HomeMy WebLinkAboutLog030
'MB
Myers
Biodynamics inc.
~ geotechnical engineering. geological sciences .. coastal processes
GEOTECHNICAL REPORT
Beckett Point
Community Wastewater
Treatment Area
Jefferson County, Washington
Mr. James Hasslinger, P.E.
Mr. Michael Moren, P .E.
Parametrix, Inc.
5700 KitsapWay, Suite 202'
Bremerton, Washington 98312~2234
Prepared for:
Prepared by:
Myers Biodynamics, Inc~
Rolling Bay Building
11254 Sunrise Drive
Bainbridge Island, Washington 98110
May 10, 2005
Project No. 041136-5
30
t 5J...
ROLLING BAY BUILDING . 11254 SUNRISE DRIVE BAINBRIDGE ISLAND, WASHINGTON 98110 . 206.842!6073
Table of Contents
Section
Page No.
1. 0 INTRODUCTION.... ...'........ ....... .............. .......... ........ ....,.... ............. ........... ...:..1
,
2.0 SITE AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION........................................................... 1
-
3 .0 INFORMATION REVIEW............. .... ...... .... ...... ......... ..'... ........................... ..~2
4.0 QEO LOGI C SETTING. ......... ..............'.. ... .... ........ .............................................2
4.1., SoiL........ ...... ........ .,. ..~... .......... ..... .... ...'.... ......... ........ ..... .................. ...... ...:. .;3
,
4.2 Groundwater. .......... ....... ..... ........ .............. ... .......... ........ ................. ............3
I
5.0 SITE REC01';lNAISSANCE ..........................................................................:..4
5 .1 Topography.. ... .... .......... ..... ...... ....... ...... ...... ... ..... ..:........................ .-............4
5 .2 ,Vegetation....................... ......:..................................................;.................... 4'
5.3 Drainag~........................................................................................... ~............5
5.4 Soil Exposures and Groundwater Evidence...;.............................................5
6.0 GENERALIZED SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS AND LABORATORY'
TEST RESULTS .......... ......... .......;-. ............ ....... ...... .......: ....... ..........................6
6.1 Test Pit Explorations ..................................................................................6 '-
,
,6.2 Laboratory Testing. ............. ............... ..... .............. ....... ............................ ...6 .
7:0 HYDRAULIC LOADING RATES FOR ON-SITE SOILS....................;.......7
. I
8.0 WATER BUDGET AND GROUNDWATER NITRATE' LOADS...............8
8.1 W aterBudget Assessment.... ............ ........ ........... ............ ................ ..........8
8.2 Nitrate in the Environment.......................................................................11.
9.0 QUANlIFICATION OF NITRATE IN GROUNDWATER..........:...........12
10.0 CLOSURE.. ..... .... .... ..... ....... ... .......... ~ ..... .... ................ .... ................ ....... ...... ..1,5
Geotechnical Report
Beckett Point Community WWT
Jefferson County, Washington
I -
11.0 REFERENCES.. ... ............ ... ...u....:~....~...................w....,'..'.'....;:;'....'i....,;;............. ... ... .....16.
I r') ,.~, K~JlS ~'~. \'2_~~,',. \
11r-,{ \ ,DE cl i H t--
\ u li~c 2 7 2005 \ U i Pmj'" ,::",o:tJtJo~
, JEFFfFS'Of,;r.'(~G\;y.~<-'" . Myers Biodynamics, lnc,
,JEPT. OF
30
.5d-.
FIGURES:
Figure'} - Vicinity Map and Site Plan
Figure 2 - Proposed Treatment Area Exploration Plan
Figure 3 - Well Location Plan
APPENDICES: .
Appendix A - Field Exploration Program
Appendix B - Laboratory Testing
;
Appendix,c - Wat~r Well Logs
'.
3D
3 ~
Geotechnical Report -
Beckett Point Community WWT
Jeffirson County, Washington
- ii -
Project No. 04Jl36-5
May 10, 2005
Myers. Biodynamics. Inc.
1.0 Introduction
This report presents the results of site soil investigations for a large on-site wastewater
treatment system proposed for the Beckett Point Community in Jefferson County,
Washington. Our work was conducted in general accordance with out agreement dated
October 4, 2004. The scope of our work included information review, -site rec()nnaissallce,
test pit explorations, laboratory testing of selected sQilsamples, and preparation of this
report. The purpose of our work was to provide descriptions of the near-surface soil
conditions and applicable United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) soil
classifications for the proposed wastewater: treatment system design. In addition, evaluation
of potential impacts from the treatment system to local groundwater conditions including
"water balance" and "nitrate balance" analyses were included in the scope of our work.
2.0 Site and Project De~cription
The'Beckett Point Community is located southwest of Port Townsend in Jefferson County,
Washington. The Beckett Point Community includes existmg residences and undeveloped
lots located along the shoreline of Beckett Point and on the slope immediately above the
Point. The Community also owns undeveloped, forested property northeast of the Point. The
general configuration of Beckett Point and the proposed wastewater treatment area are shown
on the Vicinity Map and Site Plan, Figure 1.
The proposed location for the community wastewater treatment system is northeast of
Beckett Point within the forested, undeveloped property owned by the Community. The; i
forested area totals approximately 30 acres and isbo11nded on the north by Hill Crest A ve~'i=:::
and Beckett Point Road. Adjacent property borders the east side of the forested area and tli~L}j I
steep c~astal slope that descends to the Point is located seyeral hundred feet to the south ~~';") I
west. The Proposed Treatment Area Exploration Plan, Figure 2, shows the treatment area lrt" . I
more detail. ,
- , I
I '. I
We understand that the proposed community wastewater treatment system is being designd,d:";;?) I.
in accordance with the W ~hington State Department of Health tlDesign Standards for Lar~~D
On-;site Sewage Systems with Design Flows of Greater Than 3,500 Gallons Per Day" I /,.:,~,l:.::;,.~:.::::n
. (WSDOH 1993). The proposed system will replace existing individual systems located ani; L,.,.J;.~..,,,,:
I '-'.~'~-- -...,,"
the residential lots, which, generally do not conform to current Health Department standards: ",,- -,""
The new system will also. account for buildout of some of the remaining undeveloped lots for
a total of 102 residential hook-ups. . ,
The new community system will collect wastewater in a sewerage system along Beckett
Point Road and View Point Lane. Collected wastewater will be pumped up the coastal slope
along existing roads/driveways to a pressure distribution treatment area. The current
wastewater treatment area design layoufwill cover approximately 5 acres of the total 30-acre
Geotechnical Report
Beckeit Point Community WWT
Jefferson County, Washington
1 of 17
Project No. 041136-5
MayJO; 2005
Myers Biodynamics. 1nc.
30
L\ 5lf.
forested area northeast of the Point. Existing forest within the 5-acre treatment area will be
cleared and limited grading will be required. for system construction. The treatment area will
be located on the northeast comer of the property as shown on Figures 1 and 2. A more
detailed description of the treatment area and surrounding community property is presented
below in section 5.0 Site Reconnaissance. .
3.0 Information Review
Reference information for the area was reviewed as apart of our work and included soil and
geologic mapping, water supply information, and water well Jogs.' The general reference
infoimatio~ is presented below. A sunimary~ofsoil and groundwater information obtained
- from the information review is summarized in Section 4.0 Geologic Setting.
~ Geology and Groundwater Resources of Eastern Jefferson County , Washington;
Water Supply Bulletin (WSB) No. 54, April 1981.
)> State of Washington Department of Ecology (DOE). Coastal Zone Atlas, Volume 11,
Jefferson County, July 1978.
)> Washington State Department of Ecology Well Logs website:
,http://apps.ecy.wa.gov/welllog/index.asp . ,
)> U.S. Department of Agriculture Soil ConserVation Service, Soil Survey of Jefferson
County Area, Washington, 1975.
)> Eastern Jefferson County Groundwater Characterization Study, prepared for Public
Utility Di~trict No.1 of Jefferson County, by Economic and Engineering Services,
Inc. and,Pacific Groundwater Group, May 1994.
. .
)> Stage 1 Technical Assessment as of February 2000, Water Resource Inventory Are~.
(WRIA) 17, by Parametrix, Inc., Pacific Groundwater Group, hie., Montgomery
Water Group, Inc., and Caldwell and Associates, Inc., October 2000.
)> Selected Analytical Test Results for Local Quimper Sub-basin Drinking Water Wel~~
Susan Porto, R.S., Jefferson County Health Department, 2004-2005. . . .
"
i
. ~
\
\
I
ell
...
,.
~:J
'4,0 Geologic Setting
A summary of local soil and groundwater conditions is presented below. The summary is
based on the information review presented above. Site specific observations and subsUrfaceL
explorations are presented in later sections 'of the report.
30
5' 5~
Geotechnical Report
Beckett Point Community WWT
Jeffirson County. Washington
2 of 17
Project No. 041136-5
May 10, 2005
Myers Biodynamics. 1nc,
4.1 Soil
-
Geologic mapping generally indicates the local area northeast of the project site is capped by
glacial till. Glacial till is composed ofa mixture of gravel, sand, silt, and clay that was
deposited and overridden by the most recent glacial advance (Vashon Stage of the Frazier
Glacier) that covered the area. Glacial advance outwash is mapped below the glaciid till
across much of the project site and along the steep coastal slope above the Point. Glacial
advance outwash soils are generally composed of sand or sand and gravel that have been
deposited by melt waters of the advancing glacier and subsequently overridden, by the glacial
ice. Both the outwash and glacial till soils are generally in a very dense or hard condition
. below the surface soil horizon due to consolidation by glacial ice. Southeast of the Point,
, mapping also shows interglacial deposits below the advance outwash that can include sand
and gravel, silt, or clay soils, which are also in a very dense or hard condition below the
surface soil horizon. The Point is mapped as recent, post glacial deposits including loose
sand and gravel beach deposits along the shoreline and soft organic soils associated with a
lagoonlocated on the interior of the Point as shown on Figure 1.
Soil Survey reference mapping indicates the proposed treatment area'ismapped as Cassolary
Sandy Loam, 15 to 30 percent (CfD) with the Point mapped as Tidal Marsh (Td) and Coastal
Beaches (Co). Coastal zone atla,s mapping shows the steep coastal slope in the Beckett Point
Community as "Unstable" with areas of "Unstable Old Slide" and "Unstable Recent Slide"
identified northeast and southeast of the Point and local comm':1Ility. The proposed treatment
area above the steep slope is described as "Stable" with reSpect to slope stability.
4.2 Groundwater r"
\
Water well logs were obtained from a Washington State Department of Ecology (DOE) , \
website and reviewed to help evaluate the subsurface conditions within the local m:ea. Well~"; ..1\
were identified north? northeast, and southeast of the project site. The Well Location Plan, \ ':;;..
Figure 3, shows the approximate location of well logs in the area based on DOE informati01!~""5) \
The two closest well logs, designated WWI and WW2 for the purposes of this report, are 1 \
attached as Figures C-I and C-2 in Appendix C. W ell logs show a likely cap of glacial till
(sand; gravel, and clay) ~derlain by sandor sand and gravel with chiy layers of significant
thickness. Static water levels reported on the well logs were typically more than 170 feet
below grade at the well locations with the closest well logs (WWl and WW2)indicating a
static water level of approximately 230 feet below grade.
The Jefferson CountY PUD No.1 was also contacted for additional information regarding
water supply wells in the local area. No current water wells or associated well logs were
identified on the project site. All potable water is reportedly provided by the PUD No. 1
system that obtains its water from the Quilcene River located more than 15 miles south of the
project site.
The lack of local water wells precludes a determination of site specific groundwater gradient
, or flow direction. However, the Groundwater Resource of East Jefferson County reference
shows an estimated grOtmdwater flow direction generally following local topography,
Geotechnical Report
Beckett Point Community WWT
Jeffirson County, Washington
3 of /7
Project No. 04 J/36-5
, May 10, 2005
, Myers Biodynamics, Inc,
~O
r-
C"-J
5'~
, flowing northwest, west and southwest of the proposed treatment area. The groundwater
flow direction is oriented opposite (away from) the identified wells in the area. .
5.0 Site Reconnaissance'
I
Site conditions were evaluated by conducting a reconnaissance of the proposed wastewater
treatment and surrounding local area at various dates from October 2004 through March
2005. Site and local conditions including topography, vegetation, surface drainage, and soil
exposures and groundwater evidence are preseJ;lted below. Subsurface conditions.in the
proposed treatment area were also investigated by conducting test pit explorations across the
site at locations shown on Figure 2. A description of the subsurface conditio_ns observed in
the explorations is prese!lted in Section 6.0.
5.1 Topography
Topography in the proposed treatment area generally slopes down to the north and northwest,
as shown on Figure 2. The treatment area elevations drop from a maximum of approximately'
380 feet on the southwest side of the site to approximately 290 feet on the north side of the
site. Average site grades range from 10 to 25 percent with locally steeper areas of 30
percent. One area of approximately 40 percent slopes was observed, but this relatively steep
area is outside of the designated treatment system footprint. The site topography includes,
several shallow ravines that descend to the northwest. While not currently transmitting water..
(see Drainage Section below) these ravines likely reflect relic (prehistoric) drainage routesl {
The locally steeper areas of the site are generally associated with ravine side slopes. I\..' .
Beyond the proposed treatment area, local, grades slope down to the northwest, west, and
southwest towards the steep coastal slope. North of the Point, View Point Drive and
associated residences are located at th~ toe of the slope with a concrete bulkhead west of t1l~} .'
road along the shoreline. At the Point, the steep slope descends to the existing lagoon areaL~n.
On the ' east side ofthe Point, the steep slope descends to a cul-de-sac at the terminus of :'
Beckett Point Road. At this location several structures are present at the toe ofthe slope.:
East qf the Point, the steep slope descends to the Discovery Bay Shoreline. 'Coastal slope I
grades average 100 percent (45 degrees) above View Point Lane and associated residences!
The coastal slope is less steep at times above the Point and lagoon with grades of 70 to 100
percent (31 to 45 degrees), At the terminus of Beckett Point Road, the toe of.theslope wa~
, apparently excavated for the cul-de-sac creating a locally steeper segment 20 to 30 feet above
the road elevation with grades of45 to 50 degI:ees (100 to 119 percent).
5.2 Vegetation
The treatment area is heavily forested with an established canopy of deciduous and conifer
trees including Douglas fir, Western red cedar, hemlock, alder and big leaf maple: The
understory vegetation is moderate with woody shn;tbs and herbaceous groundcover including
. 'sword fern, salal, and Oregon grape. Clearing for primitive access rpads has occurred across
the site as shown on Figure,2.
Geotechnical Report
Beckett Point Community WWT
Jefferson County, Washington
4 of 17
3D
1
Project No. 041136-5
May 10. 2005
Myers Biodynamics. Inc.
5J-
Beyond the treatment area the forested condition continues downslope to the steep coastal
slope. The steep slope above View Crest Lane is well vegetated with established trees and
understory vegetation dominated by Douglas fir and madrona. Above the Point, areas of the
slope have been cleared (and historically graded) for residential hemes and Beckett Point
Road. Some established trees and understory vegetation remain with the residential areas.
On the slope above the lagoon vegetation is primarily grasses with occasional small trees.
Vegetation on the Point is dominated by grasses and herbac~ous groundcover.
5.3 Drainage
Topography within the proposed wastewater treatment area would generally direct any
surface water flow north and northwesttowards Beckett Point Road and Hillcrest Avenue.
However, no evidence of significant surface water runoff, erosion, or active drainage courses
was observed in the proposed wastewater treatment area. This includes no evidence of
surface water flowjnthe existing shallow ravines on the site. It appears the purrent site
conditions including soil and vegetative cover allow for infiltration and evapQ-transpir:;:t.tion
of incident prec}pitation on the site.
Local grades surrounding the wastewater treatment area generally direct surface water runoff
to the northwest into the Beckett Point Road draiIlage ditch. Elsewhere, surface gradients .~
direct surface water flow towards the steep coastal slopes northwest, west, and southwest of
the treatment area. Observation of the local area indicates no evidence of significant surfa~i....'"
- . " I'
water runoff or erosion. on the steep coastal slope. This includes a utility trench alignment i (".~~
excavated and backfilled down-the steep coastal slope. ' I
5.4 Soil Exposures and Groundwater Evidence
Due to vegetative cover in the proposed wastewater treatm~nt area, no significant soil I
exposures were observed on the site. Minor exposures along the primitive road system ' I
indicated primarily granular sand and gravel soils. No groundwatetseepage or evidence!91;
1 ""~-,..:...f
- seasonal day lighting groundwater was obserVed in the treatment system area. i
~ ,,;'
, i{
Soil exposures were observed.at various locations in the vicinity of the proposed treatment'::.:..-:::::.::::::;,
system. A local "gravel pit" is located off of Beckett Point Road and west of the treatment
area as shown on Figure 2. Open cuts with significant soil exposures are present in the
gravel pit with near-vertical exposures of interbedded gravelly sand, fine sand, and fine
sandy silt. No evidence of groundwater seepage or significant soil staining/mottling that
would indicate seasonal perched groundwater was observed on the gravel pit cut slope.
Soil exposures were limited on the steep coaStal slope due to vegetative cover. However, at
the terminus of Beckett Point Road a cul-de-sac was constructed by apparently cutting into
the toe of the slope. Above the cul-de-sac exposures of interbedded fine sand, silty fine sand
and gravelly sand were observed on the steep coastal slope.
No daylighting groundwater was observed on the steep coastal slope. In addition, above View
Point Lane and above the lagoon, slopes were well vegetated with species generally indicative
of free draining soil conditions. However, near the terminus of Beckett Point Road historic
I -~ .
Geotechnical Report
Beckett Point Community WWT
Jefferson County, Washington
,30
~
Project No. 041136-5
May 10,2005
Myers Biodynamics, Inc.
50117
trd-.
, structures at the toe of the 'slope were reportedly utilized as a "spring house" to coUect
groundwater at the toe of the slope. Some hydrophytic herbaceous vegetation was also
observed in this area. '
G.O Generalized ~ubsurface Conditions and Laboratory Test Results
Subsurfac,e conditions within the proposed treatment area were investigated by conducting _
test pit excavations across the site. Representative samples from the test pits were submitted
for grain size analyses to confirm soil classification. A description of the sllbsurfac~
conditions in the test pit explorations and laboratory testresults are presented below in
sections 6.1 and 6.2, respectively.
6.1 Test P~t Explorations
Eleven test pit explorations, TP-l through TP-ll, were excavated across the site on October
21, 2004. The approximate locations of the test pit explorations are shown on Figure 2.
Logs of the test pit explorations are presented in Appendix A on Figures A-I through A-II.
, along with a summary of the field exploration program. Test pits were excavated to depths
.of 7 to 10 feet below existjng site grade in order to observe soil conditions below the
elevation of potential future treatment system drainfields.
Previous site investigations were also conducted on the site by others. A total of eleven soil
log excavatio~s were performed on the site in 2001. Locations of the previouS soil logs (by
others) are also shown on Figure 2 as SL-1 through SL-11. Copies of the previous soil logs
generated by others are presented in Appendix A as Figure A-12, Sheets 1 through4.
Generalized subsurface conditions observed in the proposed wastewater treatment area are
presented below. Soil descriptions are based on both ASTM and USDA {in parenthesis) j
methodologies. In general, site test pit explorations indicate subsurface conditions consistent i
with the reference. mapping, w~lllog review, and reconnaissance of the area. Soils are :
composed of glacial advanced outwash consisting of gravelly slightly silty sand (USDA:,
gravelly ~and), fine sand (USDA:,fine sand and fine to medium sand), and gravelly sand L
(USDA: gravelly sand). In the maJority of the test pits shallow, near-surface zones of silty to
very silty sand (USDA: sandy loam) were present 1 to 2 feet below the existing ground
surface.
6.2 Laboratory Testing
Seven representative soil samples were selected for laboratory testing to determine grain size
distribution and provide confirmation of soil classification. The samples were selected to~
represent the range of soil types encountered within the p~oposed on-site wastewater
treatment area. The results of the laboratory testing are presented in Appendix B, Figures B-
1 through B-3. A summary of the laboratory test results is presented below in Table 1.
Geotechnical Report
Beckett Point Community WWT
Jefferson County, Washillgton
6 of 17
Project No. 041136-5
May 10, 2005
Myers Biodynamics, Inc.
5:J.-
"'",...
'P
w
.,_....-"1 ~
10
t.n 1~'iJ
c::> :2:'>
~ ' :-.5:::
~!.I~i
, Iffj~
lito
,.."......._.J ~'~
:1~~::C~~::~:;:Jl fu
L c;J
TABLE 1
Results of Laboratory Grain size Arialyses
Beckett Point Community Wastewater Treatment Area
Percent USDA Particle Size
Test Pit Sample Gravel Sand Siltand Clayl
No. No. Depth C M F USDA DescriPtion2
TP-2 8-1 12-18" 2 11 11 36 40 Sandy Loam
TP-2 S-3 .. 36-48" 23 27 38 10 2 Gravelly Fine to Coarse
SAND
TP-4 S-2 36-48" 24 26 30 17 3 Gravelly Fine to Coarse ' .
TP-5 S-2 42-48" 11 14 37 30 8 Fine to Coarse SAND
(dominated by Fine Sand)
TP-8 8-3 48-54" 6 - 8 26 51 9 Fine to Medium Sand
(dominated by Fine Sand)
TP-9 S-2 24-30" 11 8 17 40 24 Loamy Fine to Medium
SAND(dominated,by Fine S@d)
TP-ll S-2 48-54" 10" 15 '" 34 31 10 Fine toCoarse SAND
(dominated by Fine to Medium Sand)
,
Notes: 1. Coarse medium and fine sand, silt and clay size fraction based OR USDA criteria interpolated from grain
size Curves. ,
2. USDA description based on sand, silt and clay fraction. Clay percent estimated to be
less than 5 percent based on grain size curves.
7.0 Hydraulic loading Rates for On-Site Soils
Soil classification based on USDA methodology was utilized to determine the hydraulic loading
rate, for site-soils in accordan<;e with Washington State regulations governing on-site sewage
design (WAC .1995 and EPA 1980). Table 2 presents maximum hydraulic loading rates related
to USDA soil classifications and types as presented in WAC Chapter 246-272 for On-Site
Sewage Systems (WAC 1995). Based on'our field observations and the results oflaboratory
testing, soil within the proposed wastewater treatment area are generally Type 2 to Type 3 soils
with sand typically dominated by fine sand. Associated maximum hydraulic loading rates for
Type 2 and 3 soils range from 1.2 to 0.8 gallons per square foot per day (gal/ft2/day). Based on
the abundance of fine sand in many of the soU samples tested, a maximum loading rate of 0.8 '
gal/ft2/day is recommended for design. The loading rate recomme~dation is based on field
observations, test pit explorations, and laboratory testing of soils within the proposed wastewater
treatment area.
Geotechnical Report
Beckett Point Community WWT
Jefferson County, Washington
70ln
~
to
Project No. 041136-5
May 1 (f; 2005
Myers Biodynamics, Inc.
5~
TABLE 2
Maximum Hydraulic Loading Rate (WAC 1995 and WSDOH 1993)
Beckett Point Community Wastewater Treatment System
"
Loading Rate
Soil Type Soil Textural Classification Description gal/if/day
lA Very gravelly coarse sands or coarser, extremely gravelly soils Varies
IB Very gravelly medium sands, very gravelly fine sands, very. gravelly very Varies
fines sands, very gravelly loamy sands
2A Coarse sands (includes the ASTM C-33 sand) -.",' 1.2
2B Medium sands " 1.0
3 , Fine sands, loamy cOarse sands, loamy medium sands 0.8
4 Very fine sands, loamy fine sands, loamy very fine sands, sandy loams, 0.6 ,
loams
5 Silt lo~s that are porous and have a well developed structure 0.45
6 Other silt loams, sandy clay loams, clay loams, Silty clay loams 0.2
8.0 Water Budget and Groundwater Nitrate Loads
'An examination of a basin's water characteristics and specifically fa water budget can be used as
a general planning tool that predicts the pathways by which water enters, flows through, and -
leaves a watershed. It can provide a useful tool for developing long-term water quantity, water
quality, and lan<J use pla'nning strategies within a basin. Water budget analyses and related "
nitrate load projections, however, should not be rigorously used to assess the status of resource
availability because they do not allQw prediction of a system'sresponse to additional
withdrawals and short-term variations in resource characteristics.
8.1 Water Budget Assessment
A water budget is an assessment of the major components ,of a hydrologic system and includes
the interactions between surface water and groundwater systems. A preliminary assessment
provides an understanding of the magnitude of the recharge, selected discharge components, and
" contaminant loads to the water environment. At the project level, water balance analyses of a
proposed development also help pf<,wide initial guidance to resource managers, civil engineers
and planners in developmentpf.pro.jectwater,m~gep:le~strategies and constructed facilities.
. I/', L'. \~ He c ,..". .
I' l
I' r'~ ',",
';, H
I" l,
dl if
j~ u
Geotechnical Report
Beckett Point Community WWT
Jefferson County, Washington
30
II
s
8 of 17
ProjectlVo.041136-5
. May 10, 2005
Myers Biodynamics, Inc.
\'"
The water balance assessment for the project is based on the followin~ conservation of mass
principle: water entering a system equals water exiting a system (plus or minus any change in
. storage within the system). Under each set of site conditions in this evaluation, we assumed that
the change in water storage overJhe average water year is zero (extreme water years will result
jn variations in groundwater storage, however, the long-term condition of groundwater storage is
assumed to be a steady state system). As a steady state system, the water balance relationship is
the following:
Recharge = Discharge
\ Where:
Recharge (R) = Precipitation (P) + water import (I) - rejecJed recharge (RR)
Discharge (D) = Natural discharge (ND) + on-site extraction (EX)
Surface water runoffand shallow perched groundwater that migrates laterally and discharges
from topographIcally sloped areas is colleCtively designa'ted as' "rejected recharge." The term.
"r~ected rechargei! is used in WRIA 17 Water Resources Study (Parametrix et at. 2000) to
describe basin conditions ~long Jefferson County coastal slopes where some portion of the
groundwater often migrates laterally from zones of perched water conditions and discharges
from the slope as seepage, springs, confined drainage channels, and wetlands and is lost from the
groundwater regime. R~charge in the project area includes all water that infiltrates into the site
soils beyond the vegetation root zone and remai~s stored in the water-bearing geologic unit (non-
rejected).
Precipitation is the primary input to the analyses. Average annual rainfall for the Quimper
watershed sub-basin ranges from approximately 17,5 to 22.5 inches per year (Parametrix et al. .
2000). Water balance analyses for the project assumes an average annual precipitation of21.5\
inches per year. '
In 2000, a water resources study ofWRIA 17 (that includes eastern Jefferson County) reassessed
the status of groundwater characteristics in local watershed sub-:basins. The WRIA 17 study
expanded a prior study assessment of groundwater characteristics in eastern Jefferson County
(EEC et al. 1994). Recharge and "rejected runoff" rates were established for each sub-basin
through groundwater modeling. The estimated average annual recharge rate for the project area
sub-basin is 5.8 inches per year from precipitation baSed on the WRIA 17 study.
In addition to precipitation contributions to groundwater recharge, project recharge rates will
also be artificially augmented by the introduction of treated wastewater effluent into the near-
surface soil horizon of the 30 acre soil absorption set-aside area. The average wastewater load
for the receiving area based on the wastewater treatmynt engineering design is 7,250 gpd for 102
domestic hook-ups (Parametrix 2(05). Th~.p.r?j~ted~e~gnloa9-6q!J-ates to an additional' 3.25
inches per year applied over the 30 acre~rea, Ii, i:; ;j'l/ i;, .'. . '., \
\ . . -~,~_..."".__...............,--_."'..,-,....~....--,...-
Geotechnical Report ,
Beckett Point Communiiy WWT
Jefferson Couniy,Washington
j .;
1; ';';\
_ :,,1\ 0
I
. ;;\:p~. ~FJ~~Y~~~,:~~~:i50;':~1\-'~~_._,._.,.__j
,._-~-....,.-----"-_._~~- Project No. 041136-5
90f17 May 10,2005
Myers Biodynamics, Inc.
1", "'1
i
. ,:;:) V
......).
17"
5~
TABLE 3
Summary of Values
Initial Water Balance Assessment and Nitrogen Loading
I
WRIA pun Selected
Parameter 17 Study No. 1 Study Other Comments ~
2000 1994 Value
I
Precipitation (P), 17.5 - 21.5 represents average value
inches/year 22.5 21.5 - 21.5 selected in WRIA 17.Study,
Table 472
WWT Import (I), - 3.25 3.25 Based on 7,250 gpd applied within
inches/year 30 acre set-aside area
Groundwater Site-specific soil explorations
Recharge (R), 5.8 5 - 10 - " 5.8 confirm site "alluvial depOsits
incheslvear , without over-consolidated'materials
~ ,
Wastewater Load, . 1502 7,250 71 gallons/ 71 gpd/residence based on average
gpd/hook-up - gallons/ gallons/day hook-up/day annual design value for 102 hook-
- cap/day ups 00,250 gpd (Parametrix 2005)
On-site Extraction 0 No extraction proposed within
(EX),gpd - - - project area
I Part-time occupancy with no high
Total-N in raw 20 - 85
wastewater, mgIL mgIL 35 - 40 mgIL strength wastewater component at
each of the 102 hook-ups
Total-N removal
through septic \ 0.10 - 0.30 0.20 Assumed averiige value
tanks, (%) ,
,
Denitrification Single pass 'value for conventional,
selected on-site,
attached growth Ne~1. - 0.50 0.10 attached growth treatment within
WWT system, native soil with low organic
% ofNOj--N composition
,
Background
groundwater Assumed conservative value
Nitrate < 0.1 mgIL 0.1 mgIL derived from local 2004-2005 well
concentration, , test results
mg/L .1
I WWT= Wastewater Treatment System Design Hydraulic LoadJ7,250 gpd)
2 Value is an average daily USage factor typically applied in similar profiles
3'0
l3
5J.-
Geotechnical Report
Beckett Point Community WWT
Jefferson County, Washington
10 of 17
Project No. 041136-5
May 10. 2005
Myers Biodynamics. 'Inc.
~:;--::--'=--...--....--.
IL (f'\ fC Ii !jn ~--"--
k, ',VI H'" "; 'I';,' II~ ,I, !
t--"':':"- ~ .-:;: ~ilt'!i c:;:
I " (
I ' I
,
8.2 Nitrate in the Environn:lent
In healthy surface and near-surface groundwaters, nitrite is rapidly oxidized to nitrate as
shown below in The Nitrogen Cycle in the Environment. The nitrate is formed from the
nitrate or ammonium ions by microorganisms it} soil, water, sewage, and the human digestive
tra9t. In q.!1antities normally found in food orfeed, nitrates become toxic only under .
conditions in which they may be reduced to nitrites. 'The reaction of nitrite' with hemoglobin
is generally haz~dous in human infants under the age of 3 months. Nitrate as nitrogen (N03-
-N) should not exceed 10 mglL in a drinking water supply based on current regulatory
standards.
Transformation of the principal nitrogen compounds (Organic nitrogen, ammonia,
ammonium, nitrogen gas, nitrite, and nitrate) can occur through several key mechanisms in
the environment: fixation"ammonification, synthesis, nitrification, and denitrification (US
EPA 1993). Nitrogen fixation is the conversion of nitrogen gas into n*ogen compounds that
can be assimilated by plants. Biological fixation is the most corrimon, but fixation can also
occur' by lightning and through industrial processes. Ammonification is the biochemical
degradation of organic-N into NH3 or N~ + by heterotrophic bacteria under aerobic or
anaerobic conditions. Some organic-N cannot be degraded and becomes part of the hUmus in
- soils. Synthesis is the biochemical mechanism that converts N.H4 +.,.N or NO] --N into plant
protein (Organic-N). Nitrogen fjxation is a unique form of synthesis that can generally only
be performed by nitrogen-fixing bacteria and algae. Nitrpgen cycle processes in the
environment are schematically shown below. '
~
NO-
.
NH,I NH t, NO.
Organic N
------- --------- ---------
I
I Surface Soil
I
,
I
I
I
I
I
,
f'Gro';ndWat;- -- ,-- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --I
L_______________.____~___________________~_________~_______J
The Nitrogen Cycle in the Environment
GeotechnicUl Report
Beckett Point Community WwT
Jeffirson County, Washington
11 of 17
ProjectlVo.041136-5
May 10, 2005
Myers Biodynamics, 1nc.
:o-u
Ii'
.
S;J.-
Nitrification is the biological oxidation ofNI14+ to N03- through a two-step autotrophic
process by the, bacteria Nitrosomonas and Nitrobacter. The, two-step reactions a(~)1su~~Iyc~>c
very rapid and hence it is rare to find nitrite levels higher than 1.0 mg/L in water (Sawy~r,,~t ;;;:.:,;;,:
al. 1994). The nitrate forrtled by nitrification is available for plant use as a nitrogen source
(synthesis) or may alsobe reduced to N2 gas through the process of denitrification. Nitrate
can, however, contaminate groundwater if it is not used for synthesis or r~duced through
denitrification.
9.0 Quantification of Nitrate in Groundwater
,
Potential impacts to the existing groundwater regime were requested by the Jefferson County
Health Department to assess the general impacts of additional nitrate loads to groundwater
resources. In addition to a water budget analysis, an evaluation of the nitrate loading or
ItNitrat~ Balance" was conducted for the proposed wastewater treatment project. The
accumulation of nitrate in groundwater can be one of the most significant long-term
consequences of onsite wastewater disposal (Hantzshce and Finnemore 1992).
Nitrogen primarily exists as Organic-N and NH3=NINH4 +-N in septic tank effluent and is
usually transformed into nitrate as the ~astewater infiltrates through the soil column beneath
_ the system's soil absorption field. Nitrogen loading from high housing densities can
significantly exceed any potential plant uptake of nitrogen even, if the effluentwas properly
applied, a common problem in many communities and for many large treatment system
. applications (Gold andSims'2000; County of Butte 1998; Hahtzshc~ and Finnt':more 1992).
As a result of the potential for nitrate groundwater contamination generated from septic-
tank/soil absorption systems, public heath and w.:aterpollution control agencies have tried
either to limit the number of onsite systems in a given area by quantifying nitrogen loading~
(Hantzsche and Finnemore 1992), or to examine altemativeonsite technologies that provi~e
nitrogen.removal (Ayres Associates 1993; California Regional Water Qualify Control Board
1997; Whitmeyer et al. 1991). '
Nitrate impacts to the groundwater may be e~timated using a mass balance equation. The
Hantzsche-Finnemore mass balance equation estimates nitrate loads.to groundwater based on
measured factors of rainfall, groundwater recharge, septic system nitrogen loadings, and \
denitrification. . The equation takes the folloWing fopn:
nr = l.uw.(I-d) + R.nb
(I +R) .
where
nr final N03--N concentration in groundwater after mixing, mg/L
I = volume of wastewater entering the soil averaged over the gross developed area,
in/yr (m/yr) , .
nw = Total..N concentration of wastewater, mg/L
d. = fraction ofN03--N lost to denitrification
R = average recharge rate of rainfall, in/yr (m/yr) ,
nb = background NOJ.--N concentration without wastewater discharge, mg/L
Geotechnical Report
Beckett Point Community WWT
Jeffiirson County, Washington
b'O
IS
Project No, 041136-5
May 10, 2005
Myers Biodynamics, Inc.
12 of 17
5d-
. .
/1 j ,,/ tt.;..
f~"";~/.. ,....,'
I f,l) " "
'I \ i "
f II ,<
/.t., / f1
,,Ji,) .;tll
0' (fj
l
/
' ,^~, ~
A critical simplifYing assumption in the equation is that there is uniform and conil!le~~.~ng of
wastewatet and rainfall over the entire developed area and mixing is completed at the:'watet@~le
(Hantzsche and Finnemore 1992). The assumption has many limitations in critical analyses;:: . :;,
since complete mixing of wastewater and rainfall will never actually occur. Nevertheless,the'~'"
lIantsche-Finnemore equation has been used in long-term planning successfully as long as its'
limitations are recognized audthe parameters are carefully monitored and adjusted for changing
local conditions.
If the volume and Total-N concentration of wastewater applied over a development area can be
determined or estimated, along with the probable degree 9f denitrification of nitrate in the '
eI).vironment, then the resultant concentration of nitrate in groundwater can be calculated if
rainfall and recharge rates at the project area are known.
The removal rate of Total-N .within conventional residential septic tanks is typically 10 to 30
percent, With the majority being removed as particulate matter through sedimentation or flotation
processes. Because of the septic tank's anaerobic environment, nitrogen exists principally as
Organic-N and NH3-N/NH4 + -N (TKN). Organic-N is transformed to NH3-N/NH4 + -N via
ammonification; although some NH3-N/NH4 + -N is converted to Organic-N via bacterial cell
growth, there will be a net increase o(NH3-N/NH4 + -N in the effluent. Within the treatment area,
nitrogen can undergo several transformations within and below subsurface soil absorption,
trenches. These transformations include; 1) adsorption ofNR. +-N in the soil; 2) volitization of
NH3-N in alkaline soils at a pH above 8.0; 3) nitrification and subsequent movement ofN03"-N
t-owards the groundwater; 4) biological uptake of both NH3-NINH/-N and N03--N; and 5)
denitrification if the environmental conditions are,appropriate. The removal of nitrogen in the
on-site wastewater treatment process is shown schematically below.
..
TOTAl NITROGEN REMOVAL
..
NlTRFtcATION
..
IlEI<ITRIFICAllON
..
I
I
AEROBIC NOi -. N I. ANOXIC
PHASE I.' PHASE
I
SOil ABSORPTION TREATMENT
Nitrate Carbon
_ Nitrogen Removal Pr6cess inOn~Site Wastewate~ Systems
Within a properly designed and constructed subsurface absorption trench, diffusion of oxygen
into the vadose zone of the groundwater system promotes the biological oxidation ofNH. + -N to
N03--N thro~gh biological nitrification. Depending on soil moisture conditions and organic
'matter concentrations within the soil column, N03~-N can be reduced, under anoxic conditions,
to Nz gas through heterotrophic denitrification. . A carbon source is required f~r the
denitrification to occur. Although denitrification may be significant ins<;>me soils in many
instances there may not be sufficient organic substrate ata depth below the 'A' horizon to
V Geotechnical Report
Beckett P"oint Community WWT
Jefferson County, Washington
l~
ProjectlVo.041136-5
May 10. 2005
Myers Biodynamics. 1nc,
13 of 17
5d-
promote denitrification (Ayres Associates 1993). Under these conditions, N03--N can migrate
downward into the groundwater aquifer, depending on soil moisture conditions (saturated or
unsaturatedflow). The historical practice of constructing relatively deep subsurface soil
absorption trenches (2 to 4 ft.) for septic tank effluents may also often have the effect of helping
diminish denitrification potential and the enhancement ofN03--N movement in the soil column.
Plant uptake ofNH4+-N and N03--N could also be a potential removal mechanism for subsurface
absorption systems if trench designs were changed to shallow trenches within the proximity of ,
root systems.
Many wells (364) were analyzed for nitrate concentrations within the WRIA 17 study area.
Nitrate concentrations measured in WRIA 17 groundwaters are predominately within the natural
"background" concentrations (82 percent) or are only slightly elevated from background
concentrations (10 percent). The remaining wells showing elevated nitrate concentrations are
typically distributed in a "spotty" fashion with no discernable geographic pattern. Among allof
the sub-basins, the occurrence of elevated nitrate is most notably. apparent in th~ Indian-
Marrowstone, Chimacum, Dabob- Thorndyke" and Little Quilcene sub-basins followed by the
Quimper and Lublow sub-basins. Recent 2004-2005 analytical test results from wells in
proximity to the site identified in the Jefferson County Health Department,records appear to
show (when records are available) nitrate levels below the analytical test detection limit of 0.1
mgIL (Susan Porto; R.S. 2005). The maximum allowaple contaminant level for nitrate as ,
nitrogen in drinking w~ter is .1 0 mg/L.
Application of the nitrate loading mass/balance equation to the project using parameters
identified in Table 3 yields a projected final ni~rate concentration of9.8mg!1jnJh~gr.()ll1l(l\Vater
regime at the project area based on th~ following relationships: ' ; . . ";.'
nr = (30)mg/L.(3.25)in/yr.(1.0-0.1) + (5.8)in/yr.(0.I)mg/L
(5.8'+3.25)in/yr.
nr = 9.8 mg/L (nitrate concentration in groundwater at site after mixing).
Actual concentrations at the closest set of drinking water wells are reasonably'assumedto'6e'-'-". .,....,,-..-
substantially less than the projected concentration at the treatmerit area.
It appears the nitrate impact of the proposed treatment system design that handles 102 hook-ups
at all average daily flow of7,250 gallons per day that is applied to the 30 acre project area has a
localized impact to groundwater quality.' While the change in groundwater quality appears
significant, it also appears the impact is le~s than'the 10 mg/L nitrate tviCL limit for drinking
water by the time groundwater migrates off the project site and would be further reduced at the
distance of existing identified wells. Since the .estimated nitrate concentration in local
groundwater appears to be close to the 10 mg/L MC~ limit for drinking water, it would be
appropriate to require groundwater~onitoring of nitrate le'\lels in any future water supply wells
completed near the project site. Alternatively, groundwaterffionitoring wells could be installed
near the perimeter of the site to monitor actual nitrate leyels migrating from the project area in
order to have an early detection system available to respond to potential changes in groundwater'
q~lality .
3Q
/1
Project No, 041136-5
May 10, 2005
MYers Biodynamics, Inc.
Geotechnical Report
Beckett Point Community WWT
Jefferson County, Washington
I4 of/7
5~
11.0 References
Ayres Associates, Onsite Sewage Disposal System Research in Florida, Report Prep~~(ilor--''''
Environmental Health Program, Department of Health and ~ehabilitative Services, State
of Florida, March 1993.
California Regional Water Quality Contrpl Board, Evaluation of Alternative Onsite
Treatment Systems for the Removal of Nitrogen from Wastewater, Central Coast Region,
November 25, 1,997.
Communications with Michael Moren, Parametrix, Inc., 2004-2005.
County of Butte, Chico Urban Area Nitrate Compliance Plan, Program RepOrt and Proposed-
Implementation Plan, Butte County Administrative Office, Orov'ille, California, March,
1998. '
Design Manual: On-site Wastewater Treatment and Disposal Systems, United States
Environmental ProtectionAgency, EPA - 625/1-80-012, October 1980.
Eastern Jefferson County Groundwater Characterization Study, prepared for.Public Utility
District No. I of Jefferson County, by Economic andEngineering.8ervices, Inc. and
Pacific Groundwater Group, May 1994.
Gold,A.J. and Sims, J.T., Research Needs in Decentralized Wastewater Treatment and
Management: A Risk~Based Approach to Nutrient Contamination, National Research
. Needs Conference Proceedings:,Risk-Based Decision Making'for Onsite Wastewater
Treatment, EPRI, US EPA, National Decentralized Water Resources Capacity
Development Project 2001.1001446, Palo Alto, CA, 2000.
"\
- ,
Hantzsche, N. and Finnemore, E., predicting Ground- Water Nitrate-Nitrogen Impacts,
GroundWater, Vol. 30, No.4, pp. 490-499, 1992.
Selected Analytical Test Results for Local Quimper Sub-basin Drinking Water Wells, Susan
Porto, R.S., Jefferson County Health Department, 2004-2005.
Stage 1 Techpical Assessment as of February 2000, Water Resource Inventory Area (WRIA)
17, by Parametrix, Inc., Pacific Groundwater Group, Inc., Montgomery Water Group,
Inc:;- and Caldwell and Associates, Inc., October 2000.
US EPA, Manual: Nitrogen Control, EPA/625/R-93/010, Office of Water, Washington, D.C.,
I 'I " . - ,
September, 1993. '
Washington Administrative Code (WAC) Chapter 246-272J.arge On-Site Sewage Systems,
. April!!, 1995.
Geotechnical Report
Beckett Point Community WWT
, Jeffirson County, Washington
16 of 17
ProjectlVo, 041136-5
May 10. 2005
Myers Biodynamics. Inc.
'3v
It 5'J-
/
\
Washington State Department of Health (WSDOH) Design Standards for Large On-Site
Sewage Systems with Design Flows of Greater than 3,500 Gallons per Day, December
1993 (Amended July 1994).
Whitmeyer, R. W., .et aI., Overview of Individual Onsite Nitrogen Removal Systems,
Proceedings of the Sixth National Symposium of Individual and Small Community Sewage
Systems, American Society of Agricultural Engineers, ASAE Publication 10-91, pp. 143-154,
1991.
?>Q
(f' SJ-
Geotechnical Report
Beckett Point Community WWT
Jeffirson County. Washingt?n
~,
Project No. 041136-5
May 10, 2005
Myers Biodynamics, Inc.
17 of 17
10.0 Closure
This report was prepared for the'exclusive use ofParametrix, Inc. and the project design team
for specific application to the proposed Beckett Point Community On-Site Wastewater
Treatment System in Jefferson County. The data and report conclusions and interpretations
should not be construed as a warranty'ofloval environmental conditions.
"
Within the limitations of scope, schedule, and budget this report was prepared' in accordanc~
with generally accepted engineering principles and practices in the area at the time this report
was prepared. No Q.ther warranty, whether expressed or implied, is made. The conclusions
and recommendations presented herem are based on our understanding of the. project as
described in this report and on-site conditions observed at the time of our explorations.
If project plans change from those described in this report, we should be contacted and
retained to review the changed conditions. We sQ.ould also be contacted and retained to
review our report if: 1) there is a substantial lapse of time between submission of this report.
and the start of construction; 2) conditions have changed due to natural causes, project design
objectives or construction operatiONS at the site; or '3) conditions appear different from those,
described in oUr report. The purpose of the review is to determine the applicability of the
conclusions and recommendations considering the time lapse and/or changed conditions.
We appreciate the opportunity to provide you with engineering and.scientific services.
Please contact our office at your convenience should you have any questi9!!~_QrJe.gJ]j,r~
additional services.. .'-' .
~-:.-MYers, P.E. Lr
Principal Geotechnical Engineer
",.,_r"~'.
Sincerely Yours,
MYERS BIODYNAMICS, INe.
Rian Myers, P.R P.W.S.,
Principal Environmental Scientist
JNM/RDM:esw
. i&l.EXPIRES~;;'2
Geotechnical Report
Beckett Point Community wwt
Jefferson County, Washington
J 5 of 17
~
:20
. 11.0 References'
Ayres Associates, Onsite Sewage Disposal System Research in Florida, Report 'Preparea-f~~:.:~::i
Environmental/Health Program, Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services, State
of Florida, March 1993.
California Regional Water Quality Control Board, Evaluation of Alternative Onsite
Treatment Systems for the Remoyal of Nitrogen from Wastewater, Central Coast Region,
November 25, 1997.
Communications with Michael Moren, Parametrix, Inc., 2004-2005.
County of Butte, Chico Urban Area Nitrate Compliance Plan, Program Report and Proposed
Implementation Plan, Butte County Administrative Office, Oroville, California, March,
1998. '.
Design Manual: On-site Wastewater Treatment and Disposal Systems, United States
Environmental Protection Agency, EPA - 625/1-80-012, October 1980.
Eastern Jeffers~n County Groundwater Characterization Study, prepared for Public' Utility .
District No.1 of Jefferson County, by Economic and Engineering Services, Inc. and
Pacific Groundwater Group, May 1994.
.Gold,A.J. and Sims, J.T~, Research Needs in Decentralized Wastewater Treatment and
Management: A Risk-Based Approach to Nutrient Contamination, National Research
Needs Conference Proceedings: Risk-Based Decision Making for Onsite Wastewater
Treatment, EPRI, US EP A, National Decentralized Water Resources Capacity
Development Project 2001.1001446, Palo Alto, CA, 2000.
Hantzsche, N. and Finnemore, E., Predicting Ground-Water Nitrate-Nitrogen Impacts,
GroundWater, Vol. 30, No.4, pp.,490-499, 1992. '
Selected Analytical Test Results for Local Quimper Sub-basin Drinking Water Wells, Susan
Porto, R.S., Jefferson County Health Department, 2004-2005.
Stage 1 Technical Assessment as of February 2000, Water Resource Inventory Area (WRIA)
17, by Parametrix, Inc., Pacific Groundwater Group, Inc., Montgomery Water Group,
Inc., and Caldwell and Associates, 'Inc., October 2000. )
US EPA, Manual: Nitrogen Control, EPA/625/R-93/01O, Office of Water, Washington, D.C.,
September, 1993.
Washington Administrative Code (WAC) Chapter 246-272 Large On-Site Sewage Systems,
April 11, 1995.
Geotechnical Report
Becket/Point Community WWT
Jefferson County, Washington
3D
2.(
Project No. 041136-5 .
May 10, 2005
Myers Biodynamics, Inc.
16 oj 17
oJ-
Washington State Department of Health (WSDOH)Design Standards for Large On-Site
Sewage Systems with Design Flows of Greater than 3,500 Gallons per Day, December
1993 (Amended July 1994). .
Whitmeyer, R.W., et aI., Overview ofIndividual Onsite Nitrogen Removal Systems,
Proceedings of the Sixth National Symposium of Individual and Small Community Sewage
Systems, American Society of Agricultunil Engineers, ASAE Publication 10-91, pp~ 143-154,
1991.
/
Geotechnical Report
Beckett Point Community WWT '
Jefferson County, Washington
, /70f17
30
22. ;,v
Project No. 04/136-5
May 10.2005
Myers Biof/ynamics, /nc,
a3
S;}-
c:: ,='
Qf&
l?~
'- U)
..t::::0)
U)0l
~<tl
" .s
~~
'0-.1
0)::::::
U)~
i3:;:,.
C::51
.s10
Cl'C;
.~ Ld
..... "-
~o
0......
-dB
::::::/::
~~
a}
"q
~~
o~
Z(J)
Cl)
16
o
en
<1l
-
m
E
'x
o
r....
0.
0.
<
......
....
o
at
....
.S
"b
(l)
-g
(3
1:: .s
o "0
at c:
.... ::;
.S ..Q
"b "tJ
-{g ~
~ .~
(.) ::i
.S ~
8> ~
-- Q
~ l
lJJ lJJ
o 0
Q q
Ci
Z 3i
~ S:
~ . .
M III It)
I 0
-It) 0
M (\I
.,..
.,..
-:t
<::I
0
0 z
Z I-
W (.)
a; w
:> (3 ill
<.:i l-
a: ;3
Ii: a.
m
~
<(
:g
"'"
~
It}
o
.....
s:::
Q)
E
.....
~c:
Zt!=.B
<:C....C>
-I Q).S
o..1U~
Z ~ ro
Ot);::
-m~
t:c?:'E
g~~
-ISO
-I E f
ujEt.
::8~
.....(1)
c""')
&
Q
.....
+-'
j
o
Q)
m
.
U~
CO
... ~
fIl~
1.I~:;!~
- ;:;i~
Sid
raal~~
II c H~
_ =~i~
GJ ~ !!~
11Ift CI &l~g
"1 <It'C,,,
l!!!!""CD..
I!: m u~
~
F.ill~
Iii c. fa
~!I~ ill
~l Dr
"d8
I!,: -
~..~ n
~ i;
It"
UJ
~
=
-a
-
(..3-
!a. 0 G')
CD'om
(jJ3~
o3m
::Jc:O
o 2. :I:
g~~
::J <0
ro+~)a
~Ch'-
~S":D
Ch~~
2: <to
::J""'l.,.,
ca ::;I ~
. 0 (1)
::Jm
ro+
3
(1)
::J
ro+
)a
""'l
(1)
m
'"C
:0
o
m'"C
><~
'"Cm
....0
O-t
:D:o
~m
O~
Zs:
'"C ml
r-z
)>-1
z)>
:0
m
)>
..~
(I);1e>
r- ,~ m
~"'Z
0"):.(j)iS'
~ :g ~
o ..,.. '1J
S- 0 _.
m a. ;;;
(il 3 x
III "lj
~a;Cl
C> C/) iil
/\) 0 ::!'.
:::.: 0
r- ::J
<8 b
r- ~
g t:::
III 0
.... ::J
~r s
(j;'
C/)
r:
~
'-'-
o
>
...."0
_"0
:s '"
() ~
::T_
\I 3
....a
0(1)
o(f)
erg
~(j)
..
z
~
m
en
..
~ !\)
'tJ""tJ
r- (j)i ..,.. ii)
g 5a ~. ::J
et 1=!. g. :if
o' .... Q.. C/)
::J ~ o-m
C/) "ti ~ Q..
Q, g- ~g
~ ~ iiloj
::::.: 0 3m
Cl ::J m ~
to C/) ::;Om
C/) C/) )('::t
~ c: ~
~ ~ g.~
a ~ a;~
::r 0 Q.."'\)
~ ~ ad
~ a; ~"t)
III Q.. Cj 0
..,.. . ..... C/)
(!j C:> (l)
III 0lQ..
'tJ '0
'tJ iiJ
a _.
E. ~
3 ~
III Q..
a; ):.
. tti
III
"
.....
~.
6t
~
-<~
~
-
-ijUZI ~
~ I ....Ie
l'irD
!!I '5 ;
~Ii ~
i~:. -
'.- M
~o~ III
i-
f~
m
~
"
~
-a
o
_0
c..3.G)
~om
cooQ
(jJ3~
23mO
-c
O::J:t
o ;:;: Z
S~o
~m)>
... en r-
~;:xJ
0~m
::r""'"tJ
:;";0
tQ"::Q
o:;l~
::JCO
a
3
co
::J
.-to
>
(iJ
m
<
-
o
-
z
-
-t
-<
3:
)>
-a
)>
Z
C
(J)
-
-t
m
-a
.-
)>
z
~~
~ t:;"
~ .(")
Q
--e
~
~
, f.-f r 1<<
/' '---J \
<
o
Z
=t .
-<
==
>
"tJ
>
....."0
_"0
::s ...
o ~
::1',_
II 3
",a
CJ1(1)
Ocn
<to
~~
o
ZoI
s-o
-02
Ci3iiJ
CIl-o
<1>::r
::l _0
......0
&cn
c:
/<
~
~
z
~
p;1
.~
I
II
"
'-/
~Q)
~
I~/~
/?>y
/~
/.:f
~/(j>
.//
~~
)):::;,
roo-
Sill\)
31'/)
(1)~
::t
F.g
Q.t;d
~(1)
(1)~
0.. (I)
~~
o~
~-.
~::t
~C/)
~
~
"C~
"1:J
a
'"
Q:
~
+
~
V\~
-1
~
-
(
APPENDIX A
~~"~'-';,-:i7: -~;:':--'---~~T-ITT
I'" . l" :" \, ,- (,;C;'
\' ' ; '~_"::::'--~----I'
\ ~ ~ ';~
\ ~'\ 1
,\ (\. \ 0 E C 2 7, 200S
~ \01 l L
. r \
. L-~~-;7(~~ ~ \ 1~1\iT'.7'~. .. ~
JtFFfR:.lO.~ ~u_1,: "v:q.:,,;: '
OEPT. Of COr\'\i~ilh\\T\' DtVll'-":,,,,,::,::,,,:,,_,,:
l...--
" t'\.,.... ITr-!\,4
t~.v'~. ~PJI
30
(;"2:] d( b . of 5' J-
IAppendix A
Field E,:xplora,tion Program
Subsurface conditions for the projel~t site were explored by.advancing 11 test pit.
explorations, 'f,P-1 through TP-II, .at the approximate locations shoWn on the
Proposed Treatment Area Exploration Plan, Figure 2., Subsurface conditions observed
in the explorations are presented OIil.Test Pit Logs, Figures A-I through A-It in this .
Appendix. In additio~ previous so illogs (performed by others) were reviewed and
are presented herein as Figure A~12~ sheets I through 4.
The tt?st pit explorations conducted for this study were approximately located in the
field by taping or pacing relative to survey reference points or existing physical '.
features. After completion, test pit locations were., surveyed located by Parametrix,
Inc. as shown on Figure 2. The loc:ations.ofthe explorations should be considered
accurate to the degree implied by tbe method used. Approximate ground surface
elevations were interpolated from the topographic map provided to ol}foffice
"Beckett Point Proposed Drainfieldi Area," by Parametrix Inc., dated March 1,2005.
Soi1logs performed by ,others were not surVey located and were approximately
located on Figure 2 based on infoITllation provided by others.
A licensed professional geotechnical! engineer/engineering geologist from Myers
Biodynain.ics was present thrOUgh01Ut the field work and test pit explorations
conducted by our firm to observe the conditions; obtain soil samples, 'and to prepare
field logs of the explorations. Soils ~\vere classified in general accordance with ASTM. \
D-2488 "Standard Practice for Description and Identification pf Soils (Visual-Manual
Procedure)," USDA methodology, and the Key to Soil Exploration Logs presented in
this Appendix. The exploration logs sutIll11arized as Figures A-I through A-II
represent our interpretations of the contents of the field logs and the resuits of
laboratory testing.' .
Test Pit Explorations
Test pit explorations'TP-l through TP-II were excavated on October 27, 2004 to (
depths of7 to 10 feet (84 to 120 inches) using a Case 580K backhoe. Soils }\Tere
classified and field logs were prepared of the observed subsurface conditions. The
relative density of the soils, shown in parenthesis, was estimated in the field at the
time of the explorations. Representative soil samples were.obtained from the test pits
and returned to our office for further review and selective laboratory testing. The field
logs were modified bas~ on our review of the samples and results of laboratory
testing.
,30
tf<7 5'~
Geotechnical Report
Becket/Point Community WWT
Jefferson County, Washington
'Appendix A
Project No. 04Il36-5
, May 10. 2005
Myers Biodynamics, In-eo
Previous Soil Logs (By Others)
Soil logs were.conducted on the site by others and are included herein for re:fierence.
The soil logs were conducted on February 20, 2001 by NTI. Logs prepared. by NTI
are attached as Figure A-12 sheets 1 though 3.
L..~,,__ ..._-,.."'............--.....---._,..-~"'".......''""~-
, .
Geotechnical Report
Beckett Point Community WHIT
Jefferson County, Washington
Appendix A
Project No. 041136-5
May 1 (), 100S
Myers Biodynamics. .Im-
30
;?% 5r
Key to Soil Exploration Logs
Sample Descriptions consist of the following:
Minor constituents, major constituents; density or
consistency, color, moisture, and additional comments
including trace constituents. Soil classification is based
on visual field soil sample observations and laboratory
results on selected samples, where indicated on the
logs. Soil classification is based on grain size, plastic-
ity, color, density/consistency, and moisture. Visual-
manual methods of ASlM D2488 were used as an
identification guide.
Soli Density and Consistency
Soil density/consistency in borings is related to the
Standard Penetration Test (SPT) as shown below. Soil
density/consistency estimates in test pits are based on
visual observation and presented parenthetically on the
soil logs.
Coarse-Grained
Soil Density
V~rt L~ose. .
l;,OQss. ' ""\}':i<
Medium Dense
Fine-Grained
Soil Consistency
.,,~~rr.s?~
'. '.fJ.fi1tt?:.<....
Medium Stiff
SPT*
0-4
c:,':;:j4itljrA::;.
10-30
SPT"
0-2
'~~,f)
4-8
'. ...~~~rf!.l;:
15-30
"Minor Constituents
Trace *
Estimated Percentage
0-5%
Moisture
~o7st Much perceptible moisture, probably above optimum
Laboratory Test Symbols
PP
Pocket Penetrometer com resslve strength in TSF)
Consolidation
TCV
Triaxial Consolidated Undrained
au Unconfined Com ressian
~~~li
Unified Soil Classification System
~
'0.91
::::'"
198
c:'"
~~
~CI.l
~:;;
'. '"
::S
0'-
CJ)~
"b<u
III E
.5",
~!!
~'~
ldJ
E
'C~
~.!!!
.c::'"
t~~
~'~
~ if)
.:)
.!Ii c:
..... (lJ
~~S
'-
"bill
~l:>
'- '"
1Il-
li..~
f~
'-Ill
fIl-
0'"
uE
~~.~
(UCUl.?
.<::E~
""'Ill
~.m'U)
-c:,..
I!?,!;) ,
~~;g
. .:sCl)
~~:)
r:{U~
cil8:s
....
o ,-Ill
~~l'~
-:;~~
~.~.~
-c:II)
[!!,g'l'
~Jg~
~Ill~
~~r.:
mO,"
(5":S
,. 0':
ATD ~ ~:~ ::::
~:: ~:.'
_t: ."
8-1
8-2
8-3
.!Q
~g GW
gaj
c:~~
m~
(j
Well-graded gravels and
gravel-sand mixtures, little
or no fines
Highly Organic Salls
.,
~.~
:>1(
!'!.<::
Cl'~
~O
c:"
(Q ,en-
VloCl)
~~~
U~
'€
$'"
~1 ~
c:;II.
'"
CIl
:?l
.c:
~~
G~
",.s:
~~
~~,
CI.l'S
:3"
'-
. III
R'"
-8!
;'1 ",,<::>
V_'"
~~~ ~
tU --:;::
.,:l;l
~.~
-'
Pt Peat. muck and other
highly organic salls
Observation Well Symbols
Bentonite
seal
Test Pit Symbols
8f7/82 ?
Boring Symbols
7 2.0" d!a. Split Spoon
24 Sampler (SPT) .
27
3
50
5014'
Ground Water Level:
date of reading
ATD:At Time
Sand pack and well
screen or hydrotip
3.25" dia, Split Barrel;
Ring Sampler '
P '" Sampler pushed '*No sample recovery
p
3,0" dia. Thin Wall
Tube Sampler
~
Ground Water seepage
Myers ]
~~DBa~!!an~~~'~~~"n~~~:
Bainbridge laland, Wa.hlngton galla
TEl.; 2a6184~6<ml FAX; 2a6lll4~-37117
--
TEST PIT LOG Tp..1
t:
:i'
b:
w
c
1- 8-1
2- 8-2
3-
4- 8.3
5-
6-
8-4
7-
8-
9-
10-
11-
12-
13-
14-
15-
16-
17-
18-
This log applies on. 'i 10 test pit location at tM time Ol8xOIlva#on, Subsurface lJOndffions may differ at O/her
locations and may also change over time, This 10[;1 is a simplified interpretation of the ae/ual condliions.
C/)
W
.J
c..
:E
<(
C/)
Beckett Point
Jefferson County, Washington
TEST PIT LOCATION: See Figure 1 SUFiFACE CONDITIONS: Forest Duff
DESCRIPTION COMMENTS
1-inch Forest Duff
Silty to Ve/}' Silty SAND; (loose to medium dense), .light gray brown,
slightly moist [USDA Classification: Sandy LOAf
- - - - - - .."-.-.-- _. ~
Gravelly Slightly Silty SAND; (dense), light gray bl''Own, slightly moist,
cemented [USDA Classification: Gravelly SAND]
Gravelly SAND; (dense), light gray brown, slightly moist, weakly
cemented [USDA Classification: Gravelly SAMD]
-----~_.,._------
Very Gravelly SAND; (dense), light gray brown, s:fightfy moist, trace
cobbles [USDA Classification: Gravelly SANDI
-----------.
becomes moist, gray brown
8-5
becomes moist to ve moist
Bottom of test pit at 10 foot depth
Completed and backfilled 10/27/04
roots to 21-inch depth
trace roots to 39-inch
depth
boulder at 48-inch to
60-inch depth
Myers
Biodunamh:s inc.
BUS:(206) 842-6073
Rolling Bay Mercantile Bldg.
11254 Sunrise Drive
Bainbridge Island WA 98110
FAX: (206) 842-3797
DATE
October 27, 2004
ELEVATION (FT) 385 :t.
PFI:<>JECT NO
FIGURE
A.1
041136.5
TEST PIT LOG TP-2
ti:
J:
f-
a.
w
c
1-
S-1
2-
S-2
3-
S-3
4-
5-
6-
7-
a-
S-4
9-
10-
11-
12-
13-
14-
15-
16-
17-
18-
This log applies only to test pit locatIon at the time 01 excavation, Subsurface conditions may differ at other
Jccations and may also change over time, This log is a simplilied interpretation of the aclual conditions.
(J)
W
..J
Do
==
<
(J)
Beckett Poi nt
Jefferson County, Washington
TEST PIT LOCATION~ See Figure 1 SURFACE CONDITIONS: Forest Duff
DESCRIPTION COMMENTS
2-inches Forest Duff
Vel}' Silty SAND; (loose to medium dense), light gray brown, slightly
moist [USDA Classification: Sandy LOAM]
Lab Test: GS
Gravelly Silty SAND; (dense), light gray brown, slightly moist, cemented
[USDA Classification: Gravelly Loamy SAND] _ _ _
Gravelly SAND; (medium dense), light gray brown, slightly moist
[USDA Classification: Gravelly Fine to Coarse SAND]
roots to 24-inch depth
Lab Test: GS
trace roots to 48-inch
depth
SAND; (medium dense), gray brown, moist [USDA Classification: SAND]
Bottom of test pit at 8.5 foot depth
Completed and backfilled 10/27/04
3"0
3/ 5~
Myers
Biodynamics inc.
BUS~ (206) 842-6073
RoHing Bay Mercantile Bldg.
11254 Sunrise Drive
Bainbridge Island WA 98110
FAX: (206) 842.3797
DATE
October 27, 2004
ELEVATION (FT) 378 1:
PRo.JECT NO
AGURE
A-2
041136-5
TEST PIT LOG TP-3
Ii: en
w
:C -'
.... D.
D. :s
w <(
0 en
8-1
1-
8-2
2-
3-
4- 8-3
5-
6- 8-4
7-
8-
9-
10-
11-
12-
13-
14-
15-
16-
17-
18-
t-MB
This log applies only to test pit location et the time of excavation, Subsurface conditions may dlffsr at other
locations and may ais" change ovar time. This log is a simplilled Interpretation of the actuaf conditions.
Beckett Plaint
Jefferson County, Washington
TEST PIT LOCATION: See Figure 1 SURFACE CONDITIONS: Forest Duff
DESCRIPTION COMMENTS
1-inch Forest Duff
Silty to Very Silty SAND; (Ioose)~ brown, slightly moist
[USDA Classification: Sandy LOAM] _ _ _ _
Gravelly Silty SAND; (dense), light gray brown, slightly moist, cemented
[USDA Classification: Gravelly Loamy SAND]
-------.-------
roots to 28-inch depth
Gravelly SAND; (medium dense), light gray brown, slightly moist
[USDA Classification: Gravelly SAND]
trace roots to 51-inch
depth
grades to SAND; (medium dense), light gray brown to brown, slightly
moist to moist [USDA Classification: SAND]
Bottom of test pit at 7 foot depth
Completed and backfJ1led 10/27/04
30
3L
5'c}-
Mgers
Biodunamics inc.
BU&(206} 842.6073
Rolling Bay Mercantile Bldg.
11254 Sunrise Drive
Bainbridge Island WA 98110
FAX: (206} 842-3797
DATE
October 27,2004
ELEVATION (Flj 329 :!:
PROJECT NO
FIGURE
A.3
041136-5
TEST PIT LOG TP-4
t:
:I:
t-
o..
UJ
o
1-
2- g.1
3-
4- 8-2
5-
6-
7-
a-
9-
10-
11-
12-
13-
14-
15-
16-
17-
18-
~.
This Io{J applies only to test pit location at the time of excavation. Subsurface conditions mey differ at other
locations and may atso change OVer time. This log Is a simplified interpretation at the actusl conditions.
en
w
..1
Co
:s
~
en
Beckett Point
Jefferson County, Washington
TEST PIT LOCATION: See Figure 1 SURFACE CONDITIONS: Forest Duff
DESCRIPTION COMMENTS
2-inches Forest Duff
Silty to Very Silty SAND; (loose), brown, slightly moist
USDA Classification: Sandy LOAML _ _ _ _
Gravelly Silty SAND; (dense), light gray brown, slightly moist, weakly
cemented [USDA Classification: Gravelly Loamy SAND]
roots to 32-inch depth
---------
Gravelly SAND; (medium dense), light gray brown to brown, slightly
moist [USDA Classification: Gravelly Fine to Coarse SAND]
becomes moist at 6D-inch depth
trace roots to 47-inch
depth
Lab Test: as
--~----.---------
grades to Sandy GRAVEL; (medium dense), gray brown, moist to vel)!
moist [USDA Classification: Sandy GRA VEL]
Bottom of test pit at 8 foot depth
Completed and backfilled 10/27/04
30
33
f)CY
Myers
Biodynamics inc_
BUS: (206) 84N'1073
Rolling Bay Mercantile Bldg.
11254 Sunrise Drive
Bainbridge Island WA 98110
FAX: (206) 842-3797
DATE
October 27, 2004
ELE.VATION iFf)
317 :t
PROJE.CT NO
AGURE
A-4
041136-5
TEST PIT LOG TP-5
1-
2- 5-1
3-
4- 8-2
5-
6-
7-
8-
9-
10-
11-
12-
13-
14-
15-
1a-
17-
18-
'MB
t:
:i
I-
a.
w
o
This log applies only to test pit location at the time of excavetion, Subsurface conditions may differ at other
locations and may also change over time. This log is 8 simplified Interpretation of the actual conditions.
C/}
W
...J
Q.
:s
<C
CJ)
Beckett Point
Jefferson County, Washington
TEST PIT lOCATION: See Figure 1 SURFACE CONDITIONS: Forest Duff
DESCRIPTION COMMENTS
1-ihch Forest Duff
Silty SAND; (loose), brown moist [USDA Classification: Loamy SAND]
- - - - - - -- - -- roots to 21-.inch depth
Slightly Silty SAND; (medium dense), light gray brown, moist, trace gravel
[USDA Classification: SAND]
- - - -- - - - - - trace roots to 41-inch
depth
SAND; (medium dense), gray brown to red brown, moist to very moist Lab Test: GS
[USDA Classification: Fine to Coarse SAND}
becomes moist
grades to Gravelly SAND; (medium dense), gray brown, moist to very
moist [USDA Classification: Gravelly SAND]
Bottom of test pit at 8 foot depth
Completed and backfilled 10/27/04
'3'U
3'-1
5)-
Myers
Biodunamlcs inc.
BUg:'(206) 842-6073
Rolling Bay Mercantile Bldg.
11254 Sunrise Drive
Bainbridge Island WA 98110
FAX: (206) 842-3797
DATe
October 27,2004
ELEVATION (Fl) +
302 -
PROJeCT NO
FIGURe
A~5
041136~5
TEST PIT LOG TP-6
Ii:
J:
....
0.
W
o
1- 8-1
2-
3-
4-
8-2
5-
6-
7-
8-
g-
10-
11-
12-
13-
14-
i5-
16-
17-
1S-
This Jog applies only /01 /est pit location alii) e time 01 excavation. Subsurface condi/ions may differ a/ o/h.r
loca/lons and may also change Over lime. inls /og is It simplified Interpretation 01 the ac/uai conditions,
(/)
W
..J
0.
:l:
<(
(/)
Beckett Point
Jefferson County, Washington
TeST PIT LOCATION: See Fi ure 1 $;URFACE CONDITIONS: Forest Duff
DESCRIPTION COMMENTS
2 to 3-inches Forest Duff
Silty SAND; (loose), light gray brown, slightly moist
[USDA Classification: Loamy SAND] __ _ ____ _
grades to SAND; (medium dense), gray brown to red brown, s:/tghtly
moist to moist [USDA Classification: SAND]
roots to 26-inch depth
-----------..--
trace roots to 46-inch
depth
Gravelly SAND to Sandy GRAVEL; (medium dense), gray brown, slightly
moist to moist [USDA Classification: Gravelly SAND to Sandy
GRAVEL]
weakly cemented red brown SAND zone at approximately 84-inch depth
Bottom of test pit at 8 foot depth
Completed and backfilled 10/27/04
Myers
Biodynamics Inc.
BUS: (206) 842-6073
Rotting Bay Mercantile Bldg.
11254 Sunrise Drive
Bainbridge Island WA 98110
FAX: (206) 842-3797
~ ."~~~PT OF___ rv ___od.'~~~"-
30
3S
b"-J--
DAre
October 27,2004
ELEVATION (FT) 312 .:t
AGURE
A..f3
PROJECT NO
041136-5
rEST PIT LOG Tp.. 7
1- S-1
2-
3- S-2
4-
5-
6-
7-
8-
9-
10-
11-
12-
13-
14-
15-
16-
17-
18-
Ii:
:c
f-
a.
w
C
This lag applies 11I1"V to lesl pi/location at the time ot excavation. Subsurface condl1ions may differ al other
locations and ma;/ also change over time. This log is a simplitled Interpretation at Ihe ae/ual conditions.
CI)
W
..J
a..
:E
ct
(/)
Beckett Point
Jefferson County, Washington
TEST PIT LOCATION: See Figure 1 SURFACE CONDITIONS: Forest Duff
DESCRIPTION COMMENTS
2 to 3-inches Forest Duff
Silty SAND; (loose), light brown to rod brown, slightly moist
[USDA Classification: Loamy SAND]
boulder at 24-inch depth
Gravelly Slightly Silty SAND; (medium deJ1se), light gray brown, slight~ roots to 27-inch depth
moist, weakly cemented [USDA CJ~ssifjicatlon: Gravelly SAND]__
SAND; (medium dense), light gray brown, slightly moist
[USDA Classification: SAND}
grades to Gravelly SAND at times
trace roots to 44-inch
depth
weakly cemented sand layer, red brown at 84-inch depth
Bottom of test pit at 7 foot dopth
Completed and backfitted 10/27/04
J~. _~~" .~._."..~"
so
3h
5~
Myers
Biodunamh:s bu::.
aUg;"(206) 842-6073
Rolling Bay Mercantile Bldg.
11254 Sunrise Drive
Bainbridge Island WA 98110
FAX: (206) 842-3797
DATE
October 27. 2004
ELEVATION {FT} 317 :t
PROJECT NO
FIGURE
A-7
041136-5
TEST PIT LOG TP-f:J
1- 3-1
2-
$-2
3-
4- 3-3
5-
6-
7-
8-
9-
10-
11-
12-
13-
14-
15-
16-
17-
1S-
Ii:
=i'
f-
a..
w
C
This log applies only to test pit location at the time of excavation, Subsurface conditions may differ at other
locations and may also change over time. This log is a simplified interpretation of !he actual condilions.
(/)
W
.J
0..
:is
<
(/)
Beckett Point
Jefferson County, Washington
TEST PIT LOCATION: See Figum 1 SURFACE CONDITIONS: Forest Duff
DESCRIPTION COMMENTS
3 to 4-inches Forest Duff
Slightly Gravelly Silty SAND; (loose), brown, slightly moist, roots
[USDA Classification: Loamy SAND]
---------
Slightly Gravelly Slightly Silty SAND; (medium dense), light
gray brown, slightly moist to moist [USDA Classification: SAND]
-------.--
boulder at 24-inch to 36-
inch depth
roots to 45-inch depth
Slightly Gravelly Slightly Silty SAND; (medium dense), light gray brown, Lab Test: GS
Slightly moist [USDA ClassificatFon: Fine to Medium SAND]
Bottom of test pit at 7 foot depth
Completed and backfilled 10/27/04
30
37
Myers
BiDdunamic5 inc.
BUg;'(2.06) 842-6073
Rolling Bay Mercantile Bldg.
11254 Sunrise Drive
Bainbridge ISland WA 98110
FAX: (206) 842.-3797
DATE
October 27 t 2004
ELEVATION 1FT} 328 .:t
PROJECT NO
FIGURE
A~8
041136-5
TEST PIT LOG TP-9
10-
11-
12-
13-
14-
15-
16-
17-
18-
This log applies only to test pit location at the time at excevation. Subsurface conditions mey differ at other
locations and may also change over time. This log is e simplified interpretation of the actual conditions,
Beckett Point
Jefferson County, Washington
TEST PIT lOCATION: See Figure 1 SURFACE CONDITIONS: Primitive Road/Forest Duff
DESCRIPTION COMMENTS
1-inch Forest Duff
Slightly Gravelly Silty to VelJl Silty SAND; (medium dense), dark brown, abundant roots
moist [USDA Classification: Sandy LOAM1-.... _ _ _
Slightly Gravelly Silty SAND; (medium dense), light gray to brown to roots to 27-inch depth
red brown at times; moist [USDA Classification: Loamy Fine to Medium Lab Test: as
SAND] boulder at 36-inch depth
roots to 41-inch depth
4-
---------
SAND; (medium dense), light gray brown, moist
[USDA Classification: SAND]
$-3
5-
6-
becomes gravelly at 72-inch depth
7-
grades to Gravelly SAND to Sandy GRA VEL; (dense), gray brown, very
moist USDA Classification: Gravell SAND to Sand GRAVEL
Bottom of test pit at 7.7 foot depth
Completed and backfilled 10/27/04
8-
9-
Myers
Biodunamh:s Inc"
BUS':(206) 642.6073
Rolling Bay Mercantile Bldg.
11254 Sunrise Drive
Bainbridge Island WA 98110
FAX: (206) 642.3797
DATE
October 27, 2004
El.EVATION (FT)
297.:!:
PRO..JECT NO
3<0
3f
5;1-
FIGURE
A-9
041136-5
TEST PIT LOG TP-10
Beckett Point
Jefferson County, Washington
TEST PIT lOCATION: See Figure 1 SURFACE CONDITIONS: Forest Duff
DESCRIPTION COMMENTS
2-inches Forest Duff
1-
S-1
2-
S-2
3-
4-
8-3
5-
6-
7-
8-
g-
10-
11-
12-
13-
14-
15-
16-
17-
1B-
Ii:
:t'
I-
a.
w
o
This log applies oniy to test pitlccation at the lime of e=vation. Subsurface conditions may differ at other
localions and may also change over lime, This log is a simplified interpretation of the actual condhions,
en
w
-J
a.
:E
<C
en
Gravelly Silty SAND; (loose), light gray brown, moist, roots
[USDA Classification: Gravelly Loamy SAND]
- - - - - - - - roots to 27-;nch depth
Gravelly to Very Gravelly Slightly Silty SAND; (medium dense to dense),
light gray brown to brown to red brown at times, slightly moist, weakly
cemented at times [USDA Classification: Gravelly SAND]
--------
Gravelly SAND to SAND; (medium dense), light gray brown, moist
[USDA Classification: Gravelly SAND to SAND]
trace roots to 62-inch
depth
grades to Gravelly SAND to Sandy GRAVEL; (medium dense), brown
to reddish brown, very moist
USDA Classification:Gravell SAND to Sand GRAVEL
Bottom of test pit at 9 foot depth
Completed and backfilled 10/27/04
3~
3 ? 5;)-
Mye.rs
BiOdynamics inc..
BUEf:"'(206) B42-6073
Rolling Bay Mercantile Bldg.
11254 Sunrise Drive
Bainbridge Island WA 98110
FAX: (:206) 84:2-3797
DATE
October 27, 2004
ELEVATION (FT) 307 .t
PRDjECT NO
FIGURE
A-10
041136-5
TEST PIT LOG Tp.'''11
Beckett Point
Jefferson County, Washington
TEST PIT lOCATION: See FigUlre 1 SURFACE CONDITIONS: Forest Duff
DESCRIPTION COMMENTS
2 to 3-inches Forest Duff
t:
:i
....
0.
lLI
C
1-
5-1
2-
3-
4-
S-2
5-
6-
7-
8-
9-
10-
11-
12-
13-
14-
15-
18-
17--
18-
This log applies onl)' 10 test PH Iocalion at Ihe lime of excavation, Subsurface conditions may differ at other
10CJ3lions and may also change over lime, This log is a simplified infeIPretalion of Ihe aclual condilions.
en
lLI
..J
a.
::!
~
Slightly Gravelly Silty SAND; (loose), light gray brown, slightly moist
[USDA Classification: Gravell'y Loamy SAND]
- - - -- - - - --
roots to 26-inch depth
Gravelly Slightly Silty SAND; (medium dense), light gray brown, slightly
moist [USDA Classification: Gravelly SAND]
zone of sandy gravel and cobbltes, weakly cemented at 36 to 42-inch
de th
- - - -- - - - - - trace roots to 49-inchdepth
Slightly Gravelly Slightly Silty SAND; (medium dense), gray brown, moist
at times [USDA Classification: Fine to Coarse SAND] Lab Test: GS
grades to Gravelly SAND zones.at times
red brown, weakly cemented SA NO zone
Bottom of test pU at 7.5 foot depth
Completed and backfilled 10/27/04
;~.~---",,,,,,,-,,,--,.~,,,,---~,,--'<'-'''''-''~<'~~''-''<' .
3D
'f0 5/}.
Myers
Blodunamil:s Inc.
BUg:'(206) 842-6073
Rolling Bay Mercantile Bldg.
11254 Sunrise Drive
Bainbridge Island WA 98110
FAX; (206) 842.3797
ClATE:
Ootober 27, 2004
ELEVATION (Ff)
338 .t
PROJECT NO
FIQURE
A~11
041136-5
,e6(
:: H~ DepL OffICial
i
i
.... . '.' ,. :~:~L.J
Date , F~~,2fi. ~~~,~'~~:_.~:~~:~-;.~~:
.' _..~. - ,
PmJa<;t ~ett Poln( ~unfty ~Infleld' .
. .~
aaekh~.9~~,_...,
i~ Preseftt
'property 0wner1Pcv.
i;JOb. No.
... .M.!ke~ Uodsey ~xca~iOS .,..,. r... . .
. " ............... \.
Weather
_ BecketlP-otnf Ftsherman'v Cfllb
~ CGF.IOOO1"()1
Seo(Twp-Rng) .
ParoclNumbaf
24(30-2)
002242003
-,."
. ~
.'
HOlE (!). "
NO. ur
:E Z
0 .:~ .
TYPE ~ flJ , !:l ~
OF DEPTH (I) , TEXlURE APPf....
d SYSTEM (loches) ~ t th .~ "J MTE.
z ~ ~o
9 ~ ~~g (gpdlsq. '
DATE 0 ft.)
OBSERVED :: fJS ~(L
n b 0
:i ~
r 0
a:: 0:(
1 Owl) 10 >1'00 l O.G
6-.17 MctaU<y St 0..6
Conv. 17 -74. Red k'I so Be Neas 50 Dty MStoLS 0.8
M::a.s (Nol)'iS)
2f2.O/Q1 74..100 'M$ 1.0
'.
2 O~'12 24 >f74 SL 0.6 . .
12 w SO LS 0.8
Conv. 00..83 Red In SO S..oGM 03. Dry f..M S {S-CEM Neas arv. O,B'
heas Heat> (No M$ to LS) ,
moo1 lyrs)
II 83 -174- F-M8 0.0
i .'
S 0..25 25 >1'14 Sl o.e.
II 25-80 Red tn. se se Neas I.S to F-M S o.~.
~ mas (No lyrs) 72- ,Dry
60 -174 l$toF~S OJ~ ..
J QJ2jJf(}1 - "
j '.
I. 4, 0-21 21 >.144 G SL to VG st. 0.6
; 21-M F 1.10 VF toTO S1L @
! w: 34 .. TO F...o 0 3-4' - llr,y . . lit:lrdpan .@
I 1Q.. 120 0 Hardpan (!)
':#20101 . .
12Q..144 MQ..C LP 0.45
. i
30
. '-I ( 5J-
Figure A-12 (1 of 3)
SOIL HOLE LOGS
F'age-L.of~
Date Februarv 20. 2001
Project Beckett Point CommUnltv Dra~
'c ..
I HOLE ~
NO. w
~
0 'ui~
lYPg HI C/) '.
~ I -1m
OF DEPTI-t f~ ~ TEXTURE APPL.
d ~ i.) ~. -
z SYSrEM (1nd1es) 1- 0 F · '~ RATE
'--po" .. 0 ..-..'- ~. -:g" . ~~,'5 . (gpd/sq:-" ~,
:> (:! t;; '..".
9 DATE 0 ~
~ CISi' ~&c ft.)
OB::?ERVED ...... $:0 1
O'fi ~
g!:.
c:(
.-" ...... ".c,.,.:.... . .
5 o..a 27 >81 JUtl<..,'/y,., ..,.' q',:;'.> "I .
SL p;,Uf n~" ""{\.".HJcU. ie.. ..O:.EL~-~
8..29 F BLKY F st..:..'-::....::....'.:'.....--...----...-.. '0.45
SF 29- 81 F...o C so Dry. Pst. 0
(PiYM) 81-87 SC/CEil\i FoMS 0.8-
87.132 Me G-COEl SL 0,9
2120101 132.168 C Hardpan @
.
G 0-19 21 >156 SL 0.6
19-41 VGW 0.8
fff 41 -49 F Me 44 Dry \IF SL TO SiL ~
49 .. 1.56 F-D C Hardpan (Sl
2120/01
T 0..17 . 32 >180 SL 0.6
17..3S se LS 0.8
CONY. 35 - 72. R&c.f in se $0 Areas 45 Dry FoM t..S o.a
iveas (No Lyro)
2120101 72..180 f:..MlS o.a
8 0..21 14 >168 SL 0.6
21-48 Me VGLS 0.9
CONY. . 48..71 Me 51 Dry MS o.a
71 -108 MS 0.8
2120101
9 0-18 ao >180 Sl O~€i
18 -4$ G FroM LS 0.6
cpNV. 43 -8S 50 Dry GtoVGMS .1.0
85 - 'f80 GtoVGMS 1.0 '.
2I2O/t)1 ,
1D 0-20 28 >-1 SO SL 0.5
2{} -43 GLS 0.6
PONY" 43-63 Red in so SC Areas 6G Dry F..f'91 S to LS 0.8
Neas (No Lyrs)
2120101 83-180 F-MS 0.8
11 0-22 . BlKY 33 >1$8 SL 0.5
22 - 46 Me-C VG fo EG LS (Type 1 B-1A) 0.6',. 0.8
2120/01 46 - 66 se 6S Dry F-M S to LS 0.8-
6S~OO Red In SO SO Areas MS to LS O.S
mas (No Lyrs) O.~ -1.0
90-168 M$
II
GJ f'olrn sou H* L~ .
30
4J-
Figure A-12 (2 of 3)
5J-
"-
LEGEND.. SOIL HOl,E lOGS
Page -L.. of J__
TYPE OF SYSTEM
.Coov
CPF
p
PP.E
pst
PDT
M
SF
SF><M
NS
WSE
1JI0l11JNG
VF Very Faint
F Faint
, 0 Distincl
P Prominent
~muoruRE
l
SO
Me
C'
CEM
MAS
Bt.KV
1EXnJkE
S
LS
st
L
Sit..
Sf
SlOt
SiC
Cl.
SeL
SO
C
Conventional Orafnfield
C<>nventiOllS( Pratnfiefd - Partial Fftl
Pressure Disltibu60n Draiofield
Pressure Distribution Dmiofrefd -,:,J?artial Fill., .. .
Pressure Dislribution Draiofiekf M sane! Lit)ed,
Pressure Pistribution Drainfleld - Deep Trench (Sand Uoed)
Mound
mtermittent Sand Filter
Mound With Intermittent Sand Riter Pretreatment
No System Possible
Wet Season E\lafuation
Examples
F-D
Faint to Moderate
Looss
srtghUy~
MoclemteIy Compact
Cotnpacl .
Cemented
Massive
Blocky
Examples
Mc.c'
MC/CEM
Moderatefy Oompact to Compact
Moderately COmpact 8< Cerr'leftfed
APPLICA'I10N (APPLl RAT8
Sand
Loamy &In<f
Sandy ~m
Loam
Sflt Loam
Silt
Silty Olay Loam
Sffty Clay
O1ay Loam
sandy Ciay loam
Sandy OIay
ctay
@
Unusable Re$irlclive Layer
Text~ml OUarmem
ft'
M
C
G
VG
EG
Cob
Fine
. Medium
Coarse
Gravetty
Very Gravsll)'
Ex1remely Gravelly
Cobbles
Examples
VG F-M S
PSL
Very Graveny Fine to Medium Sand
Fine Sandy Loam
v~~
G..~~~pcwt~"'*~.wpd
Note: . The type of system undertln~ is tfte
type of systa(n curreotiy ~ (Jy
. the solis. Wet season evaluation
arKflor effe(.:tNa c:urtain. drolo[ng. may
allow revistng the type of system. :
t/-J> '\) S,r
Figure A-12 (3 of 3)
\
APPENDIXB'
LOG ITEi\1
...",' ,<-",,' .
.,... . ~v
. . f;~:::Jt4'1 ,. of 5J- .
,
4
APPENDIX B
LASORA TORY TESnNG'
Laboratory testing was perform~d on sel~,cted site soil samples. to evtU.uate index .
'properties and provide a correlation with engineering parameters. Laboratory tests
were performed on disturbed soil samples collected from the test pit explorations. .
The laboratory. testing performed and procedures followed are presented below. '
Tests were conducted in general accord~ce with the American Society of Testing and
Materials (ASTM) standard test procedures. '
,
SOIL CLASSIFICA nON
"Soil samples collected during the exploration program were visually classified in the
field. Field visual classification of soils was conducted in general accordance with
ASlM D-2488 "Standard Practice for Description and Identification of Soils (Visual-
Manual Procedure)", USDA Methodology, and the Key to Soil Exploration Logs
presented in App~ndix A. Field log soil classifications were updated as necessary
based on the results of the laboratory testing. Laboratory soil classifications and
. descriptions were in general accordance with ASTM standards. In addition, soils
'were also classified in accordance with USDA soil textural criteria using the laboratory
grain size information. The USDA description is shown in brackets on the t~st pit
logs. '
GRAIN SIZE ANALYSES (GS)
, .
Grain size analyses were performed on selected site soil samples to determine grain
'size distribution. The selected samples .are indicated on the applicable exploration
lo'gs., The tests were conduCted in general accordance with AS1M D..422. The results ,
, of the graili size analyses are shown iIi this appendix on Figures B-1 through B-3.
.. -
Geotechnical Report
Beckett Point Community WWT,
Jefferson County, Washington'
~o
'HS S-;y
Appendix B
;Prqject No. 041136-5
. May 10, 2005
Myers Biodynamics, Inc.
'I
Particle Size Distribution Report
.E If. If. If.
.sl .sl .sl l::! i 0 U v i ~ 8 ~ B
'" .. ~ :L ~ 51 ;; i ;;
100 I . . I ~ . . '" . . . I I .
. . . . . . . . . I . .
I . . . . . . . . .
90 . . . . . ~. . . . . .
I . . . . ~ . . . .
. . . . . . Ilrl~ . . . . .
80 . . . . . . . il\.. . . . .
. . . . . . . . ~ . . .
. . . . . . . . ~ ~ . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . .
70 . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . \1 .
. . . . . . . . . . .
~ . . . . . . . . I . . . .
W 60
Z . . . . . . . . ~ . I . . . "
u:: . . . . . . . . . . . . .
l- . . . . . . . . . 0 .
Z 60 ,
W 0 . . . . 0 . . . . . .
~ . . . . . . . . . . . !:::= -ff; ....... -- -~:; --~i"-f r =~.:~'
. . . . . . . . . . . . \ ;; f
w 040 ILl. J,;:, ~J ..-:.'; ;i,t.:.;~ :'\
a.. . . . . . . 0 . :\ 0 0 0 . .1 i., r-'~
0 . . . . 0 . . . . . . Hr
30 . . . . . . . 0 . . .
. . . . , . . . . 0 . . . II l\ \
. . . I . 0 . . . . 0 . :i ~ I :';",f
0 . . . . . 0 . 0 . 0 . .,' ~.: }l\
20 . . . . . . . . .. . .
. . . . . 0 . . ~ . .0 . ! ! .
0 . . . . . . . . . . . . - :i,~:1 .n",':-
0 . . . . . . . . . ~ ~. I . F iPSI N :t\1
10 . . . . . . . ; " .o'r n/ , .I , !i::, (,,\) .I'
I . . . . . . . 'N . -
. . . . . . . 0 . .. .
0 . . . . . . I I I
200 100 10 0.1 0.01 0.001
GRAIN SIZE - mm
% COBBLES % GRAVEL % SAND % SILT % ClAY uses. MSl-rTO PI.. LL
0 0.4 49.2 50.4 ML
0 18.2 19.4 2.4 SP
6. 19.0 77.1 3.9 SP
SIEVE PERCENT FINER SIEVE PERCENT RNER SOIL DESCRIPTlOl'l
.:;c,:s 0 0 6. IlllRlber 0 0 6. o Sandy silt
11Im
.75 100.0 100.0 #4 99.6 81.8 81.0
.5 91.4 89.2 #10 98.2 77.1 75.9 o Poorly graded sand with. graVel
.375 100.0 81.5 87.4 #20 93.1 69.4 68.3
#40 84.9 44.0 44.0
if@ 75.9 12.1 19.9 6. Poorly graded sand wilh gravel
#140 60.2 3.0 5.5
#200 50.4 2.4 3.9
>< GRAIN SIZE REMARKS:
000 0.105 0.600 0.631 o Oassification based on grainslze only
03() 0.341 0.317
010 0.205 0.169 o 0assificati0!1 based on gtainsii:e only
>< COEFAClENTS
Cc 0.94 0.94 A Classification based on gtaimlze only ,
. ,
Cu' 2.92 3.73 -
o Source: TP.2 Sample No.: 8-1 . Elev./Depth: 12-18 "
o Source: TP-2 Sample No.: 8-3 Blev.lDeptb: 36-48 "
A Source: TP-4 Sample No.: 8-2 Elev JDepth: 36-48 "
ClIent Myers Biodynamics, Inc.
SOIL TECHNOLOGY Project: 041136-5
ProIecI No.: 04-2033 Plate 1
1.1f;3~
Figure B-1
5J-
0'
Particle Size Dis1tribution Report
J!
J!
J!
I:!
.Ii .Ii.r:
<>
~l() i SQI
90
.Ii ::: .Ii s ~ ; . ~, i . .
co " .. ~
I , , , :~ , , , . . .
I , , , - ~ 0 . , 0 . I
I . 0 I . . 0 0 I 0 0
. . 0 0 0 0 . . " .
I . , , I . - , . I , ,
I 0 0 I , , , "- .( , , , .
I . . . , . . , , . .
, . . . , . . . , z , . , . .
. I , , . , , . " . . I
. . . , , , . . ~ . . , .
I . , . . , . . . . , 0
I . , , , . . , ~ , . I
, . . . I , , I , .
, . , , . , . , . . .
. . . . . . . , :, ~. . , .
. . . . , . . . r\: . ,
. . . , . , . . , .
. . . , 0 , . . , \\: .
I . . . . . , I \: .
. . . , r . , . ,
I I . , . . . , \~ I
, I . , . , , , .
. . . . . . , I . .
. . . . . . . , . ~\
, . 0 , , 0 0 0 . \: : I
, . 0 , . , . , . .
. . 0 , , 0 , . , .
. . . , . , , . . \ ,
. . . , 0 , , , , 0
, . , , , . , . ,
. . . . . 0 ,
. . . , . , , , . , .
. , 0 , 0 , . 0 0 . . ,.
0 . , .. . .. . 0 . , 0
200 100 10 00 0.01 0.001
GRAIN SIZE - mm
100
80
70
~
Woo
z
u:
~60
W
o
ffi,ro
Q.
30
20
10
o
% COO8lES % GRAvel % SAND % SILT % ClAY
0 8.3 82.6 9.1
0 3.7 83.3 13.0
1;,. 9.0 6O~6 30.4
SIEVE PERcerr FlNER SIEVE PERCeIT FINER
Inc:M& 0 0' '1;,. number 0 0 '6-
.75 100.0 100.0 100.0 #4 91.7 96.3 91.0
.5 96.9 98.4 95.4 #10 89.4 94.3 88.6
.375 95.0 98.4 92.4 #20 85.1 91.2 85.4
#4() 69.2 82.5 78.7
#60 37.5 59.9 63.9'
#140 12.0 20.0 37.1
#200 9.1 13.0 30,4
uses
MSHTO
PI. LL
SP-SM
8M
SM
SOil DESCRIPTION
o Poorly graded;aad with silt
o Silty sand
A silty sand
GRAIN SIZE
0.360 0.250 0.223
0.215 0.139
0.0851 .
COEFActENTS
1.51
Cu 4.23
o Source: TP-5
o Source: TP-8
tJ. Source: TP-9
REMARKS:
o Classification based on graiDsize OI1ly
o CIassificalioo. based on gzainsize OI1ly
A Classification based on grainsize OI1ly
SOIL TECHNOLOGY
Sample No.: 8-2
Sample No.: S-3
Sainple No.: 8-2
Client: Myers Biodynamics, h1c'
r:-":-O"..~
Project: 041136-5 ~ r .
\!;
P .
1\
" r--
E1ev.lDepth: 42-48 ·
Blev.lDeplh: 4&-54 ·
Blev.lDeplh: 24-30 "
2
IFig1.lre B-2
10
t11
5')/
TiEP-"
.~
Particle Size Distribution Report
90
JD .E JD :t I S ~ I .. I ~ .. i
.. .. N ~ ;; i i i
T ~
. , . . . . , . . . .
, . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . .
. . . , . . ~ . . . .
. . . . . . . . . , .
. .. . . . . . . . .
. . . . , . . . , . . . .
. . , , . . . . . . , , . .
, , . . . . . . . 1 . .
. . . , . . . I ~ . , '. I
. I , . . . I . . , , .
, . . . . I . . . . 1
, . . . . . . , . . .1 . .
, . . . . , . .~ . , . .
. , . I . . :1\ , I . ,
. , . . . . . . . . . .
I . I . . I . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . , . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . \ . . .
. . . . . . . . . , . .
. . . . . . . . . ~ . , .
. I . . . . , . . . ,
. . I . . . . . I I , I .
, . I . . , . . . \ I I
, . , . . . . . . I .
. . . . . . . . . . . . .
, . . , . . . . . . .
. , , . . . . . . :'t ,
, . . . . . . . . .
.. , . . . . . . . . .
, . . . . . .
I , , . , . . . . . . . ,
. . . . , . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . .
200 100 0 1 O. 0.0 0.001
.Ii
I:!
" .Ii
.Ii ,,;
8
tj! I
100
80
70
cr:
Woo
Z
u::
!z50
~
ffi40
A..
30
20
10
o
GRAIN SIZE - mm
% COOBtES
% GRAvel
7.9
% SAND
79.2
% SILT
% ClAY
uses
SM
MSlfrb
PL
u.
o
12.9
SIEVE PERCENT FINER SIEVE PERCENT RNER
InchM 0 number 0 o Silly sand
Ible
.75 100.0 #4 92.1
.s 95.4 #10 90.1
375 93.8 #20 85.3
#4() 69.7
#60 40.7
#l.ro 16.6
#200 12.9
E1evJDepth: 48-'
v '-"i'liiul.j I U
GRAIN SIZE
REMARKS: ; t.,",: c;:""-:-i';'~, -;::~;~t:'~';;n,
O aas-''''^^'' \ U:::,~ Ii:;a.....ll,:'" ..1:.., [:\\'1
:>u.l.......OJt~~~~uml '1'/
i i t~)j t'4'''~ '-.- ~,' '-*-
H 1""",\ i
j! '\!
III k!;
\" '" I
:! i,.__~ ~~J t
0.352
0.194
Cc
Cu
o Source: TP-ll
Sample No.: S-2
'"-----_...~.....~
JEFFERSON COUN .
, '"
SOIL TECHNOLOGY
Client: Myers Biodynamics, Inc,
Project: 041136-5
.: 04.2033
Plate
3
3D
4~ 5;)-
Figure B-3
APPENDIX. C
\...-
L or;; r'T'~"'" ," II
,~~'. .' ''''-'r' I ~~;"' .' ,
~'''' .
. (,..' .", ','",' .,,~
· .<~/i Lf <p~~ .
"-' .
~-~-~--_....__....--.~............._-_._..-_..._~..._---
~"......." ,c;,~ (r~:~t -~- f y;~r r,:..~ r""'''''-. ~
· "..~ '. I'J; I"" r:. \"1 r- '... '. ,
\; _ j: k:-, \67 fi U t:j - tJ~:r :' f \ \.,
L.';' '.-- ~ ------1 ~ t: i, '
'1lYI '1'11L ql
L U! DEe 2 7 2005 rl;;!) l
I } I
JEFFfRSON COUNTY I
OEPl OF COMMUNITY OEVEL.OPMEf-U !
Appendix C
Water Well logs By Others
Water supplywelI.logs (prepared by.others) from the local area were obtained from
the Washington State Department of Ecology. Well logs were reviewed to provide
g~neral information on the soil and groundwater conditions underlying the local area.,
, Selected water well logs are presented herein and denoted as WW-l and WW-2,
Figures C-l and C-2. The approximate locations ofWW-l and WW-2 are shown on
Well Location Plan, Figure 3.
I .
,
I
Geotechni9a[ Report
Beckett Point Community WWT
Jefferson County
Appendix C
~'\)
SO
5").;..
Project lV~ Q41136-5
May 10, 2005
. Myers Biodynamics, Inc.
c.. STATE OF WASHJNGT01(
DEPAltTAn:NT OF OONSEJr'f.BI!UON
AND m:vELOl"JUl2'f.f
mu.r LOG . N4' APP~iL....2.796
na... 1...20-. . ,19 61
~ bt..llel1 ,dril1~r
~drill.erJs record
'f'
Loec&tioa: Sta&l of W ASmNaTON
Je.t"terson I.
CouJ1tJ: .
~
Jl'ap
Nim!.~mL'4 ~1Q..t..r" i. 2, 'W.
.t>rUtbg Co Ht~~lson & lli,JJ.:lmns
, Rt. 1 Pt. Townsend Wash.
Ke:lbod of DrfIlt"t. ~
~ Balch Land Deve1op. .Co~..
~8050-35th Ave. N.E. to Seat-t;le 15
Land ~ dalnM ~
(
(
.,
-.
. E'
.=:J. ~ ITA(=~j ~ .~~
~~~~'*'........--...~... -~
~dlll ~l<' me. lie....,. .. -w ~,)OftI1t ~ cw.,~" 1M ::
......m-.w-__~~ ~'IDUl~'--'"
JfIcMlbloo. J'~s.we(~JQt"'~)el'l~~dI:~). ~
!rRJt. 111' .
"3'\:)
6J
5;y
"
r
~
t
~
. .
Sheet
..
0" ",,_b'
I WWl I Figure C-l
~ .
Fu. 0dCIm0I and J1nt Cop., 'WIth
De~of=rh
~~"i>ttuen r!iW
WATER WELL REPORT AppIka\ICQ No. ~
BTA..'l'JI or WABBJNQ';OOlIf Pem\I& No. ....
(1) OWNER: N_.FHH~~LJI4.xt.lJ J9/.k" ~~r;..St 8lfAltl!iJ.~.uMJ. 0 99.J.u,
(%) LOCATION OF WELL:' CUJl~ .:9~ ~ 1 ~ ))UJ.,s,1lli.lt. Au&l.u. ~ '1~ ~\V.x.
~ lIa4 tlbbwce ~ acI:Iolt or nbdtricIm ~
J\_~J.r..~~'f: ~ 't::i.pItmp tQQed oa) ~ ,m.I
- w_ -1- . w_ ......E. nm. W.....,.l.mIl.
-"- :_ Ad
- - 11.1" ~ . (/1.' ./1 ..1)' ~1t
bale of t~ . II . [Sllltled]~UP-1tl<<.~ 6 'i/fl
==- ~~" ,'IJ /IDIJI. wIftt. ~p ,..,~:::'Wdo_ IlCer J'2.. ,,~ M.wI ~ r (Wtl1 DI;Ule:)
~.t.... I>f ~ Was a c:!lemfca1,...al;nb lIDJKIet Tet.'.r_.o,..._."".No. ~_,_.., ,.,~, 'c~.'.,,'~-,::'.,~.lj, ".,~_. Date......kA.9 -. 19i.~
. .,., .,..., , I :,c> 'f"'''m;:;tltM~,'
(t1SI:.A.DD't'.rIb~ ~ ~
. .I,:, ~"....".. __,,,.~,,__,...",,",
ECY 050-1-20 ; ; ;,__ J ~
lUll DEe ~_..
JEFFERSOf\) eCn.'
DEPT. OF COIVilvlUNtTY
(3) PROPOSED l1SE: :o-atJo tI JndIatdal 0 K1UlidpcIl 0
lrrlptSoa C. 'flit wen 0 OIber 0
(4) nPE OF WOB.1U ~=~1.~
w." 'tnIl rt ~: Xlut [] Bond []
~ [] CalIllt [J DrtYes []
--..u_1S 0 AM Botal7lS .Jettccl 0
(5) DIMENSIONS: DiMM~ of -.ell "_v tDdla..
:DdIIo.f ,3::/,.., ~ Depat of ~ _lt3~J.. ..
(6) CONS'l'lWClION DE'l'AIr..s:. jJtm I ft- ~ ~A
, "
CasiDg ms~-,,--.. DIM'&.. ~.4..- a.1e~/ft.
. ~o ~-:DIam. b.-~ ft. ~ ft.
WoIde4'1lf _- 1Ibm..ma _ ft. .. _ ft.
l"edondaDss Ta 0 .. ~
'J'1pe of patDntor -'
SIZJI of puJlcU&N
~ InIll
.~ InIll
pcllllt~ m-
ID.~
ft,1o
4.10
ft.1e
~.. ~ JiJ~ >>.5">> . lJ CL-r
~.1ll1M If!.~t: ~ ~
'DIaa.~ Slot me 12- m..~ ft. f.i'1iJi. ft.
ntom: Slot.... _ ~ _ ft. 10 OiL
Graye1 paebc1: Yes 0 -11 . sa. e.t~:
Grwd placed me ft. ..
Smfate seal: Ye:alil N.9..0 ,T1t ~ ~t~!9
lIal.ttb1 -.t Ja .-l /:fetJ"fZJm"'" "="-
DJ<l.riq IIInIta ~ -we watut y 0
. ~ of _tut IlcpIh of atn'-
)IdbCMl Ill! ..... wtrata ~
('l) PUJ4l": ~..'Jj >>-
'J'1pe: . H.P
I
(8)'WA'l'D:i..xVEt.S:" ~~PAw~va ~
, St&uo JenI /1.3 t) . ft..... test of wdl .".l.-;l y-~ " .
.AxIal"" JlCCllIUt1l .... per lIll'DlIft IllIda XiIII"
.A%ld.". ....ter lIII ~ b)'
(9) WELL '1'.ESTS:
'WM . r>-. 1es:t lIll:IdeJ TltI [J
'YJel41 ~ 'lOtth
cap, 'falTe.'lrie.)
~. III Ill. __ waJ1!l' JeTd ,b
.""",,",, bdow IIIatle )fIYd .
Noll u 7a. 1>1..,
fL~~
'. ..
~\)
5J-
5'J.-'
...--......
(10) WELL tOO:
.
1'DrmIoIIGIa: Daerlll~~ntiw. ~ alft .,....... alMI ~ tlItCl
~,,~~IIaat~.J::r::=t~~
.1II.\ftSIAL :rac>>c m
Mt1bJJ] tJdtt 3
&MI#J~~
84Af,A)tf~nJ
Btlwn (JJ.~ Ii
Q6fAW'11 ~,."
ill.
A.
ft.
ft.
ft.
ft.'
No~
WllCk
)on. WELL DImJ,F:&JS S'.rA'.rDIENT:
ThIs wen 'IV&S ~ 'lIDder my ~ and t1Us n))Olt Is
\rue to the bm ~ 1117 knowledge and belfef.
NAVlIJ. &llfj1'l" ~itlll1"'h.. '& I ).,0 _
C~ Ar;a, DC' ~on) C'f7pe or p.d1tt)
...'
.,g. s
I WWZ\ Figure C-2
....."-"'"-'~~.....""'..__......~_~_......_.._..._.....__~r~.._~,.,.."'*"-'",........-.....'._.~_~
I'
117;:,"\
II, !] ,--
ll~\ll".
I It l i ,
IU UL___--' I
~ . JEFFfRSON COUNTY " .;
j OEPT. Of COlviniilil'MY OEVclOPiV:EN f J
L.. :
tl