The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutLog011 Section 5 . . . '0 Myers Biodynamics inc. - geotechnical engineering. geological sciences. coastal processes', . rr%!"r;-TJi lE ,),/. rm i'l AUG - 5 200,5 [lJ) ! L,_, , I L_...~ ~"..........,..~"..,..,~....,_.-""__,_."..~_:'"._..,, .. ""'._ GEOTECHNICAL REPORT . Beckett Point Community Wastewat~r Treatment Area Jefferson County, Washington , Prepared for: Mr. James Hasslinger, P.E. Mr. Michael Moren, P.E. Parametrix, Inc. . 5700 Kitsap Way, Suite 202 Bremerton, Washington 98312-2234 . , . Prepared by: Myers Biodynamics, Inc. Rolling Bay Building , i 1254 Sunrise Drive ". ", . . Bainbridge Island, Washington 98110 , .' , , , , May 10,2005 Project No. 04 ~ 136-$ I, "r, h," ~ Ii,' ; ! .......1\1 -=._>~..,__LL__~_ . x.xJ._....~._ of22-. . ROLLING SAY BUILDING . 11254 SUNRISE DRIVE. BAINBRIDGE ISLAND. WASHINGTON 9Rl10 . 7()()R47 ()071 . . . .' ~',,:! " .J , ~ Table of Contents Section' Paige No.' 1.0 INTRODUCTION ~...'.................. ....... ........... ....... ............ ................. ..............1 '" " 2.0 SITE AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION.....;..................................................... 1 3. 0 INFORMATION REVIEW...................... ...... ..... ...... ...;.. ........................ .....:..2 4. 0 GEOLOGIC SETTING. ........ .......... ............ ........ ....... ....... ..... ...... ......:.~............2 4.1 "Soil...................................................................;.............................................3 4.2 Groundwater. ...... ...... ... ............. ..... ...... ........... ...:....... ............ ........ .............3 5.0 SITE RECONNAISSANCE ...... ..... ............ .......... ...............-.......;.. ............. ......4 ,5 .1 Topography.......... .......... ............. ......... ........... :.... ...... ......,............. ............. .4-, " 5 .2 Vegetation...... ...'... ...... ".... ............... ...........~ .................. ................ ...,....... ......4 5.3 Drainage................................. ~..................................................................... 5 5.4 Soil Exposures and Groundwater Evidence.................................................,5 6.0 GENERALIZED SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS AND LABORATORY TEST RESlJL TS ..... ..... ....... ..... .......... ..... :............. .......... ..'... .....;.........:....... ......6 6.1 Test Pit Explorations .......................................:..........................................6 / 6.2 Laboratory Testing.. .......... .................... ........ .... ....... .......... ...... '.' ... .............6 7.0 HYDRAULIC LOApING RATES FOR ON-SITE SOILS............................7 8.0 WATER BUDGET AND GROUNDWATER NITRATE LOADS.........:.....8 8.1 Water Budget Assessment .........................................................................8 8.2 Nitrate in the Environment..................................................................'.....ll 9.0 QUANTIFICATION OF NITRATE IN GROUNDWATER.......~..............12 10.0 CLOSURE............. .......... ...... .................................. ........... ............. ......... .....15 . 11.0 REFERENCES ..........................................,...................................,.................16 'j"'f"W-l\ Ii ! I Ci\i!' II .----- Z; ~ 'Of~~. 041136-5 ,_.__.,"--, . , . ay 10, i005 Myers Biodynamics, Inc. Geotechnical Report Beckett Point Community wwr Jefferson County, Washington' '- i - . FIGURES: Figure 1 - Vicinity Map and Site Plan Figure 2 - Proposed TreatmentArea Exploration Plan Figure 3 - Well Location Plan APPENDICES: . Appendix A - Field Exploratio~ Program . Appendix B - Laboratory Testing Appendix C - Water Well. Logs . , . . Geotechnical Report Beckett Point Community WWT Jefferson County, Washington -ii- lTEM, f(' ~.~_ ~"""~"'"'''3 f.Jr2_ ,H'~_"''''''''''''- . Project No. 0,41136-5 May 10.2005 Myers Biodynamics, Inc. e 'e- " e " / 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 Com~unity in Jefferson County, Washington. Our work was conducted in general accordance with our agreement dated " dctober 4,2004.' The scope of our work included information review, site reconnaissance,- test pit explorations, laboratory testing of selected soil samples, 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 "wa~er balance" 'and "ni~rate balance" analyses were included in the scope of our work. ' '2.0 Site and Project Description The Beckett Point Community is located southwest of Port Townsend in Jeffer$On County, Washington. The Beckett Point Community inCludes existing residences arid 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 , generalconfigur~tion of Beckett P9int and the proposed wastewater treatment area are shown on the Vicinity Map and Site Plan, Figure 1. ' , , ' The proposed locati~n for the community wastewater treatment system is northeast of Beckett Point within the forested, undeveloped property owned by the Comtnunity. The forested area totals approximately 30 acres and is bounded on the north by Hill Crest Avenue and Beckett Point Road. Adjacent property borders the east side of the forested area and the steep coastal slope that descends to the Point is located several hundred feet to the south and west. The Proposed Treatment Area Exploration Plan, Figure 2, shows the treatment are,a in more detail. , I , \- I We understand that the prop,?sed comm~ty wastewater treatment system is being designed in accordance with the Washington State Department of Health "Design Standards for'Large On~site Sewage Systems with Design Flows of Greater Than 3,500 Gallons Per Day" , (WSDOH 1993). The proposed system will replace existing individual systems located on' the iesiderttiallots, which generally do not conform to current Health Department standards. The new. system will also account for bllildout of some of the remaining undeveloped lots (or I a total of 102 residential hook-ups.- The new community system will collect wastewater in a sewerage system al9ng Beckett Point Road and View Point Lane. Collected wastewater, will be pumped up the coastai slope I along existing roads/drh:,eways to a pressure distribution treatment area. The current , wastewater treatment ~rea design layout will cov~r approximately 5 acres of the total 30-acre ," Geotechnical Report Beckett Point Community WWT Jefferst;Jn County, Washington "T'f-\\ ~ ~ ~. t:. pdJ. \l "'~~'''',~'"'''7T''-'~\'f'~ ",__c_"_,~",_7::.-,"",,,_>_"~,"f:o.,,,";7__~,~~A. Project No. 041.136-5 May 10, 2005 Myers Biodynamics, Inc. 1 of 17 . . . I I forested area northeast of the Point; Existing forest within the 5-acte treatment ~ea 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 I and 2. A more detailed desl(ription of the treatment area and surrounding community property is presented ' below in section 5.0 Site Reconnaissance. ' , ' I / 3.0 Information Review Reference'information for the area was reviewed as a part of our work and included soil and \ ' ' geologic mapping, water supply information, and water well logs. The general ref~rence information is presented below. A summary of soil and groundwater information obtained from the information review is summarized in Section 4.0 Geologic Setting. , ' )0> Geology and Groundwater Resources of Eastern Jeffer~on County, Washington, Water Supply Bulletin (WSB) No. 54, April 1981. )0> 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/we1110g/index.asp )0> 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 District No.1 of Jefferson County, by Economic ,and Engineering Services, Inc. and Pacific Groundwater Group, May 1994. )0> Stage J Technical Assessment as of February 2000, Water Resource Inventory Area \ (WRIA) 17, by Parame~rix, Inc., Pacific Groundwater Group, Inc., Montgomery Water Group, Inc., ami Caldweltan~ A~sociates, Inc., Oc~ober 2000. . ' )0> , Selected Analytical Test Results for Local QuimperSub-basin Drinking Water Wells, . , ,Susan Porto,'R.S., Jefferson County Health 'Department"2004-2005. " ' 4.0 _ Geologic Setting I}. SUll1)llary of local soil and groundwater conditions is presented below. The summary is based on the information review presented above. Site specific observations and subsurface explot;ations are presented in later sections of the report. ' , ",",lL" "'.'''~''-;-::.- r"'~ '~o ,.",..:::2~.,-.II,....::L:""""'" Project No. 041136-5 May/O, 2005 Myers Biodynamics. Inc. Geotechnical Report Beckett Point Community WWT ' Jeffers01i County, Washington ' 2 of 17 " ,. " , 4J Soil Geologic mapping generally indicates the local area northeast of the project site is capped by glacial till. Glacial till is composed ora 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.' Glaci~l advance outwashis mapped below the glaci~ till across inuch of the project site and along the steep coastal slope above the Point. Gracial advance outwash .soils are generally composed of sand or sand and gravel that have be~n deposited by melt waters of the adv~cing 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 advailce outwash that can ine1udesand and ~ravel, 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 l~goon located on the interior of, the Point as shown on Figure 1. Soil Survey reference mapping indicates the proposed treatment area is mapped as Cassolary Sandy Loam, ,15 to 30 percent (CfD) with the Point mapped as Tidal Marsh (Td) and Coastal Beaches (Co). Coastal zone atlas 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 community. The proposed treatment area above the steep slope is des~ribed as "Stable" with respect to slope stabi1ity~ . 4.2 Groundwater . . .. '. ~ , 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 area. Wells 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 ,are~ based;on DOE information. The two closest well logs, designated W,Wl and WW2 for the purposes of this report; are atta~hed as Figures C-.l and C-2 in Appendix C. Well logs show a likely cap of glacial tilL (sand, gravel, and clay) underlain by sand or sand and graver with clay layers of significant thickness. Static water levels reported on the well logs were typically more than 170 feet be.low grade at the well locations with the closest well logs (Wwl' and WW2) indicating a static water level of approximately 230 feet below grade. I The Jefferson County PUD No." 1 was also contacted for additional information regarding water supply wells in th~ local area. No current water wells Qr 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 dfthe project sjte.' " The . lack of local water wells precludes a determination of site specific grou.ndwater gradient or.. flow direction. However, the Groundwater Resqurce of East Jefferson County reference shows an estimated groundwater flow direction generally follO'\ymg local tqpography ~ Geotechnical Report Beckett Poi;lt Community WWT ,Jefferson County, Washington, Project^,o.04JJ3~5 May 10. 2005 Myers BiodynamiCs. Inc. l\. " , '''''''.'M~'''~''~'-'.'''--:';';:::::{5 . (;~;'TQ,~~d ;JF....:i..="'.'-'~ ,"""',."".....,.", '" '. flowing northwest, west and southwest of the proposed treatment area. The groundwater flow direction is oriented opposite (away from) the identified wells i~ the area. 5'.0 Site Recorinaissance Site conditions were evaluated by conducting a reconnaissance of the proposed wastewater treatme~t and surrounding local area at various dates from October 2004 through March. 2005. Site and local conditions.inc1uding topography, vegetation, surface drainage, and'soil ,exposures and groundwater evidence are presented be~ow.. 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 conditions observed.in the explorations is presented in Section 6.0. 5.1 Topography . Topography in the proposed treatment area generally slopes down to the north and northwest . as shGwn 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 r~ge 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 routes. The locally steeper areas of the site are generally associated with ravine side slopes. . Beyond the proposed'treatnlentarea, local grades slope down to the northwest; west, and southwest towards the steep coastal slope. North of the Point, Vi~w Point Drive and associated residences are located at the toe of the slope with a concrete bulkhead west of the road along the shoreline. At the Point, 'the steep slope descends to the existing lagoon area. On the east side of the Poil1;t, the steep sldpe des~ends to a cul-de-~ac at the terminus of . Beckett Point Road. At this locatioQ. several structures are present at the toe ~f the slope. East of the Point, the steep slope descends to the Discovery Bay Shoreline. Coastal slope grades average 1 PO perceht (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 termiriusofBeckett Point R~ad, the toe 'ofth~ slope was , apparently excavated for the cul.;.de-sac creating a, locally steeper segment 20 to' 30 feet above . th"e road elevation with grades of 45 t~ 50 degre~s (100 to 119 percent). 5.2 Vegetation The treatment area is heavily forested with aA establis)1ed canopy of deciduous and conifer I . ' _ trees including Douglas fir, Western red cedar, hemlo~k, alder anc;l big leaf maple. The' understory vegetation is moderate with woody shrubs and herbaceous groundcover ;ncluding sword fern, salal,and Oregon grape~ Clearing for primitive access roads has occurred across the site as shown on Fig~e 2. , . ' " Geotechnical Report Beckett Point Community WWT Jefferson County, Washington 4 of 17 ProjectlVo.0411311-5 , May 10, 2005 ."..,.,....l.\_.~m_.Y'yers Biodynamics. Inc. ,.,.1,.....)~O~'"\ .' . 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 madrollll. Above the Point, areas of the slope have b~en cleared (and historically graded) for residential homes arid Beckett Point , Road. Some established tr~es and understory vegetation remain with the residen~ial areas. On the slope above the lagoon vegetation is primarily grasses with occasional ,small trees. . Vegetation on the PO,int is dominat~d by' grasses and herbaceous groundcover: 5.3 Drainage Topography within the proposed wastewater treatment area would generally direct any surface water flow north and northwest towards Beckett Point Road and Hillcrest Avenue. However, no evidence o(signifi~ant s~face water runoff, erosion, or active drainage courses was observed in the proposed wastewater treatment area. This includes no evi4enee of surface water flow in the existing shallow ravines on the site. It appears the current site condi~ions' including soil and vegetative 'cover allow for infiltration andevapo-transpiration ofincident precipitation'on thesite., " ' " -- . I . . Local grades surrounding the wastewater treatment area generally direct surface water runoff to tbenorthwest into the Beckett Point Road drainage ditch. Elsewhere, surface gradients direct sm:face water flow towards the steep coastal slope's northwest, west, and southwest of the treatment atea. Observation of the local area indicates no evidence -of significant surface water runoff or erosion on the steep coastal slope. This includes a utility trench alignment . ex:cavatedand backfilled down the steep coastal slope. . 5.4 Soil Exposures and Groundwater Evidence , , , Due to vegetative cover in the proposed wastewater treatment area, no significant soil exposures'were observed on the site. Minor' exposures along the primitive road system indicated prim,arily granular sand and gravel soils. No groundwater seepage or evidence of , seasonal daylighting groUndwater was observed in the treatment syste~ area. Soil exposures were observed at various locations,in the vicinity of the proposed treatment ',system. A local "gravel pit" is located off ofBec~ett 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 interbedde~ gravelly sand, fine sand, and fine sandy silt., No evidence of ground~ater 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 theterniinus of Beckett Point Road a cul-de-sac was constructed by apparently cutting into the toe of the slope. Above, the cur.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 yegetatedwith sp~cies generally indicative . of free draining soilconditipns. Howev~r, near the terminus of Beckett Point Road historic Geotechnical Report Beckett Point Community WWT Jefferson County, Washington Project No. 041136-5 May 10,2005 Myers Bio(lynamics. Inc. , 5 of17 ,",;~:o '~',"J ,; IJ"- .",s"",,..,,,,,,,,.......,, , , . . . structures at the toe of the slop~ were reportedly ~ti1ized as a "spring house" to collect groundwater at the toe of the slope. ~ome hydrophytic herbaceous vegetation was also observed in this area. . 6.0 GeneraUzed Su~surface Conditions and Lab~ratory Test Results , . Subsurface 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 g~~n size analyses "to confinn soil classification. A description of the subsurface. conditions in the test pit explorations and labor~tory test results are presented below in sections 6.1 and 6.2, respec~ively. . , 6.1 Test Pit Explorations Eleven test pit explorations, TP-1 through TP-11, were excavated across the site ,on October 21,2004. The approximate locations of the test pit explorations are shown on Figure2. Logs 'of the test pit explorations are presented in Appendix A on Figures A-I throl,lgh A-II along with a summary of the field exploration program. Test pits were excavated to depths of7 to 10 feet below existing site grade in order to observe soil conditions below the elevation of potential future treatment systemdrainfields~ Previous site investigations were also conducted on the site by others. A total of eleven soil log exca,:,ations were perfonnedon 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, She'ets 1 through 4. Generalized subsurface conditions observed in the proposed wastewater treatment area are presented below. Soil descriptions are based on both ASTM and USDA (in parenthesis) methodologies. In general, site test pit explorations indicate subsurfl;lce conditions consistent with the reference mapping, wen log review, and reconnaissance of the area. Soils are composed of glacial advanced outwash consisting of gravelly slightly silty sand (USDA: 'gravelly sand), fme sand (USDA: fine sand and' fine to medium sand), and gravelly sand (USDA: gravelly sand)., In the majority of the test pits sh~low, 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 , I , \ Seven representative soil s~ples were selected for l~boratory testingto detennine grain size distribution and provide confinnation of soil classification. The s~ples were selected to represent the range of soil tyPes encountered within the proposed on-site wastew~ter '- tre~tment area. The re~ults of the laboratory testing are presented in Appendix B, Figures B- ,I ,through B-3. A summary of the laboratory test results is presented below i~ Table 1. Geotechnical Report Beckett Point Community WWT Jefferson County, Washiligton 6 of 17 Project No. 041136-5 ,.,.,."1~...~"..=,,.,,~ Bi::~i~/f::' u,/l--", ..5fZ~, ) , . TABLE 1 Results of Laboratory Grain si~ Analyses Beckett Point Community Wastewater Treatment Area '" Percent USDA Particle Size Test Pit Sample . Gravel Sand ' Silt and Clayl No. No. Depth C M F , USDA Description2 TP-2 S-l 12~18" 2 11 11 36 40 Sandy Loam - 'TP-2 S-3 ' ~6-48" 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 Flne to Coarse SAND . (dominated by Fine Sand) TP-8 S-3 48-54" 6 8' 26 51 9 Fine to Medium Sand . (dominated by Fine Sand) I , TP-9 8.-2 24-30" 11 8 11 40 24 Loamy Fine to Medium '. SAND( dominated by Fine Sand) TP-11 S-2 48-54" 10 15 34 31 10 Fine to Coarse SAND (dominated by Fine to Medium Sand) Notes: 1. Coarse medium and fine sand, silt and clay size fraction based on 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. Soil classification based on USDA metnodology was ~tilized to determine the hydraulic loading rate for site soils in accordance 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 of laboratory . 'testing, soil within the proposed, wastewater tre~tment 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/ft~/day). Based on the abundance offine sand in mahy of the soil samples tested, a maximum loading rate ofO~8 , - gal/ft2/day is recommended (or deSIgn. The lQaping rate recorrimendationis based~on field observations, test pit explorations, and laboratory testing of soils within the proposed wastewater ~re~tment area~ ! , Geotechnical Report , Beckett Point Community WWT Jefferson County, Was~ington 7 of 17 . i'\,,"[..r':i\() '" .........,._.1, '......___" 10 '. 'q".,....w."., . ~o , "- .,'<;f.~,,:._'"..,,_. ProjectlVo.041136-5 . Maid 0,' 2005 . Myers BiodynamiCs;/nc. . " . ., . . TABLE 2 Maximum Hydraulic Loading Rate (WAC 1995 and WSDOH 1993) Beckett Point Community Wastewater Treatment System Soil Type Soil Textural Classification Description Loading Rate galltt2/day 1A , lB Very gravelly coarse sands or coarser, extremely gravelly soils Very gravelly medium sands, very gravelly fine sands, very gravelly very fines san"ds, very gravelly loamy 'sands Coarse sands (includes the ASTM C-3~'sand) Medium sands. Fine sands, loamy coarse sands, loamy medium sands Very fine sands, loamy fine sands, loamy very fine sands, sandy loams, loams' ' Sitt loams that are porous and have a well developed structure Varies Varies 2A 2B 3 4 1.2 1.0 0.8 0.6 5 0.45 6 Other silt loams, sandy ~lay loams, clay loams, Silty clay loanis 0.2 8.0 Water Budget and Groundwater Nitrate' Loads An examination of a basin's water characteristics and specifically a 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 land use.planriing strategies within a basin. Water budgetab.alyses and related nitrate lo~d projections, ~owever, should not be rigorously used to assess the status of resource availability because they do not allow prediction of a system' s"re.sponse to additional withdrawals and shorMerm variations in resource characteristics. 8.1 Water Budget Assessment , , , . A water budget is, ;;m 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 ana1yses'ofa proposed development also help provide initial guidance to resource managers, civil engineers and planners ill develJ)pm~nt of project water man~geh1ent strategies and constructe~ facilities,. Geotechnical Report Beckett Point Community WWT Jefferson County, Washington ~,. . ...il."..,.. ,,5,,__.., Project No. 041136-5 . May 10. 2005 Myers Biodynamics, Inc. 8 of 17 . . . The water balance assessment for the project is based on the following conservation of mass principle: water entering a sy~tem equals water exiting a system (pIps 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 over the average water year is zero (extreme water years ~ill result in variations in groundwater storage, however, the long-tenn condition of groundwater storage is 'assumed to be a steady state system). As a steady state system, thewatef balance relationship is . the following: ' Recharge = Discharge Where: ~~charge (R) = Precipitation (P) + water import (I) - rejected recharge (RR) . Discharge (D) = Natural dischar~e (ND) + on-site e~traction (I)X) Surface water runoff and shallow perched groundwater that migrates laterally and discharges from topographically sloped areas is collectively designated as "rejected recharge." The term "reje~ted recharge" is used in WRIA 17 'Water Resources Study (ParametJ:ix et al. 2000) to describe basin conditions along Jefferson County coastal slopes where some portion ofthe groundwater often migrates laterally from. zones of perched water conditions and,discharges from the slope as seepage, springs, confined drainage channds, and wetlands and is lost 'from the groundwater regime. Recharge in the project area includes all water that infiltrates into the site soils beyond the vegetation root zone and remains stored in the water-bearing geQlogic unit (non- reje,cted). . 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 of 21.5 inches per year.' . In 2000, a water resources study of WRIA 17 (that includes eastern Jefferson County) reassessed the status of groundwater characteristics in local watershed sub-basins. The WRIA 17 study expanqed a prior study. assessment ofgrouridwater characteristics in eastern Jefferson County (ImC,et al. 1994).. Recharge and "rejected runoff' rates were established for each sub:-basin through groundwater modeling; The estim~ted aver~ge annual recharge rate for the project area sub-basin is 5.8 inches per year from precipitation based on the WRIA 17 study. " I ' In addition to precipitation contributions to groundwater recharge, project 'recharge rates will 'also beartificiaUy augmented by the introduction of treated wastewater effluent into. the near~ surface soil horizon of the 30 acre S9i1 absorption set-aside' area. The average wastewater load fOf the receiving area based on the wast~water treatment engine~ring design. is 7,250 gpd for 102 domestic hook-ups (Parametrix 2(05). The projected design load equates to an additiop.al 3.25 inches per year applied over the 30 acre area. Geotechnical Report Beckett Point' Community WWT , Jefferson County, Washington "~",,.11~__~.,,~~._.,~~ ,..,.,.,'...,.,...'.. L z.; -0 ,.',,,'.',,,'.,,. ~, Projec( No, ()4TfJ~5 " ,,""" May J 0, 2005 . Myers Biodynamics, lnc. ' 9 of J 7' . ! . .' . TABLE 3 Summary of Values ; Initial Water Bal,arice Assessinent and 1'.litrogen Loading WRIA PUD Selected Parameter , 17 Study No. 1 Study Other Value Comments , 2000 1994 - . , 21.5 represents average value Precipitation (P), 17.5 - 21.5 21.5 selected in WRIA 17 Study, inches/year 22.5 - Table 4-2 ". WWT Import (I), - 325 3.25 Based on 7,250 gpd applied within . inches/vear 30 acre set-aside area Groundwater . Site-specific soil explorations Recharge (R), 5.8 5 - 10 - 5.8 confirm site alluvial deposits , inches/vear ; without over-consolidated materials Wastewater Load, 1502 7,250 71 gallons/ 71 gpd/residence based on average gpd/11ook-J.lp - gallons/ gallons/day hook-up/day annual design value for 102 hoo!<- , cap/day UPS of 7,250 gpd (Parametrix 2(05) On-site Extraction 0 No extraction propo.sed within lEX), gpd - - - project area Total-N in raw 20 - .85 Part-time occupancy with no high , 35 - 40mg/L strength wastewater compo~ent at . ''Yastewater, 'mg/L - ~~ each of the 102 hook-uos - Total-N ,removal \ , through septic 0.10-0.30 0.20 Assumed average value timks, (%) - , Denitrification . , . selected on-site Single pass value for conventional, attached growth Negl. - 0.50 0.10 attached groWth treatment within native soil with low organic WWT system, - compo~ition . % ofN03--N , Background groundwater " Assumed conservative value Nitrate < 0.1 mg/L O.1mgIL , derived from local 2004-2005 well \ concentration, test results - mg/L , I WWT = Wastewater Treatment System Design Hydraulic Load (7,250 gpd) 2 Value is at:l average,daily usage factor typically applied in similar profiies ,/ Geotechnical Report Beckett Point Community WWT Jefferson C,ounty, Washington !, 'T E.;, )\.,} . l( " '.' .."lJ.,.::'~-'-'~-~g,~.., Project No. 041136-5 Afay J 0, 2005 Myers Biodynamics, lnc, 100117 . \ .', . , , '8.2 Nitrate in the Environment 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 in soil, water, sewage~ and the human digestive' "tract. In quantities normally found' in food or .feed" nitrates become toxic only under conditions in'which they may be reduced to nitrites. The reaction of nitrite with hemoglobin is generally hazardo~s in human infants under the age of 3 inonths~ Nitrate/as nitrogen (N03- -N) should not exceed 10 mgIL in a drinking water supply based on current regulatory standards.' " , . Transformation of the principal nitrogen compounds (Org~ic nitrogen, 'ammonia, , ammonium, nitrogen gas, nitrite, and nitrate) can occur through several key mechanisms in the environment: fixation, ammonification, synthesis, nitrification, and denitrification (US EP A 1993). Nitrogen fixation is the conversion of nitrogen gas into nitrogen 'compounds that ~ can be assimilated by plants. Biological fixation is th~ most common, but fixation can also occur by lightning and through industrial processes. Ammonification is the biochemical . degradation of organic-N into NH3 or NRt + by heterotrophic bact,eria under aerobic or , anaerobic conditions. Some organic-N'cannotbe degraded and becomes part' of the, humus in, soils. Synthesis is the biochemical mechanism that conv:er:ts NHt + -N or N03 - -N Into plant , protein (Organic-N). Nitrogen fixation is a unique form of synthesis that can generally only be performed by nitrogen-fixing bacteria and algae. Nitrogen cycle processes in the environment are schematically shown \">elow. P1anland Animal ' ReokIua Com I .------ Surface Soil Organic N ----- ----. . . . I I' I " I I I I J I I I I I I , I 'I ' I ~ -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -~ -- -- --I Ground Water .' '. . L_______~---~---?----------------------------~--------____J Ir"I-. ~ NO- . " The Nitrogen Cycle in the Environment Geotechnical Report Beckett Point Community WWT Jefferson County, Washington Project No. 041136-5 . May 10,2005 Myers Biotjynamics, Inc. 'l . , ~-_.,""-- ",",..."'''.......'.',.,'',.,q.,.'.".,, "C"() ,," I' a.,~...,' '.< ".,.....'.".0.' . .' . Nitrification is the biological oxidation ofNI4 + to N03 ~ through a two-step autotrophic process by theba~teriaNitrosomonas and Nitrobacter. The two-step'reactions are usually very rapid and hence it,is rare to find nitrite levels higher than 1.0 mg/L in water (Sawyer, et 01. 1994). The nitrate formed by nitrification is available for plant use as a nitrogen source (synthesis) or may also be reduced to N2 ga& through the proces~ of denitrification. Nitrate' can, however, contaminate groundwater if it is not used for synthesis or reduced 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 , "Nitrate Balancelf was conducted for the proposed wastewater treatment projyct. The accumulation of nitrate in groundwater can be one of the most significant long-term consequences of onsite wastewater disposal (Han~shce and Finnemore 1992). Nitrogen primarily exists as Orgariic-N and NH3-NINH4 + -N in septic tank effJ.uentiand is usually transformed into nitrate as the wastewater infiltrates through the soil column beneath the system~s soil absorption_field. Nitrogen load,ing from high housing densities can significantly exceed any potential plant uptake ofnifrogen even if the effluent was properly applied, a ~ommon problem in many communities and formany large treatment system _ applic~tions (Gold and Sims 2000; County of Butte 1998;Hantzshce and Finnemore 1992). As a result of the potential for nitrate groundwater contamination generated from septic- tank/soil absorption systems, public heath and water pollution control agencies have tried either to limit the number of onsite systems in a given area by quantifying nitrogen loadings (Hantzsche ~d Finnemore 1992); or to examine alternative onsite technologies that provide nitrogen removal (Ayres Associates' 1993; California Regional Water Quality Control Board 1997; Whitmeyer et 01. 1991). I. Nitrate impacts to the groundwater may be estimated using a mass balance equation. The Hantz~che-Finnemore mass balance equation estimates nitrate loads to groundwater l?ased on measured factors of rainfall, groundwater recharge, septic system nitrogen loadings; and denitrification. The equation takes the following form: nr = I -nw-(1-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, inlyr,(m/yr) , nb = background N03",:"Nconcentratio,nwithout wastewater discharge, mgIL Geotechnical Report, Beckett Point Community WWT ,'Jefferson County, WG.fhington Project No. 041136-5 May 10, 2005 Myers Biodynamics, Inc. 12 of /7 15,.., . . , A critical simplifying assumption in the equation is that there is uniform and cpmplete mixing of 'wastewater and rainfall over the entire developed area and mixing is completed at the " water table (Hantzsche and Finnemore 1992). The assumption has many limitations in critical analy~e~, since complete mixing of wastewater and rainfall will never actually occur. Nevertheless, the Hantsche-Finnemore equation has been used in long-term planiUng successfully as long a~ its limitations are recognized and the 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, alQng with the probable' degree of denitrification of nitrate in the , environment, then the resultant conc.;entration 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 envirooplent, nitrogen exists principally as Organic-N and NH3-N/NH/ -N (TKN). Organic-N i~ transformed to NH3-NlNltt + -N via ammonification; although some NH3-NINH/-N is converted to Organic-N via bacterial cell growth, there will be a net increase ofNH3-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 of NIL. +-N in th~ soil; 2) volitization of NH3-N in alkaline soils at a pI{ above 8.0; 3) nitrification and subsequent movement of N03- -N 'towards the groundwater; 4) biological uptake of both NH3-N/NH/-N and N03--N; and 5) . denitrification if the environmental conditions are appropriate. The removal of nitrogen ~ the on-site wastewater treatment process is shown schematically below. ... TOTAL NITROGEN REMOVAL .. , , NITRlFlCATION IlENII1llf1CAllON Of .. -4 ~ Oxygen I AEROBIC NOi - N :.. ANOXIC PHASE I' PHASE I SOIL ABSORpnON TREATMENT Nitrate Carbon Nitrogen Removal Process in On-Site Wastewater Syst~ms Within a properly designed and constructed subsurface absorption tr~nch, diffusion of o;x.ygen into the vadose zone of the groundwater system promotes the biological oxidation ofNHt +-N to N03--N through biological nitrification. Depending on soil moisWie conditions and organic matter concentrations within the soil colwnn, N03 - - N can be reduced, under anoxic conditions, . to N2 gas through heterotrophic denitrification. A carbon source is required for the denitrification to occur. Although denitrification may be significant in some soils in;rilany . . instances there may not be sufficient organic substrate at a depth below th~ 'A' horizon to Geotechnical Report , Beckett Point Community WWT Jefferson County, Washington , . Project No. 041136-5 May J 0, 2005 , t t,_.<,,~- Myers Biodynamics. Inc. ." ,.~''*.( , ...... t2 ,:),,,.,..,,,, ,ii."." 13 of J 7 .. promote denitrification (Ayres Associates 1993). Under th~se conditions, N03--N can migrate downward into the,groundwater aquifer, dependi~g on soil moisture conditions (saturated or unsaturated flow). The historical practice of constructing relatively deep subsurface soil absorption trenches (2 to 4 ft.) for septic tank effluents may also often have the effec~ of helping diminish denitrification potential and the enhancement ofN03--N movement in the soil column. Plant uptake ofNlI4+-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 proximit):' 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 natutal ' ,"backgroUnd" concentrations (S2 percent) or are only slightly elevated froni background concentrations (10 percent). The remaining wells showing elevated nitrate concentrations are typiCally distributed in a "spotty" fashion with no discernable geographic pattern. Among all of the sub-basins, the occurrence of elevated nitrate is most notably apparent in the 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 ~e site identified in the Jefferson County, Health Department records appear to' show (when records are available) nitrate levels below the analytical test detectio~ limit of 0, 1 mgIL (Susan Porto, R.S. 2005). The maximum allowable contaminant level for nitrate as nitrogen in 'drinking water is 10 mg/L. . Application of the nitrate loading mass balance equation to the project using parameters identifled in Table 3 yields a projected finaf nitrate concentration of 9,S mg/L in the groundwater regime at the'project area based on the following relationships: nr = (30)mgiLe{3 .25)in/yre(1.0-0.1) + (5 .S)inlyre(O.1 )mg/L . (5.8 +3.25)inlyr - t -y c! ~ ,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 assumed to be substantially less than the projected concentration at the treatment area. .' \ It appears the nitrate impact of the proposed treatment system design that handles 1 02 hook-ups at an average daily flow of 7,250 gallons per day that is applied to the 30 acre project area ~as a localized impact to groundwater quality. While the change in groundwater quality appears significant, it also appears the.impact is less than the 10 mglI" nitrate MC~ 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 MCL limit for drinking water, it would be , appropriate to require groundwater monitoring of nitrate levels hi any future water supply wells completed near the project site. Alternatively, groundwater monitoring wells could be installed 'near the perimeter of the site to monitor actual nitrate levels migrating from the project area in . order to have an early detection system available to respond to potential changes in groundwater ' 'quality,. . e' Geote.chnica/ Report Beckett Point Community WWT. Jefferson County,_ Washington 14 of /7 Project No. 041l36-5 May /0, 2005 ,,,....../:fyers Biodynamics, Inc. ~-r2 /1 " . 10.0 Closure , - \ This report was prepared for the exclusive use of Parametrix, 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 of local environmental conditions. . Within the limitati6ns of scope, schedule, and budget this report was prepared in accordance with generally accepted engineering principles and practices in the area at the time this report was prepared. No other warranty, whether expressed or implied, is made. The conclusions anq recommendations presented herein are.based on oui 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 sho:uld be contacted and retained to. review the changed conditions. , We should 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 objectiv<?s or construction operations at the site; or 3) conditions appear different from those - described in our report. The purpose of the review is to ~etennine the applicabjIity 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 questions or requite additional services. Sincerely Yours, MYERS BIODYNAMICS, INC. ~.~- ane N. Myers, P.~ Principal Geotechnical Engineer Riah Myer~, P.E. P.W.S. . Principal Environmental Scientist . '\ I ".. , f JNM/RDM:esw . Geotechnical Report Beckett Point Community WWT Jefferson County, Washington Project No. 041136-5 \\ M~1~2005 ",_.\.~"'~'M~~'- Myers Biodynamics, Inc. ''"CQ. . .Lt.,., .r;U . .' " . 11.0 References Ayres Associates, Onsite Sewage Disposal System Research in Florida, Report Prepared for 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 Remov~1 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 Sy~teJ?ls, United States. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA - 625/1-80-012, October 1980. .";' Eastern Jefferson County Grbundwater Characterization 'Study, preparep for Public Utility Di~trict 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 DeceIltralized Wastewater Treatment and, Manage~ent: A Risk-Based Approach to ~utrient Contamination,N(,ltional Research Needs Conference Proceedings: Risk-Based Pecision Making for Onsite Wastewater Treatment, EPRI, US'EPA, National Decentralized Water Resources Capacity Development Project 2001.1001446, Palo Alto, CA, 2000. Hantzs~he, N. and Finnemore, E., PrediCting Ground- Water Nitrate-Nitrogen Impacts, GroundWater, Vol. 30, No.4, pp. 490-499, 1992. Selected AnaJytical Test Results for Local Quimper Sub-basin Drinking Water Wells, Susan Porto, R.S., Jefferson County Health Department, 2004-2005. . . j 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,I~PA,Manual: Nitrogen Control, EPN625IR-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.,: I .. .. Geotechnical Report Beckeit Point Community WWT Jefferson County, Washington ,."~jJ:~.~_.I.. ',0:;50 . IL.,. PrftjectHo;{N1136-5 May 1 0, 200~ Myers Biodynamics; Inc. 160f17 ' . . . ", 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. ' ' " '\ . Geotechnical Report IJeckett Point Community WWT . , JejfersonCounty, Washington ~~, ,,,~~,:.S:1?., Project No. o.Il13,{;.;} May 10, 2005 Myers Biody1Ulmics; Inc. 17 of 17 ~~~ . - -tv- f .!i~ ~.1 (/)0 Sit) ftSN E II -'.c ~ () ~ C 0.- 0.,... <C no <( :E · r: z (3 :;: ~ ~ ;;:. <:;) .~ ~ ~~ . -e ~ 's E ~ .. g. ~ ~ Ci). ....:g .S~ &~ =aio ~'e (])~ !iO~ 5.~ -e'::: (])(]) lI)E Jg~ c::~ J!!~ tl.o Iii 5 z o It) C\I Ii) C\I .,... o . ,... ~ ~ ~ ~ ,... ,... "II' fts o :::E ~ ~ Ii II! ~ w ~ ~ s z <C ..J a.. w I- - en c z <s: a.. <( :E > I- - Z - o - > co CD I.. <( ... C CD E i CDC I-t= 0 ~~g. a. ... .- wtG,c a:E= ...1'0== <cas~ 03= 1: - >- ::s ~:t:: 0 050 WEs 6Ee w8! G... CD c-, ;f :s ~ (,) CD a:l ua .5) III ~oG '" -~ . e ~il lIS flii C .1'" i i ill lid~ ~ ~ -g <ii .~ :S c: -";;"0 c:: ';::: .~ ~ - 0 ~ ..... .3 g> c: ..... o :::: .- 0 ~ Cf.) ~ .Q Q) S?- A. ~ ''I ,~ E ~ ..... '- Q) ~ ~ .(: 0.: a. '0 <ii Q; ~ C~<:(.Q ZQ),- W d. ..... C)~CI) ~.. .. m L;; <:( :52 ~ ; c: ID; ._ ~ \...[ ~ ! V J a . .', "O~ . . Q)~ ' ~- l;;l.~ e~ 0.:"0 -Q) .S (ij &"tJ :t::.~ ~~ Q)E !lO~ 8~ "Os ~"O 2~ c:'S tUe 5:Q, ::::-".~0"... "." ! : 1 :! ....: I I o9d I .. en W 6 z )> -0 l? .~ a; .... B! 00 C1)0 -,- CIS II E.c ~ (,) ~ C 0.- 0.,- < ... ;' ". ". ;' ... " ... ". " ". ". ". ". "' "' ;' "' ,,/ ".; ,.. ,,/ *' ,." ...." ". . ... . . ~ ~ .~ a ~ e 'ti <u Q) W ~ Q5 .Q .s it' 0 ~ s ~ ~ v, ~ CI) .Q .~ ~ g .Q '0 ~ CI) ~ ~ '0.. ii <ii g ~ ..... (\j Cl) o 2 ~ If <( w 0: <(z 1-<( Z...l IW 0.. :!Ez !ciQ Wtri a: 0: 1-0 0.... Wo.. CJ)>< Ow a.. o 0: a.. m a... <( .... C (I) E .... mS I- F .... lI:a...C) c 0(1)0_ a.1U.c W;:tn a:S~ ..J(I)>\ <(~.... 0> C - >- ::s z.... 0 XOco O::Sc wEo 6E~ woS CJOGi c-, ~ :::: ~ (.) Q) to ul .5j ~ !2G - ':ii i 'J~ ! ~hi GI '8 'fl lif~ . ~u el Itf Q II: ~ii Q. II oh u: .. ~i!::1 11 "I ~ II Is~ a t:-t..:: .. ~o~ " ill 3- i~ . OJ C'D o ~ := ~ c..::1 CD.....~ ~O< om 3r- ::1 3 r- oSr- 0::;:0 c'< 0 3.;E;!:f ~Q)- ~fI.)O ;rS'z ~~"'tJ -...... r- ~~)> o:;lz ::1m ..... 3 C'D ::1 ..... )> a Q) . . r- m ~ G) m z .... ~ t::l t::l ~ 0 rn ~ ~ :::::: :::::: 0- 0- ~ ~ <il 5' s Q (1)' t: ~ ~ Q" Q" ~ 5' <il ::3 -g 0 ..... .., 5" ..... Q t: ~ Q" 5' <ti '0 0 4 c )> "0 "0 ... o ~. 3 ~ fI.) C') l>> ~ c 0. :s: ~ :!l Gl c iil 5 C/)Z iiiO (1)-1 t::l!'!' (1) -g~ ~!!1 ~r- .....0 og -....~ rn o' 8::' ~l:l '-'liS ~::3 "g <tfCI.I ::::::(1) r-Q" <2g 3' ,. t\)~ co(/) \1)::::r- (/) 5' ~<a 'l::l~ g . - Co> -;\ ,"1 \ c--" "'"" _w_~,w",~__,e.....'.._._., d.......... ,..._~e~ . ( APPENDlXA . ., LOG ITEM # \l PagedY of ,C;-O '. . . Appendix, A Field Explora~on Program Subsurface conditions for the project site were explored by -advanc!ng 11 test pit . explorations, TP-I through TP-l1, at the approximate locations shoWn on the Proposed Treatment Area Exploration Plan, Figure 2. Subsurface conditions observed in the explorations are presented on Test Pit Logs, Figures A-I through A-II in this . Appendix. In addition, previous soil logs (pe,rformed by others) were reviewed and are presented herein as Figure A-12 sheets 1 through 4. The test 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 loeationsofthe explorations should be considered . accurate to the degree implied by the method used. Approximate ground surface elevations were interpolated from the topographic map provided to o9foffice "Beckett Point Proposed Drainfield Area," by Parametrix Inc., dated March 1,2005. Soil logs performed by others were not survey located and were approximately located on Figure 2 based on information provided by others. A licensed professional geotechnical engineer/engineering geologist from Myers , Biodynainics was present throughout 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 were 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 summarized 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-1 through TP-l1 were excavated on October 27, 2004 to depths of7 to 10 feet (84 to 120 inches) using a Case 580K backhoe. Soils }Vere 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~d on our review of the samples and results of laboratory testing. I I Geotechnical Report BechttPoint Community wwt Jefferson County. Washington Appendix A Project No, 041136-5 May 10. 2005 Myers Biodynamics, Inc. . . . Previous Soil Logs (By Others) Soil logs were ,conducted on the site by others and are included herein for reference. The soil logs were conducted on February 20, 2001 by NTI. Logs prepared by NT! are attached as Figure A-12 sheets 1 though 3. Geotechnical Report Beckett Point Community WWT Jefferson County, Washington "~MJt , .:J k '~:C<,~__ ~'~=,'~. '<SO ~"',"".'~'" ',"-~'"",- Appendix A Project No. 041136-5 May 10, 2005 Myers Biodynamics, .Inc. Key to Soil Exploration Logs Sample Descriptions consist of the following: Minor constituents, major constituents; density or .onsistency, 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 ASTM D2488 were used as an identification guide. Unified Soil ClassificatIon System Well-graded gravels and GW graVEll-sand mixtures, little or no fines .!11 ~g l!!,-w <!lolll c:~~ gJ- o~ 15l.,..Q) ~tb.~ ~f:>'" c:.!l!~ ~.!!!.$! -c:'" ~~": :!:~~ 'Ill(/) .!11~:::) !l!~c: l!!8~ <!l 'O~ ~Gl ~'iiI laB ;:::t\l i~ ~~ :!la ~~ l~ e- r~ r:'~ .,- ~~ '" .!I1Gl ~~ l!!;::: <!lj ~g ''!!'-w <I) 0 III c::.!~ gJ!51 0.... 'O;ncu ll::""~ tUa:Jtn ;:::E:~ C:"'1ll ~.!!?fi) -c:"" t!.Q . otl~ ~~(/) ",Ill:::> 'tilec: c:~'" <i'!8,s Soil 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. ~'" ~~ alft (/) InorganIc silts, very fine sands, rock flour. silty or clayey fine sands l5 .c: ~~ u~ '1::l.!l! t:::'!::: :~ ~~ s ML -~ o.~ -'" ~8 c:<\! ~~ ~(/) 0:::> :::Ec: ..., ~-:S 0'- (/).!l! 1J1ti Ql e .s", e.sa r~ c: Cll lt1ii E: FIne-Grained Soil Consistency Very Soft '.'.:~4ift; '.' Medium Stiff Coarse-Grained Soil Density ~~~~;'PSG'; Medium Dense SPT* 0-2 >~44, 4.8 SPT* 0.4 . ';'{#iYiQ> 10-30 Organic silts and organic silly clays of low plasticity OL '- .Cll ~cu i3 ~~ "t)'~c: ~""~ ",:>1 ~.~ .... Inorganic clays of high plasticity. fat clays CH . Minor Constituents Trace" Pt Peat. muck and other highly organic salls Highly Organic SOils Estimated Percenta~ 0.5% Observation Well Symbols Bentonite seal Ground Water Level: date of reading 8f7192 ::: MoIsture .* ". ATD::: ~~: '. .". ~. .' .:: ". ATD: At Time of Drilling Sand pack and well screen or hydrotip Boring Symbols 7 2.0" dia. Split Spoon 24 Sampler (SPT) 27 3 3.25" dia. Split Barrel 50 Ring Sampler 5014" S-l S-2 Laboratory Test Symbols 3.0" dia. Thin Wall Tube Sampler S.3 p P = Sampler pushed "No sample recovery in PocketPeneuometer PP Test Pit Symbols . My.... Biodynamics Inc. ~ 11"I' ~ BuIldlnll'l12S4 s_ DrIve IlolnIIrklge _, WlilotIInQIon 91110 Tel.: __73 FAX; _-31&7 TEST PIT LOG TP-1 Ii: :i Ii: UJ Q 1- S-1 2- S-2 3- 4- S-3 5- 6- 8-4 7- . 8- 9- 8-5 10- 11- 12- 13- 14- 15- 16- 17- 18- . ~MB This log appHes only to test pit location at the time of excavation. Subsurface conditions may differ at other locations and may also chenge over time, This log is a slmpHfied interpretation of the actual conditions. (j) UJ ..I Q. :i <t (j) Beckett Point Jefferson County, Washington TEST PIT LOCATION: See Figure 1 SURFACE CONDITIONS: Forest Duff DESCRIPTION COMMENTS 1-;nch Forest Duff Silty to Very Silty SAND; (loose to medium dense), light gray brown, slightly moist [USDA Classification: Sandy LOAM] ---------.- Gravelly Slightly Silty SAND; (dense), light gray brown, slightly moist, cemented [USDA Classification: Gravelly SAND] ----------- Gravelly SAND; (dense), light gray brown, slightly moist, weakly cemente.d [USDA Classification: Gravelly SAND] ------------ Very Gravelly SAND; (dense), light gray brown, slightly moist, trace cobbles [USDA Classification: Gravelly SAND] --------------- becomes moist, gray brown 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 .--y-lL_-..:.o . ~."...,_'''_.. , c.. ~ '-'~'~"""',"",C"''"'''~'' FIGURE Myers Blodunamlcs Inc_ BUS!"(206) 842-6073 Rolling Bay Mercantile Bldg. 11254 Sunrise Drive Bainbridge Island WA 98110 FAX: (206) 842-3797 DATE October 21, 2004 ELEVATION (F1') 385 .:t PROJECT NO A-1 041136-5 TEST PIT LOG TP-2 Ii: J: t: w o 1- $-1 2- $-2 3- 8-3 4- 5- 6- 7- 8- 8-4 9- lO- ll- 12- 13- 14- 15- 16- 17- 18- '. ~M> 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 the actual conditions. C/) W ...I Do :s oct C/) Beckett Point Jefferson County, Washington TEST PIT LOCATION: See Fi ure 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 --------- roo!S to 24-inch depth 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] 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 Myers Biodynamics Inc. BUS: (206) 842-6073 Rolling Bay Mercantile Bldg. 11254 Sunrise Drive Bainbridge Island WA 98110 FflO(:(206)842~797 DATE October 27, 2004 ELEVATION (FT) 378 .:t AGURE A-2 041136-5 PRo.JECT NO TEST PIT LOG TP-3 Ii: C/) w :C ...I I- 0. 0. :s w <( 0 C/) 8-1 1- 8-2 2- a- 4- S-3 5- 6- S-4 7- . 8- 9- 10- 11- 12- 13- 14- 15- lS- 17- 18- i. ~M> This iog applies only to test pit 1oCa/ion at the time of excavation. Subsurface conditions may differ at other locations and may also change over time. This Jog is a simplified interpreta/ion of the actuat conditions. Beckett Point Jefferson County, Washington TEST PIT LOCATION: See Fi ure 1 SURFACE CONDITIONS: Forest Duff DESCRIPTION COMMENTS I-inch Forest Duff Silty to Vel}' 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] --------- Gravelly SAND; (medium dense), light gray brown, slightly moist [USDA Classification: Gravelly SAND] ---------------- 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 backfilled 10/27/04 roots to 28-inch depth trace roots to 51-inch depth ~ .1 \t '.K'.'.'.","'."""',,.,,..,...........:,,.""-,,,...,.,.""'.:,:,,..""',.,,.""-.,.."'- 3Q,.,...".,c.iS12", FIGURE Myers Biodunamlcs 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) 329 .:t PAOJECTNO A-3 041136-5 TEST PIT LOG TP-4 This log appfl8s only to test pit location at the lime of excavation. Subsurface conditions may differ at other locations and may also ohange over time. This log is a simplified Interpretalion of the actuaJ conditions. :C I- 0. W o 1- 2- S-l 3- 4- 8-2 5- 6- 7- 8- 9- 10- 11- 12- 13- 14- 15- 16- 17- 18- . ~... 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- _ _ - - C/) W ...I 0. :s ~ Gravelly Silty SAND; (dense), light gray brown, slightly moist, weakly cemented [USDA Classification: Gravelly Loamy SAND] ------------- Gravelly SAND; (medium dense), light gray brown to brown, slightly moist [USDA Classification: Gravelly Fine to Coarse SAND] becomes moist at 60-inch depth --------- grades to Sandy GRA VEL; (medium dense), gray brown, moist to vel}' moist [USDA Classification: Sandy GRAVEL] Bottom of test pit at 8 foot depth Comp~redandbackfmed10m~04 roots to 32-inch depth trace roots to 47-inch depth Lab Test: GS 3.~ / ..Ll- ~..~,.. D . L .d <" Myers Blodunamlcs Inc. BU&(206) 842-6073 OATE FIGURE Rolling Bay Mercantile Bldg. October 27, 2004 A-4 11254 Sunrise Drive ELEVATION (FT) PROJECT NO Bainbridge Island WA 98110 317.:t 041136-5 FAX: (206) 842-3797 TEST PIT LOG TP-5 Ii: :C I- 0. W o 1- 2- S-1 3- 4- 8-2 5- 6- 7- . 8- 9- lO- ll- 12- 13- 14- 15- 16- 17- 18- . ~~ 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 the actual conditions. C/) W ...I 0. :s oct C/) Beckett Point Jefferson County, Washington TEST PIT LOCATION: See Fi ure 1 SURFACE CONDITIONS: Forest Duff DESCRIPTION COMMENTS 1-inch 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 vel}' 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 . ~.,..Ll...... 3~s~, Myers Biodunamlcs Inc. BUg:"(206) 842-6073 Rolling Bay Mercantile Bldg. 11254 Sunrise Drive Bainbridge Island WA 98110 FAX: (206) 842-3797 CATE October 27, 20 ELEVATION (FT) 302.:t FIGURE A.5 04113&-5 PROJECT NO TEST PIT LOG TP-6 Ii: :i Ii: w o 1- 8-1 2- 3- 4- 3-2 5- 6- 7- . 8- 9- 10- 11- 12- 13- 14- 15- 16- 17- 18- . ~MD ThiS log appJJes only to test pit location at the timB of excavation. Subsurface cond1/lons may differ at other locations and may also change over time. This log is a simplified Interpretation of the actual conditions. C/) W ...I 0.. :E <C (f) Beckett Point Jefferson County, Washington TEST PIT LOCATION: See Fi ure 1 SURFACE 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, slightly moist to moist [USDA Classification: SAND] --------- 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 BlodynamiCB Inc.. BUS: (206) 842.6073 Rolling Bay Mercantile Bldg. 11254 Sunrise Drive Bainbridge Island WA 98110 FAX: (206) 842-3797 DATE October 27, 2 ELEVATION(F1) 312! PR04ECT NO roots to 26-inch depth trace roots to 46-inch depth .1. LN", ..... 3~. '.S~ FIGURE A-6 041136-5 TEST PIT LOG TP-7 Ii: J: l- e.. w o 1- S-l 2- 3- S-2 4- 5- 6- 7- 8- 9- 10- 11- 12- 13- 14- 15- 16- 17- 18- . ~M> This log applies only ro test pit loCation at the time of eKCSva/ion. Subsurface conditions may differ at other locations and may also change over time. This log is a simplified interpretation of the actual conditions. C/) W ...I a.. :s <t C/) 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 red brown, slightly moist {USDA Classification: Loamy SAND] boulder at 24-inch depth Gravelly Slightly Silty SAND; (medium dense), light gray brown, slightly roots to 27-inch depth moist, weakly cemented [USDA Classification: Gravelly SAND] _ trace roots to 44-inch depth SAND; (medium dense), light gray brown, slightly moist (USDA Classification: SAND] grades to Gravelly SAND at times weakly cemented sand layer, red brown at 84-inch depth Bottom of test pit at 7 foot depth Completed and backfilled 10/27/04 Myers Blodunamlcs Inc. auS:(206) 842-6073 OATE Rolling Bay Mercantile Bldg. October 27, 2 11254 Sunrise Drive ELEVATION(FT) 317.:t Bainbridge Island WA 98110 FAX: (206) 842.3797 ,1l 3'1."SO AGUflE A-7 041136-5 PRo.JECT NO TEST PIT LOG TP-8 Ii: :C I- 0. W o 1- S-1 2- S-2 3- 4- S-3 5- 6- 7- . 8- 9~ lO- ll- 12- 13- 14- 15- 16- 17- 18- . ~MB This log appJJes only /0 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 simpJJfled interpretation of the actual conditions. C/) W ...I 0. :s c( C/) Beckett Point Jefferson County, Washington TEST PIT LOCATION: See Fi ure 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 Classification: Fine to Medium SAND] Bottom of test pit at 7 foot depth Completed and backfilled 10/27/04 .~LL 35 so, AQURE Myers Biodunamlcs Inc. BUS:(206) 842-6073 Rolling Bay Mercantile Bldg. OATEOctober 27, 2004 11254 Sunrise Drive ELEVATION (FT) 328 .:t Bainbridge Island WA 98110 FAX: (206) 842-3797 PROJECT NO A-8 041136-5 TEST PIT LOG TP-9 C/) :C w ...J Ii: 0. :s w oct Q C/) 8-1 1- 2- 8-2 3- 4- 5- 6- 7- 8- 9- 10- 11- 12- 13- 14- 15- 16- 17- 18- . ~MB ThJs log applies only to test pit location etthe time of excava/ion. SubsurlaC8 conditions may differ at other loCations and may also change over time. This log Js a slmpJ/fied interpretation of the actual conditions. Beckett Point Jefferson County, Washington TEST PIT LOCATION: See Fi ure 1 SURFACE CONDITIONS: Primitive Road/Forest Duff DESCRIPTION COMMENTS I-inch Forest Duff Slightly Gravelly Silty to Vel}' Silty SAND; (medium dense), dark brown, abundant roots moist [USDA Classification: Sandy. LOAML- _ _ - 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: GS SAND] boulder at 36-inch depth roots to 41-inch depth --------- S-3 SAND; (medium dense), light gray brown, moist [USDA Classification: SAND] becomes gravelly at 72-inch depth grades to Gravelly SAND to Sandy GRAVEL; (dense), gray brown, vel}' moist USDA Classification: Gravell SAND to Sand GRAVEL Bottom of test pit at 7.7 foot depth Completed and backfilled 10/27/04 ~d{~~--"~ 3. ..~... Myers Blodunamlcs Inc. BUS:(206) 842-8073 Rolling Bay Mercantile Bldg. 11254 Sunrise Drive Bainbridge Island WA 98110 FAX: (206) 842-3797 DATE October 27, 2 ELEVATION (FT) 297.:t FIGURE A-9 041136-5 PRO.JECT NO TEST PIT LOG TP-10 Beckett Point Jefferson County, Washington TEST PIT LOCATION: See Fl ure 1 SURFACE CONDITIONS: Forest Duff DESCRIPTION COMMENTS 2-inches Forest Duff Ii: :C t: w o 1- S-l 2- S-2 3- 4- S-3 5- 6- 7- . 8- 9- 10- 11- 12- 13- 14- 15- 16- 17- 18- . ~M> This log applies only to test pit location at the time of excavation. Subsurface ccndftlons may differ at other locations and may aJso change over time. This log Is a simplified Interpretation of the actuaJ conditions. C/) W ..J 0. :s oct C/) Gravelly Silty SAND; (loose), light gray brown, moist, roots [USDA Classification: Gravelly Loamy SAND] - - - - - - - - roots to 27-inch depth Gravelly to Vel}' 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 GRA VEL; (medium dense), brown to reddish brown, vel}' moist USDA Classification:Gravel' SAND to Sand GRAVEL Bottom of test pit at 9 foot depth Completed and backfilled 10/27/04 31 $T2, PROJECT NO Myers Bladunamlcs Inc. BUg:'(206) 842-6073 Rolling Bay Mercantile Bldg. OATEOctober 27, 11254 Sunrise Drive ELEVATION (FT) Bainbridge Island WA 98110 307 .:t FAX: (206) 842-3797 AGURE A-10 041136-5 TEST PIT LOG TP-11 Beckett Point Jefferson County, Washington TEST PIT LOCATION: See Figure 1 SURFACE CONDITIONS: Forest Duff DESCRIPTION COMMENTS 2 to 3-inches Forest Duff Ii: :C t: w o 1- S-l 2- 3- 4- S-2 5- 6- 7- 8- 9- lO- ll- 12- 13- 14- 15- 16- 17- 18- . ~M. This log applies only to test pit 1oCa/ion at /he time of excavation. SubSurface ccndiIions may differ at other IoCatJons and may also change over time. This log is a simp/Wed interprets/ion of the ectuaJ conditions. C/) W ...I Q. :s oct en Slightly Gravelly Silty SAND; (loose), light gray brown, slightly moist [USDA Classification: Gravelly 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 cobbles, 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 SAND zone Bottom of test pit at 7.5 foot depth Completed and backfilled 10/27/04 3&,L~SO Myers Blodunamlcs Inc. BUS:(206) 842-6073 Rolling Bay Mercantile Bldg. 11254 Sunrise Drive Bainbridge Island WA 98110 FAX: (206) 842-3797 bATE, AQURE October 27, 2 A.11 El.EVAl1ON (FT) PROJECT NO 338.:t 041136-5 :~ SOIL HOlE lOGS Page --1........ of -L.. Health DepL 0fflclaI Miehaef S. Deeney . Ra~v Marx & t..inda ~. Jefferson Coc..mtv Date Febfl!aIY 20. 2001. . !. . project ~ Point Comniunlty Dt;.alnfleld' . ~ ~.~.__.. .~ ,Ml!<e\yJql~~oq.,........... ._. ...._M:.. . otIi<<S Present propertyOWr\en'DeV. BeokettPotllt Fisherman',.. Club "JOb. NQ. ~ CGF.1OOO1..o1 Weather .. .--.---... .' Sec(Twp--Rng) . ParwI. Ntll'11be( 24(30..2) ~. HOLE (!) NO. 1.11 :E Z 0 ~~ . TYPE g! (fJ "~tx OF DEPTH (!) , TEXTURE APPL. d SYSTEM (lnohes) ~ t lii ~,i MTE. z ~. ~~! b ~ ~sq.' -I DATE ::E ~ ft.) OBSERVED ~& 0 ~ fi! 1 0..6 10 >100 L 0.6 . 6-17 MctaU<Y Sl 0.6 ~ 17.. 74. Red In SO SC~ 50 Dry MStoLS 0.8 heas (No lyrs) 2/20101 74..100 'MS 1.0 :2 (}..12 . 24 >174 SL '0.6 . . I 12 .. SO LS O.S ~ 00..8.3 RedinSC S-OEM 63. Dry F-M S (s-cEM Iveas are 0,& 't hf:as Neas (No MS to LS) 2/2OIf}1 Lyn;: ) , ~ 83 ..174 F-MS 0.0 3 0..25. 25 >174 SL o.a II 26-00 Red in'SO SO Iveas I.S 10 F..M S 0$- ~. Aroas (No Lyrs) 72 -Dry . . 80 -174 l$ to F-M S 0.$ ~1 , '. I. - 4, 0..21 21 >.144 GSLtoVGSL 0.6 21..84 F MO VF to.TO SIt. e w: 54 .. YO F..o 0 34 .. Dry fWUpan @ I, 70 .. 120 C. HardpM <<I> 2/20101 120-144 MQ..C ~ 0,45 . . . j~l. ~--v (1 of 3) Figure A-12 SOIL HOLE LOGS Date februarY 20. 2001 Page -L. of -1l.- Project Beckett Polnt Con)mlrr'lltv Oralnfield := it HOLE ft NO. ~ 0 . ..~ .. 1YPg .~ CI1 ~~ OF DEP1H (!) I TEXTURE APPL. g SYSTEM (1od1es) ~ ~ t; ~.i RATE 0 .- '-'1)" .. ..-...... -:E'" . ~~'5 . (gpdIsq:-" " - . DATE 0 ~ ~ c ft.) ...I :;: r.Qi ~~c OBaERVEO I:- ~o Ots l ~!:. 6 o..a 27 >67 SL 0.6 8..29 F BlKY FSl 'OA5 aE 29-- a 1 F..o C 60 Pry FSl.. e (PDTI) 61-87 · SClCEM F-M$ 0.8 87..132 Me G-COB SL O,f) 2120/01 1S2..168 C Hardpafl e . . '. 6 0-19 21 >156 Sl. 0.6 19..41 VGLS 0.8 PPF 41..49 F Me 44 Pry . VFSL TOSil e 49 ..156 F-O 0 Hardpan e 2I2<W1 T 0..17 . 32 >160 SL 0.6 17..35 sc LS 0.8 CONV. as .. 72 Roq in so SO Areas 45 Of}' F-M (.S 0.8 Areas (No L}irs) 2120101 72..180 F.-MLS 0.8 8 0.. 21 14 >1G8 SL 0.6 21..46 Me VGLS 0.9 poNY. . 48 .. 71 Me 51 Dry MS 0.8 71 ...168 MS 0.8 . 2120101 . 9 0..18 30 >180 at. OJi 18..43 G F.-M LS 0.6 GPtiY, ~..6$ 50 Dry GtoVGMS ,1.0 85 .. 'fOO GtoVGMS 1.0 " 2/2OlO1 , 10 . 0..20 28 >1ao Sl 0.6 20 .. 43 GLS 0.8 CONY" 43 .. 83 Red In so sc~ 66 Dry F-M S to LS 0.8 Neas (No lyrs) 2/20{01 83-180 f-MS 0.8 11 0-22. BLKY .33 >168 at.. 0.6 .. 22-46 MC-C VG to EG LS (Type 1B-1A) 0.6.. 0.8 2J2O/01 46..68 .so 65 Pry AdS to LS 0.8 .1 lit 68..90 Red In SO SO Areas MS to LS 0.8 A'reas (No Lyrs) 00-168 MS O.fI..1.0 . I"oInl SOIl "* Lc .. .....~\..,~_.,,,.. . .4€' .50 Figure A-12 (2 of 3) .,-vPE OF SYSTEM .Conv ConvenUonal Oralnfl&ld CPF Oooventionel Prainfleld .. partial FIt P Pressure Disb1bUtion Draiotield . __ _.. Pp.F. . P.r.essure Distribution Dminfiefd~.J?at1fafEilt.. . . PSl Pressure Disltibution DraiofieId .. Sand Uoed. PDT Pressure Distribution Dmfnflefd.. Deep Treooh (Sand Uoed) M MCIUtld SF Iotermlttent Sand MIter sP"u Mound WIfh lntennlttent Sand FIlter Pretreatment NS No System Possible WSE Wet Season EvakJation M0111.JNG VF Very Faint F Faint '0 Distind P Prominent ~RE L SO t-4C c' ~ . BlK'( '. .. .. LEGEND.. SOIL HOLE I.OGS Page -L.. of-L Note; . The type of system underlined is tfle typa of system ~enffY ~ W the soUse Wet season evaluation and/or e(footlve curtain. draining. may allow revising the type of system. : Examples F-D Faint to Moderate Loose srlghUy Compact Moderately Compact Cotnpac:t . Cemented Massive BIocty Exarft>les MC-C' MClCEM Moderately Compaot to Compact Uoderalefy COrnpad & Cemented ~~CA'I10N (APPU RA'fl; @ Unu$able Resb1ctive Layer :rnxmRE S Sand LS loM1y Band Sl Sand .' Loam Y . l loam Sil SlIt Loam at sm SICL Silty Clay Loam SiC SUf.y Clay CL 01ay loam SCl Sandy Cfay l.oaq1 SO Sandy Otay C Clay TeXlQraI Qualiftel"S F M o G VG EG .Cob Fine . Medium Coatse Gravelly ValY Gravan)' Ex1remety Gravelly Cobbles Examples VG F-M S FSL Very Gravelly FIOO to ~m Sand fine Sandy Loam ......lL..-. . -"77 . l{ Lu.5 v~~ ~P4\t$Q\~~. Figure A-12 (3 of 3) \ toe APPENDIX B l ~ l . '. , l . ... , . i . LOG ITEM. . # \.l Page .If;).. . of 50 . ". - , . " ~ APPENDIX B LA80RA TORY TESTING' ,Laboratory testing was perform~d on sele.cted site sOil samples to evtlluate 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 procedur~s followed are presented below. . Tests were conducted in general accordance with the American Society of Testing and Materials (ASTM) standard te~t procedures. - SOIL CLASSIFICATION "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' logs. The tests were conducted in general accordance with ASlM D~422. The results \ , of the grain size analyses are shown in this appendix on Figures B-1 through B-3. ; - "t~"'_'_ . '13.., . .St? Geotechnical Report Beckett Point Community WWT Jefferson County, Washington trqject No. 04/136-5 May /0, 2005 Myers Biodynamics, Inc. Appendix B 't Particle Size Distribution Report . .5 .Ii .5 ~ .5.5 .5 .5 8 ~ I 10 :;: S 0 a i f i .. .. .. . i '" i I , I I ~ '" I I I I I , , . . . . . . I I . . . . 10 . . . . . I . , . . . . ~ , . . , I . . . . . \' . I . . . , . . . ~ . . I . . , . . I . . I i' I I . I . . . . I . "iiO ==== I I ~ . . I I , . I . . . ~ . . . . . I , . I . . I I I I I I . I I . . I I . . . I I , I I I . I . ~ I I . I . . I I . . I I I I I I I I I . I . . I I . I . . . I . I I I I I I . I I . I . I I I . I . I I I . I I . I . . . . I . . . . . . I I . . . . . . . I . I I I . I . I . . I I . I I . . . I I I . I I I I I I I I . I I I . I I . . . I . . . I I I I I . I . I . , I . I I I I I . I I I I I I I I I I I . I I I I I . I I I I I . . I I . . I. I , . I . I I I . . :\ I . . I I . . I . . I . I I I I I I I I I , , . Do. Ilr..' . I . . I . . I I I I . ~ . . . . . . . . . . I . ~ . . . . I . 200 100 10 O. 0.01 0.001 o 100 90 80 70 0:: ~60 u: !Z60 W ffi~ 0. 30 20 GRAIN SIZE - mm % COBBLES % GRAVEL % SAND % SILT % ClAY . 0 0.4 49.2 SO.4 0 18.2 79.4 2.4 b. 19.0 77.1 3.9 SIEVE PERCENT FINER SIEVE PE~ RNER IncMs 0 0 A IlUII1ber 0 0 b. .75 100.0 100.0 t#4 99.6 81.8 81.0 .5 91.4 89.2 #10 98.2 77.1 75.9 .375 100.0 87.5 87.4 #20 93.1 69.4 68.3 . #140 84.9 44.0 44.0 t#(j() 75.9 12.1 19.9 #140 60.2 3.0 S.S ##200 SO.4 2.4 3.9 uses. ML SP SP MSHTO PI. LL SOIL DESCRIPTION o Sandy silt o Poady graded saud with graVel b. Poady graded saud with grawl 0.631 0.317 . ~EMARKS: o Oassification based on graiDsize oaly o Oassi.ficati.on based on gtainsii:e oaly Cc Cu. o Source: TP-2 o Source: TP-2 b. Source: TP-4 b. aassifieation based on ~ oaly SOIL TECHNOLOGY .SampleNo.: 8-1'. Sample No.: 8-3 Sample No.: 8-2 CIlent Myers Biodynamics, Inc. PrOject 041136-S B1ev.JDepth: 12-18 " Blev./Depth: 36-48 " mev.lDepth: 36-48 " . 0.: 2033 e ..~.I L '1'i~ . ..5e Figure B-1 . ., Particle Size Distribution Report .E .Ii .E .E t! o I i 0 I 8! I .Ii .Ii.li ::: .5 ~ III ;; ;; I ;; .. .. .. .. . . I . '~ . . I I . I I I I I ..... ---- I 0 0 0 0 I I . 0 0 0 0 0 0 I I I . . I I I I I ~ I I . I . I . - I . I . 0 . I 0 I 0 0 \. . I . . I . I . . . "'" .~ . I I I . . . . . I . , I , I I . I . . . . . . I . I . I . . . I . . 0 ~ . . I . . I I I . I I . I I I I 0 . I I ~ ~ . . I I I I . . . I I . I I I . . I . I ., I . I I . . . I I I : , ~. I I I I I I . . . I I \: . I I I . . I I I I . I I . I 0 . 0 I 0 0 \\: I I . 0 . 0 0 . \: 0 I . . I . I 0 I I I I . . . . . \~ I . I . . . . . . I I . . 0 . . . . I I . . I . 0 I . ~\ 0 I I . . . . I \: : I I I I . 0 . . I . I I I I . I . I I . I . . 0 . . . 0 N I . I . I . I . I I I . . . . . . I . I . . . I . 0 . I 0 0 . . I . I I I 0 I I 0 . . 0- I I 0 I . I 0 I . . I 200 100 10 O. 0.0 O.llO1 100 90 80 70 ~ Woo Z u: 1-60 m ffi~ 0. 30 20 10 o GRAIN SIZE - mm % COBBLES % GRAVEL % SAND % SILT % ClAY uses AASHTO PI. LL . 0 8.3 82.6 9.1 8P-8M 0 3.7 83.3 13.0 8M 6. 9.0 60.6 30.4 8M SIEVE PERCENT FINER SIEVE PERCENT FINER SOIL DESCRIPTION IncMs 0 0 '6. NfI1lbe( 0 0 6. o Poorly graded sad with silt .75 100.0 100.0 100.0 fI4 91.7 96.3 91.0 .5 96.9 98.4 95.4 #10 89.4 94.3 88.6 o Silty sad .375 95.0 98.4 92.4 #20 85.1 91.2 85.4 #40 69.2 82.5 78.7 11<<) 37.5 59.9 63.9 Ii silty sad #140 12.0 20.0 37.1 #200 9.1 13.0 30.4 . GRAIN SIZE 0.360 0.2S0 0.223 0.215 0.139 0.0851 - COEfACIENTS 1.51 Cu 4.23 o Source: TP-5 o Source: TP-8 6. Source: TP-9 REMARKS: o Classification based OIl graiusize 0011 o Oasslfroation based OIl gminsize 0011 6. allslificall.oa based OIl graiusize oo1y SOIL TECHNOLOGY Sample No.: 8-2 Sample No.: S-3 Sainple No.: 8-2 ClIent Myers Biodynamics, Inc. Project: 041136-5 E1ev.lDepth: 42-48 " E1evJDepth: 48-S4 " E1evJDepth: 2.4-30 " -2033 2 . \~ tf5 Figure B-2 L"'o ,~.,\ ., Particle Size Distribution Report .lil~ Ji.lil:4:4 8 ! I . 100 90 80 70 a: W 80 Z u: I- 60 Z ~ 40 0. 30 20 10 0 . i. .IIi .IIi S $I $I I 0 I I i I ;; ... ... ... . '" I . I . ~ I I I I I I I . . . . . . . . . I I . . . . I . . . . . I . . . . . -..... . . . . . . . . . . . I . . . . . . . I I . I . . . . I I . I I I I .. . I . I . I , . . I I I . . , . I I I . I I . I . . . I \: I . I. I I . . . I I . I . . I . . . I . . ~ . . . I I . . . . . I . .1 I . . . . I . . . .\ . . I . I . I . . I :\ I I . . . . . . . I . I I . . . . . . I . . . . . I . . . . . . . . I . . I . . I . . . ~ . . I . . . I . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I . \ I . I I . I I . I . I . I . . . . . . . . . . I I . . . . . I . I . \ . I , . . . I . I . . I . I . . . . I I I . I I I . . I I . I I . . . . . I I . . . . . :~ . . . . . . I I . . I .. . I . . . . I I I . . . . I . I . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 200 100 0 1 O. 0.0 0.001 % COBBlES '" GRAVEL 7.9 GRAIN SIZE - mm '" SILT '" ClAY 12.9 uses 8M MSHTO PI. LL o '" SAND 79.2 SIEVE lncIws SIEVE IUIlller PERCENT FINER SOIL DESCRIPTION o Silty sand PERCENT FINER o 100.0 95.4 93.8 tt4 tllO #120 t#4O t#6O #140 #200 o 92.1 90.1 85.3 69.7 40.7 16.6 12.9 .75 .s .375 GRAIN SIZE REMARKS: o Qassification based 011. gtainsizc only 0.352 0.194 , . Cc Cu o Source: TP-ll Sample No.: 8-2 E1ev.JDepth: 48-54" SOIL TECHNOLOGY Client Myers Biodynamics. Inc. Project: 041136-5 .. 04-2033 3 PJate Figure B-3 ................\L. t.fk 15:0 , .... .4 ; t' .. APPENDIX.C . . .... .. LOG ITEM. '. . \t. '. . rj"'.i~'il '-/1. 'o'f5jO . . f~G<d;#. . '.. .... ..... . . '. Appendix C Water Well Logs By Others . Water supply well 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 infonnation 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 - Geotechni(:al Report Beckett Point Community WWT Jefferson County Appendix C Project No. 0..41136-5 May 10, 2005 . Myers Biodynamics, Inc. 50 . . ( c.. STATE OF WASHlNGTOt< ( DEPARTMEN'l' OJ' OONSEBYAT.lON AND JmTEU)l'JUEN'.f ma.L LOG ~ ApJJ:td-J.-2796 DJt- , 1-20-'. '>> 19 61 iecord bf,.lle11 Jlr1:U~~ ~driUerls record , ~ . ~ state of WASlD:NafON . CoIblt:r. ,Jefferson .. .Arft lI'ap Hll.l.\t.~~~ ~J!l.Jt.1i 2, VI. DJlICraalDlSecllola ~ Co M19lt&on & WiUlll~3 . Rt. 1 Pt. Townsend Wash. IIte.tbo4 of ~. ~ Balch La.nd Develo. . Co ~. ;a-35th Av~. lJ.E.~ L;aa4 ~ da~ ~ c:.- J.CMI XA'JaIA coarse . !htll.ll' . Shet:' 0' . . . . -. ".,........,1\.,,,.:.',,._,-,,.- l//}.'S12, I WWl I Figure C-l . . '. ~S"~Copt'ldu. WATER WELL REPaIn' AppIIeaIloONo._ ~~~~ 8TA.'1'B OJ'1fASJllN(lroN 1'aJDI& No. .... (1) OWNEB: 1f_.~NI::5Tt:MuLJtlJW lJ ./9 Jr ~~~. fI.l:Y. Pn~S1:; ueA:""l~ WM~' nJt/,. (Z) LOCATION 01' WELL: CnIlt7~ ~JlUli1:.ta.l\ kQL~ eeo.P!L 'I~ Lc:2...W.JI. ~ .... dbIa1ICe fma noltoa _~ - )on. WELL DBII:J.~'S STA'.l'.DIBNT: It .' '1'hIs well "IVU dd1kd UDder' '11I7 ~ and this npori Sa true to the bat oC J117 Jr:nowJed(e 8Dd belief. o. .. .. NAVT4fVTV(t1t7'(" f}ltlll,-JJ. ~ IIJ(J _ (l'a8ft. lIaII, _~. (Trpe or P*t) M~ &.(11_( ~'-' 9~ .... f /f .111 \ i~/';ft (p;tj~~~1ID LIeease No,. ~ 1:.6. r Date.-I:a:::J:l ._, l'i.~ e~~ Itdtt~ dblf cps .A.DDr:r:IOlt'1oL SIIIS'1'S JI' 2tICEllSAJm (3) PROPOSED 1.JSB: IllDIstkt ~ 1Il4I1:iIbW C ~ C JnI..... C, '.rMt Well D Olbir C (4) ftPB OF WOBm ar= \C':.1.~ ..... w.D rt MeQI04: _ 0 Bond D ~ D CallIe D DrtYea 0 :Ill Ir J'thut D A}J1. BDbr711 .7ette4 D .. (5) ~<:'NS<<.. DII6~"::::;;~~ ~ (a) CONSTlWC'lION DEl'Aas:. jJ(m J 'f- ~ (;to CasIq JDsta1W:..!o.-" DIML ".. A...,.,.. Q. ~t~ . 'ndt6de4 D ~It --. '-'t1ZL- Q. ~, ft. Wcldl41i1 _It -. hwa _ A. .. _ A petfonCloiasa ~es D .. " ~ ., pedInIoIr -' SIZII III pa:I\llI..... ~tI.- . ~M~""'I tr.. paM \1_'" ...., ft.to ft.to Ato SceeDs: Tesll' 2fo1i.1 J.Q~ CLA-I- ~'::'i:<1' >t.tA)1. If '1Hma.~......12- ~~A ti36' A J)Iom; _ D1t... _ ~ _A. to _.ft. GraYeI packea: 'Ya 0 No 11 . Sbe., ~ Cnftl p1eeect ... it. Ie Sadace seal: T~' ~D ~ ~ ~ Z 1IIldio:da11M4 _ .... 'Pi'J m"'" .. Dt4 .., .... -'* -we ...... T 0 . ~ of wa\et :o.pIh ., Iln'. XatII60I ., ___ lIl:rata .. ('l) P1DIP: .......Ao.. H..- ~: . B.:P I . (8).WAmti.BVEr.S:' ~~~~. . Sbiuo 1ftd p3 I) . .,.......... top .,.... IlIlk '..#;t~t":~,. . Adell. ~ - peI'...-." 'DIlt. ~__II~b7 (ClIp, ~'.w.) (9) WELL'1'.ESTS: ~~-=~ ~ Is ... . .-. test... '1'lI8 0 'Noll:ll 7M. 117 "..., 'YJeJ4: ....,....1ddl ft. ~ after .. . It It '. It --~~-\.~':::3.r=.""'" --- 011) ~!mol ~ --1- -....E-..... -"- ::. :-:- bate ., M. . t? . 8aIlcr ~ ,.1 ,.... wlftI ~ i\. dnwdo1ra.au' ~... ArteIIIlD IIDw: I.~. ))at. 1'Ut.~... of ~ WlIS a~. ....... Tea 0 ..'~ ECY __ (11) WELL l.oG: . ~~3lP..eW'crr;-H::.a IIAftMAL I'J&QK '10 3 Ia. ft. ft. ft. ft. 11: "'!ill Wock .e-s I WWZ! Figure C-2 .. _..,~ \ \,. ,-.- b~? . ..5"0