff; and 

3. Include plans for TRAX expansion to encourage commuting and reduce carbon emissions. 

Thank you. 

Nathan 

-=---=--=-=-==--=- 

=--==- 

Nathan L. Darnall 


Utah Field Office 

2369 Orton Circle, Suite 50 

West Valley City, Utah 84119 

801-975-3330 x137 

801-975-3331 (fax) 

nathan_darnall@fws.gov 

http://www.fws.gov/utahfieldoffice

Achieving sustainable native species and ecosystems 

through leadership, partnerships, and innovation 

----- Forwarded by Nathan Darnall/R6/FWS/DOI on 06/14/2010 08:40 AM ----- 

fyi 

Betsy 

Herrmann/R6/FWS/DOI 

06/10/2010 12:42 PM 

ToNathan Darnall/R6/FWS/DOI@FWS 

cc 

SubjectFw: Salt Lake City Airport Terminal 

Redevelopment Plan Environmental 

Assessment Scoping Letter 

----- Forwarded by Betsy Herrmann/R6/FWS/DOI on 06/10/2010 12:19 PM ----- 

Larry 

Crist/R6/FWS/DOI 

06/10/2010 11:46 AM 

ToBetsy Herrmann/R6/FWS/DOI@FWS 

cc 

SubjectFw: Salt Lake City Airport Terminal 



FYI 

Larry Crist 

Utah Field Supervisor 


Utah Ecological Services Office 

2369 West Orton Circle,Suite 50 

West Valley, UT 84119 

office: 801-975-3330 X126 

fax: 801-975-3331 

----- Forwarded by Larry Crist/R6/FWS/DOI on 06/10/2010 11:45 AM ----- 

 

06/10/2010 09:53 AM 

To, 

, 

, 

, 

, 

, 

, 

, 

, 

, 

, 

, 

, 

, 

, 

, 

, 

,

, 

, 

 

cc, 

 

SubjectSalt Lake City Airport Terminal 



A copy of the presentation given at the scoping meeting for the Salt Lake City International 

Airport Terminal Redevelopment Program Environmental Assessment is attached for your 

information. Please contact Patty Nelis at the Salt Lake City Department of Airports (801) 

575-3472 or Patty.Nelis@slcgov.com with any comments or questions.

From: 

To: 

Subject: 

Date: 



FW: SLC Terminal Redevelopment Program comment period 




To: 'ddrumiler@slco.org' 


Subject: SLC Terminal Redevelopment Program comment period 

Hi Dan, 

Thank you for your phone call on June 10, 2010, in response to Airport’s Terminal Redevelopment 

Program. I hope I was able to answer your questions with regard to storm water control and 

maintenance upgrades. You mentioned that you would be submitting a formal comment from Salt 

Lake County Flood Control Engineering. Our official comment period has ended, however, we 

encourage you to feel free to send your comments to us by June 25 th . Please call with any 

questions and thank you again for your interest in the redevelopment project. 

Best regards, 

Patty Nelis 




p (801) 575-3472 

f (801) 575-2395

From: 

To: 

Cc: 

Subject: 

Date: 

Willkie, Bill/BAO 

Nelis, Patty; Swank, Alisa/SEA 

McCandless, Allen; "William L. Lahey"; Robins, Kevin; Geckle, Suzanne/CIN 

RE: EA Scoping Document Comments 


Thanks for the copy. We’ll include it in the comments database. The comments primarily relate to 

the validity of the forecasts and other justification for the TRP. As we discussed, the forecast issue 

is one we expected to address in any case. This and Mr. Fullmer’s other questions related to other 

project drivers will be addressed in the statement of purpose and need. As we also discussed, we 

do not typically respond to questions submitted during scoping; we are merely looking for input to 

the process. I believe that the no action alternative and the concept Kevin mentioned about 

rebuilding in place to accomplish the necessary seismic retrofitting collectively represent the 

“upgrading” alternative he urges us to consider. We plan to address both concepts in the 

alternatives chapter. 



To: Willkie, Bill/BAO; Swank, Alisa/SEA 

Cc: McCandless, Allen; 'William L. Lahey'; Robins, Kevin 

Subject: FW: EA Scoping Document Comments 

Mr. Fullmer contacted me on Wednesday, June 30, 2010. He mentioned that he saw the Salt Lake 

Tribune article about the Terminal Redevelopment Plan and wanted an opportunity to provide a 

comment. He stated that he reads the paper every day and never saw the public notice. I 

discussed the issue with Bill Willkie and with his support we chose to allow Mr. Fullmer’s comment. 




p (801) 575-3472 

f (801) 575-2395 

From: Doug Fullmer [mailto:difinslc@gmail.com] 


To: Nelis, Patty 

Subject: EA Scoping Document Comments 

SENT VIA EMAIL 

June 30, 2010 

Ms. Patty M. Nelis 



P.O. Box 145550 

Salt Lake City, Utah 84114

RE: 

Salt Lake International Airport Terminal Redevelopment Program 

EA Scoping Document Comments 

Dear Ms. Nelis: 

I appreciate the time you gave me on the phone today and your willingness to consider my 

comments, even though the comment period for EA Scoping Document dated June 8 2010, 

has past. Because it has past, I will keep by comments brief and limit them to two points. 

The first point I would like to comment on is the existing facilities. I would encourage the 

consideration of an Alternative as part of the EA that would include upgrades of the existing 

terminals that would resolve the maintenance and energy efficiency issues. I would think that 

this would be categorized as a Socioeconomic issue. The Alternative, as I see it, would 

include a cost benefit analysis of upgrades vs. demolition & new construction; an operations 

efficiency analysis to evaluate the use of the current gates; and an analysis of the current 

physical plant and utilities as to effective age vs. actual age. 

My thought is that the proposed new construction will offer only 8 additional new gates, will 

require a lot of demolition and reconstruction of structures that are not that old, such as the 

current short term parking structure and the International Terminal at steep financial cost. 

In my many years in real estate and government, I have often observed the willingness to 

replace buildings not because they have become obsolete or dysfunctional, but rather because 

there is a trend, in this case nationally, to move to a new more “functional and modern” 

model. Conversely, I have also observed buildings remodeled that should have been 

replaced. By including an Alternative for upgrading, it would demonstrate whether the 

proposed redevelopment is truly required or simply following a national trend. 

The second point I would like to make ties in somewhat to the first. The EA Scoping 

Document clearly shows a declining trend in Annual Aircraft Operations beginning in 

approximately 2005. While the chart in the EA does not provide actual numbers, it appears 

that there has been a decrease of approximately 75,000 annual aircraft operations, a 17% 

decrease, in a five year time frame. Yet the forecast going forward shows a return to the 

2005 operations level over the next 20 years. It references a FAA study but does not give a 

date the study was done or the basis for the increase. The correctness of this study should be 

a crucial factor in the consideration of redevelopment over upgrade. If the study can be 

substantiated as current and accurate, then that would tend to give more weight to proceeding 

with the proposed project. On the other hand, if the study is not correct and the annual 

aircraft operations continue the current decline, or level off at the current level, then it would 

probably give more weight to upgrading the current facilities. 

Page 3 of the EA Scoping Document has a diagram titled “Why is the Terminal 

Redevelopment Program Being Proposed?” It contains many statements that portend to 

establish this proposal as a need and a foregone conclusion. I would hope that the 

information this proposal is based on is both current and without bias as to a particular 

conclusion. 

Again, thank you for allowing me to submit these comments late and for your consideration. 

I wish you the best as you progress through this EA process. 

Respectfully,

s/ 

Doug Fullmer 

758 East 4125 South 


801-554-9452 

difinslc@gmail.com

From: 

To: 

Subject: 

Date: 

Attachments: 



FW: Terminal Redevelopment Program Environmental Assessment (EA) for the Salt Lake City International 



David Spalding.vcf 

-----Original Message----- 


Sent: Wednesday, June 23, 2010 7:42 AM 

To: Willkie, Bill/BAO 

Cc: Swank, Alisa/SEA; McCandless, Allen 

Subject: FW: Terminal Redevelopment Program Environmental Assessment (EA) for the Salt Lake City 


Hi Bill, 

Mr. Spalding's contact information is attached. 




p (801) 575-3472 

f (801) 575-2395 


From: Ishimatsu, Barbara [mailto:Barbara.Ishimatsu@PacifiCorp.com] 

Sent: Tuesday, June 22, 2010 4:30 PM 


Cc: Spalding, David 

Subject: Terminal Redevelopment Program Environmental Assessment (EA) for the Salt Lake City 





p (801) 575-3472 

f (801) 575-2395 


From: Ishimatsu, Barbara [mailto:Barbara.Ishimatsu@PacifiCorp.com] 

Sent: Tuesday, June 22, 2010 4:30 PM 


Cc: Spalding, David 

Subject: Terminal Redevelopment Program Environmental Assessment (EA) for the Salt Lake City 


Dear Ms. Nelis: 

Rocky Mountain Power welcomes the opportunity to comment on the Terminal Redevelopment Program 

Environmental Assessment (EA) for the Salt Lake City International Airport. The program to remove and 

replace significant sections of the existing terminal facilities will impact Rocky Mountain Power electric 

facilities installed to serve the Airport at various locations. Rocky Mountain Power urges the EA to 

consider the cost to relocate those facilities and the need for replacement utility easement. In addition, 

project schedules should allow ample time for the design of replacement facilities, ordering long lead

materials such as transformers, and a plan for providing continuous power during construction. 

Rocky Mountain Power representatives are available to discuss these matters in greater detail. Please 

contact David Spalding for additional information. 

Regards, 

Barbara Ishimatsu 

Legal Counsel, Rocky Mountain Power Legal Dept. 

201 South Main Street, Suite 2300 


P 801-220-4640 

F 801-220-3299 

Barbara.Ishimatsu@pacificorp.com 

THIS COMMUNICATION MAY CONTAIN CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION AND MAY BE SUBJECT TO 

ATTORNEY-CLIENT PRIVILEGE, THE ATTORNEY WORK PRODUCT DOCTRINE, THE JOINT DEFENSE 

PRIVILEGE, AND/OR OTHER PRIVILEGES. If you are not the intended recipient(s), or the employee or 

agent responsible for delivery of this message to the intended recipient(s), you are hereby notified that 

any dissemination, distribution or copying of this e-mail message is strictly prohibited. If you have 

received this message in error, please immediately notify the sender and delete this e-mail message 

from your computer.

From: 

To: 

Cc: 

Subject: 

Date: 

Willkie, Bill/BAO 

Nelis, Patty 

McCandless, Allen; Geckle, Suzanne/CIN 

RE: SLC Airport Expansion 

Thursday, July 01, 2010 6:17:54 PM 

We can add this to the database. This comment would not require any special consideration in our 

work. 


Sent: Thursday, July 01, 2010 3:06 PM 

To: Willkie, Bill/BAO 

Cc: McCandless, Allen 

Subject: FW: SLC Airport Expansion 

Another late comment! 




p (801) 575-3472 

f (801) 575-2395 

From: Jensen, Jhan M Civ USAF AFMC 516 SMXS/MXDEE [mailto:Jhan.Jensen@HILL.af.mil] 

Sent: Thursday, July 01, 2010 4:02 PM 


Cc: YanFarah@mac.com 

Subject: SLC Airport Expansion 

The quick and the short. Please Build It! 

I fly regularly and I have gone through some of the best (SIN/KUL/DXB/LHR) and worst (JFK/ORD) 

airports in the world. Salt Lake International feels like I am going back in time whenever I go 

through it. The people are nice, I am a Utah native too, and the place is usually very clean. But the 

hub and spoke design is horrible for a lot of aircraft movements. I know Portland redid their 

airport 10 years ago or more, we are kind of wanting to do similar things. It has helped Portland a 

lot to grow, I think it would help us to get possibly more European and Asian direct flights. Also 

being surrounded by DEN, LAS, PHX, SEA it feels we are slowly shrinking into just a regional airport 

and we have to fly to one of those cities to catch international flights. I know Delta probably does 

not like the cost associated with the re-construction, but at what point will LAX or SFO get them to 

move their western hub there? 

Recently I just got back from a flight to London. We came into a gate that required a tug and had to 

sit on the plane for 15 minutes before one could make it over. With the new layout, it would help 

prevent this type of problem. I am also an aviation enthusiast and regularly people will tell me 

they love the people at SLC International, but our airport was not built for the number we seem to 

get through it and ON TIME! I don’t readily want huge programs that will cost tax payers a lot of 

money. But the airport is one of the things we need and the sooner it gets started the better! 

I have seen what new airports have done, can anyone say the enjoyed Denver Stapleton? If it is

planned right, a new airport can be an economic boom. But if we wait too long, like Kuala Lumpur 

International being late after Singapore and Bangkok, it will not matter as it will be hard get those 

airlines and tourist back because they decided to go to one of our neighboring states. 

Sorry if this is late, as I mentioned I just got back from a trip to London when I read the call for 

comments. 

Jhan Jensen

From: 

To: 

Subject: 

Date: 



FW: Salt Lake City Airport Terminal Redevelopment Plan Environmental Assessment Scoping Letter 


From: Charmaine.Knighton@dot.gov [mailto:Charmaine.Knighton@dot.gov] 

Sent: Thursday, June 17, 2010 9:38 AM 

To: Swank, Alisa/SEA 

Subject: RE: Salt Lake City Airport Terminal Redevelopment Plan Environmental Assessment Scoping 

Letter 

Alisa, Region 8 FTA does not intend to provide comments. 

Charmaine Knighton, P.E. 

Deputy Regional Administrator 

FTA Region VIII 

12300 W. Dakota Ave.; Suite 310 

Lakewood, CO 80228-2583 

charmaine.knighton@dot.gov 

720.963.3327 (office) 

720.963.3333 (fax) 

303.229.4058 (cell) 

From: Alisa.Swank@CH2M.com [mailto:Alisa.Swank@CH2M.com] 


To: Alisa.Swank@CH2M.com; Hollis.g.jencks@usace.army.mil; Woolford, Edward (FHWA); 

Larry_Crist@fws.gov; cheying@utah.gov; wbaker@utah.gov; mgeorge@utah.gov; darinbird@utah.gov; 

wmartin@utah.gov; fscuch@utah.gov; rpark@utah.gov; sbaird@slco.org; rdelegge@co.slc.ut.us; 

cchappell@wfrc.org; gscott@wfrc.org; Kevin.Luey@faa.gov; Msibul@rideuta.com; 

Mdeloretto@rideuta.com; Knighton, Charmaine (FTA); Jeff.niermeyer@slcgov.com; 

amandasmith@utah.gov 

Cc: Bill.Willkie@CH2M.com; Allen.McCandless@slcgov.com; Patty.Nelis@slcgov.com 

Subject: RE: Salt Lake City Airport Terminal Redevelopment Plan Environmental Assessment Scoping 

Letter 

This is a reminder that scoping comments on the Salt Lake City Airport Terminal Redevelopment Plan 

Environmental Assessment are requested by June 22nd. Thank you to those of you who have already 

submitted comments. If you have any further questions on the project, please contact Patty Nelis 

at (801) 575-3472. 

From: Swank, Alisa/SEA 


To: Hollis.g.jencks@usace.army.mil; edward.woolford@dot.gov; Larry_Crist@fws.gov; 

bsinclair@utah.gov; cheying@utah.gov; wbaker@utah.gov; mgeorge@utah.gov; darinbird@utah.gov; 

wmartin@utah.gov; fscuch@utah.gov; rpark@utah.gov; sbaird@slco.org; rdelegge@co.slc.ut.us; 

cchappell@wfrc.org; Greg Scott; Kevin.Luey@faa.gov; Msibul@rideuta.com; Mdeloretto@rideuta.com; 

charmaine.knighton@fta.dot.gov; Jeff.niermeyer@slcgov.com 

Cc: Willkie, Bill/BAO; McCandless, Allen; Nelis, Patty 

Subject: Salt Lake City Airport Terminal Redevelopment Plan Environmental Assessment Scoping Letter 

Dear Agency Staff Member: 

Salt Lake City Department of Airports is conducting an Environmental Assessment for the Terminal 

Redevelopment Program at Salt Lake City International Airport. As described in the attached scoping

letter, an agency scoping meeting will be held on Tuesday, June 8th from 1:30-3 pm at Kibbie 

Executive Terminal at 337 North 2370 West, Salt Lake City, UT, 84116. A public information meeting 

will be conducted on Tuesday evening. Comments will be accepted until June 22nd, 2010, and can be 

submitted to Patty Nelis, Environmental Programs Manager at Patty.Nelis@slcgov.com or at PO Box 

145550, Salt Lake City, UT 84114. For questions or further information, please contact Patty Nelis 

at (801) 575-3472. 

Alisa (Moffat) Swank 

Environmental Planner 

CH2M Hill 

1100 112th Avenue NE 

Suite 400 

Bellevue, WA 98004-4504 

Phone: (425) 233-3524 

Mobile: (425) 213-7307 

Fax: (425) 468-3124 

Email: Alisa.Swank@ch2m.com (please note new email address)

From: 

To: 

Subject: 

Date: 



FW: airport expansion plans 





To: 'Ann-Marie Lence' 


Subject: RE: airport expansion plans 

Hi Ann-Marie, 

The terminal redevelopment plans can be found at www.slcairport.com, under the "Behind the Scenes" 

caption, click on, "Public meeting presentation, Terminal Redevelopment Program Environmental 

Assessment". There you will find a short presentation on the proposed project. 

Thank you for your interest and please let us know if you have any questions or comments. Please 

note that any official comments are due tomorrow June 22nd. 

Regards, 

Patty 




p (801) 575-3472 

f (801) 575-2395 


From: Ann-Marie Lence [mailto:annmarie.lence@gmail.com] 

Sent: Saturday, June 19, 2010 8:25 AM 


Subject: airport expansion plans 

Hi Patty, 

How might I be able to find the plans for the renovation? 

Ann-Marie Lence 

annmarie.lence@gmail.com

From: 

To: 

Subject: 

Date: 



FW: airport expansion 





To: McCandless, Allen; Willkie, Bill/BAO; Swank, Alisa/SEA 

Subject: FW: airport expansion 




p (801) 575-3472 

f (801) 575-2395 


From: Allen Sanderson [mailto:allen@sci.utah.edu] 



Subject: airport expansion 

Hello, 

I recently saw the request for comments on the airport expansion. 

However, I could not find any current documents other than: 

http://www.slcairport.com/cmsdocuments/SLC_ALP_Report.pdf 

Could you direct me to a current version. 

In general, it would appear that the concourses follows a similar plan as the Atlanta airport. As some 

one who has flown in and out of that airport nearly as much the Salt Lake Airport I have a few 

comments: 

While many people utilize the people movers, there are many who appreciate being able to stretch their 

legs between flights. As such, in addition please incorporate a central passenger walk way be between 

all concourses such as what is found at Atlanta. Denver made a major mistake by not having a walk way 

between concourses and forcing all passengers to utilize the people movers. 

I would also ask that mid way concourse access be incorporated into the design on both sides of the 

concourse. Though I have rarely used these mid way access ways they will become more and more 

important as the airlines have become very strict on boarding cut off times. As such, when a passenger 

is coming off a flight in Concourse A Gate 1 and leaving out of Concourse B Gate 1 they will not have to 

walk all the way to the center of the concourse and back instead use a midway access point. At one 

point in Atlanta there were a few short cut walkways mid way between concourses. 

Passenger drop off pick up. From the plans I saw I could not deduce whether were only three traffic 

lanes like the current airport or not. 

The current airport is dangerous for private passenger drop off and pickup due the amount of 

congestion with only having three lanes fro traffic and having to cross two of them. Or a third if going 

to rental car counter.

From the current design it was noted that there would be a three level roadway I could not tell if there 

would be separated drop off and pickup. If so, this design would be a step in the right direction. 

However, the design is lacking sufficient detail other than to state that I feel having multiple lanes to 

distribute traffic is prudent otherwise traffic control systems (lights) need to installed so that passengers 

can cross safely. However, while having multiple lanes is helpful having the complete structure covered 

is necessary for inclement weather. Denver got this covering correct except it needs to allow light to 

come in. 

Finally, when renting a car I hate it when I must collect my bags and take an elevator up two levels, 

cross over traffic, then take another elevator down. Further, I prefer not have to take shuttle to get to 

the car lot. Again,it would be helpful to have current plans to make more substantial comments. 

Sincerely, 

Allen Sanderson 

1744 South 1900 East 

Salt Lake City, UT 84108

From: 

To: 

Subject: 

Date: 



FW: Airport Terminal 




Sent: Tuesday, June 08, 2010 7:26 AM 

To: Swank, Alisa/SEA; Willkie, Bill/BAO 

Cc: McCandless, Allen 

Subject: FW: Airport Terminal 

Our first comment! 




p (801) 575-3472 

f (801) 575-2395 


From: jhs24@xmission.com [mailto:jhs24@xmission.com] 

Sent: Monday, June 07, 2010 7:27 PM 


Subject: Airport Terminal 

I have one thing to say. If property taxes are going to be raised then hell no. 

If the airport wants to expand then LET THE PEOPLE WHO USE IT PAY for it. TAX THE TICKETS, TAX 

THE RENTALS, TAX THE AIRPLANES. Leave me out of it. If you want more tourism to generate state 

taxes then FIND IT IN THE STATE BUDGET WITHOUT RAISING TAXES. You have GOT to be self 

supporting at some time. Be a WISE STEWARD of what you have and quit asking for more. I've used 

the airport and I pay the taxes for tickets and fees for the services when I do. Don't ask me to float a 

bill that I don't need or want. The airport was JUST OVERHAULED FOR THE OLYMPICS!!!!! Leave it 

alone! 

Jack Sederstrom 

1937 Springfield Road 

SLC, UT 84116

From: 

To: 

Subject: 

Date: 



FW: Expansion at Airport 





Subject: FW: Expansion at Airport 




p (801) 575-3472 

f (801) 575-2395 

From: Carl Stettler [mailto:yarlrac@yahoo.com] 

Sent: Saturday, June 19, 2010 3:29 PM 


Subject: Expansion at Airport 

I understand that SLC is going to copy Denver International Airport 

configurations, Am I right? 

Carl

From: 

To: 

Subject: 

Date: 



FW: Expansion at Airport 





Subject: FW: Expansion at Airport 

Forwarding 




p (801) 575-3472 

f (801) 575-2395 




Subject: Re: Expansion at Airport 

Hi Patty, 

Living in Denver gave me all the advantage why personal affection of kids 

behavioral with the flow of departing passengers is important. First of all, 

kids do like to ride the train. No more tagging the kids every time when they 

asked their parent "are we there yet?". I recommended that the any motions 

in visuals arts could extend the kids education or learning attributes. I am 

not an expert in child behaviors but know that any suggestions of keeping 

their minds occupied can do wonders in keeping them happy. 

I would be very happy to give some support in evaluations of designs. 

Carl Stettler 

South Salt Lake. 

Lived in Denver from 1994 to 2005 

From: "Nelis, Patty" 

To: Carl Stettler 

Cc: "McCandless, Allen" ; "Bill.Willkie@CH2M.com" 

; "Alisa.Swank@CH2M.com" 

Sent: Mon, June 21, 2010 11:58:24 AM 

Subject: RE: Expansion at Airport 

Hi Mr. Stettler, 

In response to your question, the terminal design for SLC International will consist of a 

terminal building with parallel concourses, which is similar to Denver International. You 

can find SLC International’s redevelopment plans at www.slcairport.com, under the

“Behind the Scenes” caption, click on “Public meeting presentation, Terminal 

Redevelopment Program Environmental Assessment”. There you will find a short 

presentation on the proposed project. 

Thank you for your interest and please let us know if you have any questions or 

comments. Please note that official comments are due by tomorrow, June 22 nd . 

Regards, 

Patty 




p (801) 575-3472 

f (801) 575-2395 


Sent: Saturday, June 19, 2010 3:29 PM 


Subject: Expansion at Airport 

I understand that SLC is going to copy Denver International Airport configurations, Am I 

right? 

Carl



To: Willkie, Bill/BAO; Swank, Alisa/SEA 

Subject: FW: PU comments on preliminary Airport Terminal Master Plan 




p (801) 575-3472 

f (801) 575-2395 

From: McCandless, Allen 



Subject: FW: PU comments on preliminary Airport Terminal Master Plan 

Patty, 

. . . received agency comment from Brad Stewart. ‐‐Allen 

From: Stewart, Brad 


To: McCandless, Allen 

Cc: Niermeyer, Jeff; Reinhold, Rick; Ward, Thomas; Call, Chuck 

Subject: PU comments on preliminary Airport Terminal Master Plan 

Alan, 

I know that notes were taken at the recent master plan meeting, but I offer these follow‐up comments too. 

The water and sewer utilities on airport property are starting to age and have evolved in a non‐standard 

configuration. Recommend replacing water and sewer infrastructure supporting the terminals. It is wise 

to master plan these improvements so as to get proper alignment and sizing for “final” build‐out so that 

the work only needs to be done once. The changes to the water and sewer infrastructure could be 

phased to coincide with other construction work. 

 

 

 

 

 

Sewage pre‐treatment devices will be required for certain areas of the new terminals. For example 

grease traps for restaurants and sand oil separators for drains in shops and warehouse type spaces. 

Place elements such as sewer lift stations and main water appurtenances in non‐secure areas of the 

airport property so as to facilitate easier and faster response for maintenance. 

Some of the more aggressive LEED strategies, e.g. grey water re‐use, will bump up against health codes 

and regulations. Public Utilities offers to provide input for LEED design for water, sewage, and drainage 

elements of the plan. 

Rainwater harvesting and use will require water rights. 

Public Utilities offers to provide information on flood control and Great Salt Lake elevations. The 

Northwest Quadrant Master Plan is using 4217 USGS (approximately 4220 in current datum) as a 

minimum “no build” elevation. Recommend using this minimum elevation, or higher, for all new 

habitable space.

Public Utilities envisions the Airport to continue with its own storm water permit. Of course, as changes 

are made to the existing drainage system there will be opportunities to update the bmp water quality 

elements of the system. 

As you know the groundwater is high at the airport and is high in salts. Dewatering and pumping will 

likely be necessary for tunnels proposed to connect the terminals. This water might not be of a quality 

suitable for irrigation. Also, a water right would be necessary when deriving any beneficial use from a 

groundwater source. 

When preliminary drawings are available we will be able to offer more detailed input. 

Thank you for including Public Utilities at this early stage of discussion. We look forward to working with you and 

your consultants as the project progresses and as we can be helpful. 

Brad

Comments and Responses Regarding the Draft 


This attachment includes comments submitted to the Salt Lake City Department of Airports 

(SLCDA) on the Environmental Assessment (EA) for the Terminal Redevelopment Program 

at Salt Lake City International Airport (SLC or Airport). Responses to individual comments 

follow each comment document. Each comment document is presented in its entirety in the 

order shown in the following index. These comment documents are annotated with 

numbers in the margins denoting individual comments. These numbers correspond to the 

responses following each comment document. 

Index to Comments and Responses 

Comments from Members of the Public: 

Allen Sanderson, July 12, 2012 

Comments from Federal, State, or Local Agencies: 

1. Salt Lake County Engineering and Flood Control Division, May 30, 2012 

2. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Sacramento District, June 18, 2012 

RDD/122330004 (NLH4768.DOCX) 1 

TBG01271215390RDD

1744 South 1900 East 


1.801.585.0769 

July 12, 2012 

Re: SLC Terminal Redevelopment Program Environmental Assessment 

Dear Ms. Nelis, 

AS ‐ 1 

AS ‐ 2 

AS ‐ 3 

AS ‐ 4 

Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the SLC Terminal Redevelopment 

Program Environmental Assessment. Below are my comments regarding the 

Redevelopment. While there is no doubt that the SLC Terminal is reaching the end of its 

useable life and based on today’s best practices a new terminal would be of great benefit 

to the public I do not believe the existing Environmental Assessment adequately 

addresses the requirement to present a range of alternative proposals to the public. 

One alternative has been presented in a very limited fashion in Section 2. That alternative 

should be labeled as the Preferred Alternative. The alternatives presented in Section 3 

have no value for comparison nor evaluation as they are all out of date with regards 

today’s operational needs and standards. These alternatives should be part of the 

appendix as historical information. 

For the Environmental Assessment to be complete a range of feasible alternatives need to 

be presented and fully evaluated in Section 2. Below I have provided alternative 

configuration which should be explored. 

Specific issues with the proposed terminal redevelopment alternative as presented in 

Section 2 which should be referred to as the preferred alternative. 

1) Overall the proposed layout lacks a detailed rational regarding the decision for 

the placement of the QTA and CUP in relationship to the parking structure. 

The placements of the QTA and CUP to the south of rather than west of the 

parking structure leaves a huge amount of undeveloped land to both the west 

and east of the parking structure. It is my understanding that the placement of 

the parking structure and QTA was to allow for expansion east/west and 

south. Such details are missing from the document. Further, if flexibility of 

future expansion is desired alternatives should be proposed such as has been 

for the north concourse. 

The preferred location of the QTA blocks access from the parking structure to 

the long term parking. Thus removes the ability of a passenger to easily walk 

2 RDD/122330004 (NLH4768.DOCX) 

TBG01271215390RDD

AS ‐ 5 

AS ‐ 6 

AS ‐ 7 

AS ‐ 8 

AS ‐ 9 

AS ‐ 10 

from the long term parking to the terminal. At the greatest demand, Table 1.1 

70% of the parking will be surface parking and because of the lack of walking 

access passengers would be required to use a shuttle system. Under the current 

proposal such a shuttle would be required to merge into the main traffic 

pattern adding to the congestion at the terminal. This additional congestion is 

undesirable 

2) The CUP is located in at least three locations within the assessment (Exhibit 

2-1 and 2-2, and Appendix B). No rationale is presented in terms of the 

locations. Of the locations shown none appear to be appropriate though 

perhaps as shown in Appendix B is the most reasonable location. If there is a 

preferred location it should be noted with the rational behind the location. 

3) The rental car return (RAC) appears to be between the parking structure and 

the terminal. The rental car return should be to the south of the parking 

structure. Moving it to the south would remove traffic going to the terminal. If 

it is planned to be south of the parking structure it is not clear. 

4) Roads needs to be demarcated, it would appear that roads will be constructed 

between the QTA and parking structure. They are not demarcated. If no roads 

are being proposed why are helical exit/entrances located to the south of the 

parking structure? 

5) All roads lead to the terminal which is not a good solution as it begets 

congestion. The number of vehicles going to the terminal should be 

minimized thus reducing congestion. For instance, there is no need for rental 

cars to be in proximity to the terminal. They should exit and return south of 

the parking structure. A traffic study should be part of the environmental 

assessment. 

All in all I find the preferred alternative to be lacking in details, rationale, and over all a 

poor configuration and thus does not merit serious consideration. 

Please find attached a proposed plan that would place both the QTA and CUP to the west 

of the parking structure. Such a design would do the following: 

1) Move the parking structure to the east, while locating the QTA and CUP to 

the west of the parking structure which would better utilize the foreground 

land next to the terminal while allowing for expansion to the south. 

2) Add a roadway between the parking structure and the long term parking. This 

road way could support one way or two way traffic. Two way traffic would 

allow recirculation without having to go around the long term parking but 

would require traffic signals. 

3) Move the Rental Agency Center (RAC) to within the parking structure. This 

would reduce the footprint between the parking structure and terminal thus 

reducing the amount of covered area needed. 

4) Move rental car exit/return to the south of the parking structure removing 

congestion around the terminal. 

RDD/122330004 (NLH4768.DOCX) 3 

TBG01271215390RDD

AS ‐ 11 

AS ‐ 12 

AS ‐ 13 

5) All public vehicle access to the parking structure would be to the east of the 

parking structure removing congestion from between the parking structure and 

terminal. 

6) Access to the QTA from the parking would be dedicated and avoid crossing 

any public road ways. 

7) Access from the long term parking to the terminal for those walking or using a 

shuttle bus would through the parking structure via underground tunnel. Thus 

shuttle busses would never leave the long term parking lot and not impact 

traffic at the terminal. 

8) If expansion is desired for the parking structure, QTA, or CUP it could be to 

the south. Such expansion would require a road realignment for the QTA and 

CUP. 

The above proposed layout is attached for review. In addition, a proposed expansion of 

the layout is also attached for review. 

Another alternative configuration would be to move the car rental facilities off site or to 

the south and utilized a common shuttle. These configurations have there own pros and 

cons, most notable getting passengers to the terminal. These are major configuration 

differences that will have long term impact. Such configurations and details should be 

part of the Environmental Assessment. 

There are no comparisons to existing airports that have gone through a similar terminal 

design. Such configurations should be part of the Environmental Assessment so to give a 

broad range of ideas that could be considered. As such, the Environmental Assessment in 

its current form lacks a full range of configurations that should be considered. The 

comparison to a “No action” or other configurations listed in 3.1 does not meet the 

purposed and need in terms of the Airport Layout Plan approval. 

Some specific comments regarding Section 2. 

2.1.2 Level 1 - would be international baggage claim. However, there is no discussion of 

immigration/customs controls. It should be noted that international passengers could be 

either connecting to another flight or exiting the airport. Passengers connecting from 

international flights would be redirected through security screening back into the main 

terminal while those exiting should be able to freely leave the terminal without any 

additional security screening. 

Reference to “TSA security checkpoints” should be “security checkpoints”. While the 

TSA currently is responsible for “security” private operations are permitted and could be 

used in the future. Thus a generic term should be utilized. 

2.1.3 - “A new customer service building containing rental car customer service counters 

and office space would be located on the ground floor of a separate building on the north 

side of and immediately adjacent to the parking garage.” This building should be 

incorporated into the parking structure. 

4 RDD/122330004 (NLH4768.DOCX) 

TBG01271215390RDD

AS ‐ 14 

AS ‐ 15 

“Rental car employees would move the returned vehicles from the first level of the 

parking garage to the QTA facility, where the cars would be fueled and washed.” As 

noted, other configurations for the QTA need to be proposed and evaluated. 

2.1.4 Roadways – No alternatives to traffic flow configurations have been provided. 

Roadways are not adequately defined/demarcated on drawings – for instance 

entrance/exit to the south side of the parking structure is not clear. 

2.1.4.1 and 2.1.4.2 Should commercial vehicles have terminal curbside access or should 

private vehicles? I.e. the number of pedestrians crossing traffic should be assessed, as 

well as other safety issues such as the span between the terminal and parking structure. 

2.1.4.3 Entrance / exit via exterior helical ramps versus interior ramps should be assessed. 

Exterior helical ramps are speed limited and nauseating especially when used for entrance 

and exit points. Other configurations should be explored such as interior ramp 

configurations which are not as limiting – especially during the winter when snow/ice 

affect exterior ramps. 

“Vehicles would enter the garage from the east and exit the garage to the west.” There is 

no supporting infrastructure (roads) shown in any detail only the helical ramps which are 

on the south side of the parking structure are shown. 

2.1.5 Central Utility Plant – no assessment of having the plant to the east of the parking 

structure making it closer to the terminal thus reducing the run distance and energy. 

Further could the CUP be built into the terminal? 

2.1.6 Light Rail Station – “The Proposed Action would reserve a suitable location 

adjacent to the QTA and parking garage facility for the future relocated light rail station.” 

This statement makes no sense as it would appear the station would be to the south of the 

parking structure. The station should be to the north of the parking structure with easy 

access to the terminal. I.e. should come at Level 2 of the parking structure to access the 

sky bridge to the terminal which is mentioned in other sections of the Environmental 

Assessment. 

Finally I must make the following observation in terms of the phased construction, 

Appendix B. After the main terminal is completed, it would seem more prudent that the 

North Concourse be built rather than renovating the existing concourses. For instance, the 

building of the western part of the North Concourse could be done in such a manner that 

the first third could be completed before Concourse D is closed and demolished. Once 

completed and opened work could continue to the east, closing Concourse C in a similar 

fashion. And once the eastern part of the North Concourse is completed, Concourse B 

and A are closed. At that point the airport construction would be complete and meet 

needs far into the future. Such evaluation should be included in the assessment. 

This concludes my comments regarding the Environmental Assessment. Again I reiterate 

that the current “Preferred Alternative” in Section 2 lacks details needed for a complete 

environmental assessment. Further, the alternative is presented without comparison to 

any other reasonable alternatives. And finally the alternative with respect to the layout of 

the parking structure, QTA, and CUP lacks merit. 

RDD/122330004 (NLH4768.DOCX) 5 

TBG01271215390RDD

AS ‐ 16 

As such, I do believe the environmental assessment is complete and cannot be approved 

in its current form. Thank you once again for the opportunity to comment. 

If you have any questions please feel free to contact me. 

Sincerely, 

Allen Sanderson 

cc: Kevin Robins, Allen McCandless, Maureen Riley 

6 RDD/122330004 (NLH4768.DOCX) 

TBG01271215390RDD

RDD/122330004 (NLH4768.DOCX) 7 

TBG01271215390RDD

8 RDD/122330004 (NLH4768.DOCX) 

TBG01271215390RDD

COMMENTS AND RESPONSES REGARDING THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 

Response to Comments by Allen Sanderson 

AS-1 Only One Alternative Considered 

The FAA has established policies for the range of alternatives that should be evaluated in an 

EA or EIS. FAA Order 5050.4B, paragraph 706 d.(5) states: 

If there are no unresolved conflicts concerning alternative uses of available resources, the 

range of alternatives may be limited to the no action and proposed action alternatives… 

(a) Unresolved conflicts may exist between the project proponent and those wishing to 

use affected environmental resources for non-airport purposes. Typically, an unresolved 

conflict exists when an airport development project concerns involves one or more special 

purpose law (see paragraph 9.t). Each reasonable alternative description should contain 

only that information needed to explain it to someone unfamiliar with airport planning 

or operations and documentation to support it. An example of an unresolved conflict 

would be when an airport sponsor proposes locating a runway in a wetland, while a 

project opponent states the same wetland is valuable for flood retention. 

(b) In addition to the unresolved conflicts noted in paragraph 706.d.(5)(a), an EA’s range 

of reasonable alternatives may expand after considering: 

1. The proposed action’s complexity. 

2. The variety of expected environmental impacts. or 

3. Agency experience in dealing with the action’s expected environmental issues. 

(c) As the nation’s Federal agency responsible for airport actions, FAA can help the 

airport sponsor develop reasonable alternatives. ARP suggests that airport sponsors or 

their consultants discuss alternatives with the responsible FAA official in the regional or 

district Airports office. 

In sum, FAA Order 5050.4B states that, in the absence of unresolved conflicts, it is 

appropriate to limit the consideration of alternatives to the Proposed Action and the No 

Action alternatives as was done in the EA. This direction is consistent with CEQ Regulations 

regarding the purpose of an EA and the advice from FAA staff. The analyses documented in 

this EA conclude that implementation of the project as proposed by the Salt Lake City 

Department of Airports (SLCDA) would not result in unresolved conflicts as described in 

FAA Order 5050.4B, paragraph 706 d.(5)(a). Consistent with paragraph 706 d.(5) of the 

Order, the development proposed by the SLCDA is designated the “Proposed Action 

Alternative” in this EA. 

AS-2 The Alternatives in Section 3 Are Not Relevant 

The alternatives analysis presented in Section 3 show the wide range of on- and off-airport 

alternatives that might be considered by the FAA and/or others to meet the purpose and 

need for the proposed action would be infeasible and/or would entail substantially greater 

environmental and social disruption compared to the alternative of redeveloping the 

terminal complex in approximately the same location. In addition, this section briefly 

reviews the range of on-Airport terminal configuration alternatives to as well as those that 

RDD/122330004 (NLH4768.DOCX) 9 

TBG01271215390RDD


have been considered by the SLCDA within the confines of the existing terminal area. These 

examples show that, regardless of the configuration proposed, the environmental 

consequences of terminal development in this area would be essentially identical. These 

demonstrations, together with the lack of potentially significant impacts (unresolved 

consequences) in the EA, support limiting detailed consideration of alternatives to the 

Proposed Action and the No Action Alternative. 

AS-3 All Feasible Alternatives Must Be Fully Evaluated 

As described above in the response to AS.1, it was appropriate to limit the range of 

alternatives considered in detail in the EA to the Proposed Action and the No Action 

alternatives after screening a wider range of potential alternatives. 

AS-4 Proposed Layout Lacks Detailed Rationale 

Consistent with CEQ Regulations, the purpose of an EA is to determine whether the FAA 

should prepare an EIS or issue a FONSI in response to development proposed by the airport 

sponsor. An EA is not an airport planning document and, because airport improvements are 

dependent upon the initiatives of individual airport sponsors, the FAA gives special 

consideration to the proposals of the airport sponsor. The airport sponsor, in this case the 

SLCDA, has exercised its responsibilities in preparing planning studies supporting the 

proposed TRP. Those studies, which are incorporated in the EA by reference (see Chapter 8 

of the EA), support the analyses in this EA demonstrating that the proposed improvements 

would reduce congestion and delay, enhance efficiency, and otherwise meet the needs 

identified in the Statement of Purpose and Need and are sufficient to enable the FAA to 

determine if and EIS or a FONSI is appropriate. 

AS-5 Different Locations Shown for Central Utility Plant (CUP) 

Exhibit 2-1, Proposed Action, shows the CUP in the proper location. Exhibit 2-2, Airport 

Layout Plan (ALP), Terminal Area, shows the CUP location as it is reflected in the currently 

approved ALP. The ALP will be revised to reflect the new location of the CUP but 

Exhibit 2-2 correctly shows the CUP at the previously planned site, consistent with the ALP. 

Appendix B also shows the previously planned CUP site as it was used to develop 

construction phasing plans. Subsequent planning concluded that the previously planned 

CUP site might pose a line of sight conflict with the airport traffic control tower and it was 

subsequently relocated. The relocated CUP site is reflected in Chapter 2 of the EA, Proposed 

Action, but the earlier site is correctly shown to represent the currently approved ALP and 

the assumptions reflected in earlier planning studies. 

AS-6 Location of Rental Car Return (RAC) 

The SLCDA and their terminal architect have determined that the location of the rent a car 

(RAC) counters shown on the north side of the parking garage in Exhibit 2-1 would be most 

convenient for arriving passengers to pick up cars and for passengers dropping off cars to 

then access the terminal. 

AS-7 Roads Need to Be Demarcated (shown on the graphic) 

The SLCDA and its terminal architect are continuing to refine the service roadways between 

the parking garage and the Quick Turn Around (QTA) facility. These roads would be built 

10 RDD/122330004 (NLH4768.DOCX) 

TBG01271215390RDD


on existing paved areas and the locations of these roads within this narrow corridor would 

not alter the environmental consequences of the proposed development. 

AS-8 Concentration of Roads at the Terminal 

The SLCDA and their terminal architect have determined that the roadway system and the 

location of parking garage and RAC facilities best meet the needs of the traveling public. 

The access roads have been designed to accommodate the various users. The roadway 

simulation analyses presented in Appendix D demonstrate that the proposed roadway 

system and terminal layout will provide substantially improved levels of service on all 

roadway segments compared to the No Action Alternative. 

AS-9 Alternatives Lacking in Detail 

As noted in response to AS.4, the analysis presented in the EA is intended to enable the FAA 

to determine if it should prepare an EIS or issue a FONSI in response to development 

proposed by the airport sponsor. As noted above, an EA is intended to disclose potentially 

adverse environmental impacts of the proposed development; it does not replace or revise 

the SLCDA’s planning process. The analyses in this EA are based on SLCDA planning 

studies incorporated in the EA by reference as listed in Chapter 8. These analyses conclude 

that the project as proposed by the SLCDA would not entail significant adverse impacts to 

the environmental resources identified in FAA NEPA implementing orders. 

AS-10 Alternative Plan Proposed 

The SLCDA and their terminal architect have developed the proposed action balancing the 

needs of users and tenants with considerations of efficiency and capital costs. Consistent 

with CEQ Regulations, the purpose of this EA is to assess the potential environmental 

impacts of the sponsor’s proposed development program, not to redesign the sponsor’s 

proposal. The analyses documented in this EA demonstrate that the proposed TRP would 

not cause significant adverse effects to any of the environmental resources identified in FAA 

environmental guidance documents. 

AS-11 Suggested Relocation of Rental Car Facilities 

As noted above, the purpose of this EA is to assess the potential environmental impacts of 

the sponsor’s proposed development program, not to redesign the sponsor’s proposal. The 

analyses documented in this EA demonstrate that the proposed TRP would not cause 

significant adverse effects to any of the environmental resources identified in FAA 

environmental guidance documents. 

AS-12 No Comparison to Other Airports 

The evaluation of alternatives in Chapter 3 identifies a range of development and nondevelopment 

concepts to meet the needs identified in the statement of purpose and need to 

determine if any alternatives meeting these needs would avoid or minimize adverse impacts 

to the environment. In the absence of potentially significant impact due to implementation 

of the SLCDA’s proposed TRP, the EA limited detailed consideration to the sponsor’s 

proposed TRP, the Proposed Action, and the No Action Alternative. As noted in response to 

AS.9, this EA does not replace or revise the sponsor’s planning efforts, which are 

incorporated in the EA by reference (see Chapter 8 of the EA). 

RDD/122330004 (NLH4768.DOCX) 11 

TBG01271215390RDD


AS-13 Specific Comments on Section 2 

As noted in response to AS.9, the purpose of this EA is to enable the FAA to determine if it 

should prepare an EIS or issue a FONSI in response to development proposed by the airport 

sponsor; it does not replace or revise the SLCDA’s planning process. The analyses in this EA 

are based on SLCDA planning studies incorporated in the EA by reference as listed in 

Chapter 8. These analyses conclude that the project as proposed by the SLCDA would not 

entail significant adverse impacts to the environmental resources identified in FAA NEPA 

implementing orders. 

AS-14 Comments on Phased Construction 

The suggested construction of the North Concourse in lieu of renovation of the existing 

concourses has been considered. The proposed phasing is based in part on the need to 

minimize capital costs. As noted in response to AS.9 and subsequent comments, the purpose 

of this EA is to enable the FAA to determine if it should prepare an EIS or issue a FONSI in 

response to development proposed by the airport sponsor; it does not replace or revise the 

SLCDA’s planning process. 

AS-15 Section 2 Lacks Sufficient Detail for Assessment 

The Proposed Action described in Chapter 2, as augmented by the information in 

Appendix B, Terminal Area Configuration and Construction Activities, and Appendix D, 

Air Quality (including airfield and landside simulation analyses) provide the FAA with the 

information needed to determine the environmental consequences of implementing the 

Proposed Action. These sources describe the physical development and operational 

characteristics of the proposed TRP compared to the No Action Alternative. The analyses 

based on these descriptions enable the FAA to meet its requirements under NEPA by 

determining if implementation of the Proposed Action would cause significant adverse 

impacts to the environment and would therefore require preparation of an EIS. 

AS-16 EA Is Not Complete and Cannot Be Approved In Its Current Form 

This EA is consistent with FAA orders implementing NEPA with respect to format and 

content. The information provided in the EA provides sufficient information for the FAA as 

the lead Federal agency to determine if it should prepare an EIS or a FONSI in response to 

the sponsor’s proposed development. The analyses documented in this EA demonstrate that 

the implementation of the proposed TRP would not cause significant adverse impacts to the 

environment. 

12 RDD/122330004 (NLH4768.DOCX) 

TBG01271215390RDD


Response to Comments by Salt Lake County Engineering and 

Flood Control Division 

After implementation of the Proposed Action, all discharges will continue to conform to 

existing permit requirements. If unforeseen developments indicate that such discharges 

would no longer conform to these requirements, the necessary permit modifications would 

be obtained, in consultation with the applicable agencies. 

14 RDD/122330004 (NLH4768.DOCX) 

TBG01271215390RDD


Response to Comments by U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 

Sacramento District 

The FAA and SLCDA recognize that, although the Proposed Action does not affect waters 

of the U.S., other laws may apply. Other federal, state, and local regulatory agencies were 

contacted in scoping and also received copies of the Draft EA. The SLCDA will continue to 

coordinate with other agencies as appropriate. 

18 RDD/122330004 (NLH4768.DOCX) 

TBG01271215390RDD

Salt Lake City International Airport Terminal Redevelopment ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?