HomeMy WebLinkAbout290 Old Creamery Rd - 210508303001 - 1708-97IS - 2020 Cleaing-RepairINDIVIDUAL SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM PERMIT
EAGLE COUNTY ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH DIVISION
P.O. Box 179 - 500 Broadway - Eagle, CO 81631
Telephone. (970) 328-8755
COPY OF PERMIT MUST BE POSTED ATINSTALLATION SITE, PERMIT NO. 1708-97 BP NO. 11142
OWNER:— DEBBIE HFUGA PHONE: 970-926-3006
MAILING ADDRESS: I ITT P.O. BOX 1829.W p81632
APPLICANT: _ ]?AVE STANISH. SUMMIT HABITAT PHONE: 970-926-1743 _
SYSTEM LOCATION: 290 OLD CREAMERY RD.. ED__WARDS. CO TAX PARCEL NO. 2105-083-03-001
LICENSED INSTALLER: DAVIS EXCAVATING.LICENSE NO. 23-97
DESIGN ENGINEER: LKP ENGINEERING, LUIZA PETROVSKA PHONE NO.
INSTALLATION HEREBY GRANTED FOR THE FOLLOWING:
1500 GALLON SINGLE AUTO SIPHON SEPTICTANK DELIVERING281 GALLONS PER DOSE, 937.5 SQUARE FEET OF ABSORPTION AREA.
WITH 6882 SQUARE FT OF TOTAL MOUND AREA,
SPECIAL REQUIREMENTS:. INSTALL AS PER ENGINEER'S DESIGN DATED 71307. ENGINEER IS RESPONSIBLE FOR FINAL INSPECTION. _
BUILDING CO WILL NOT BE ISSUED WITHOUT THIS CERTIFICATION,
ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH APPROVAL: � ^ i " - DATE: _ JULY 11,1997
CONDITIONS:
1. ALL INSTALLATIONS MUST COMPLY WITH ALL REQUIREMENTS OF THE EAGLE COUNTY INDIVIDUAL SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM REGULATIONS,
ADOPTED PURSUANT TO AUTHORITY GRANTED IN 25-10-104, 1973, AS AMENDED.
2. THIS PERMIT IS VALID ONLY FOR CONNECTION TO STRUCTURES WHICH HAVE FULLY COMPLIED WITH COUNTY ZONING AND BUILDING
REQUIREMENTS, CONNECTION TO OR USE WITH ANY DWELLING OR STRUCTURE NOT APPROVED BY THE TONING AND BUILDING DEPARTMENTS
SHALL AUTOMATICALLY BE A VIOLATION OF A REQUIREMENT OF THE PERMIT BOTH LEGAL ACTION AND REVOCATION OF THE PERMIT.
3. CHAPTER IV, SECTION 4.0329 REQUIRES ANY PERSON WHO CONSTRUCTS, ALTERS OR INSTALLS AN INDIVIDUAL SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM TO
BE LICENSED.
FINAL APPROVAL OF SYSTEM (TO BE COMPLETED BY INSPECTOR):
NO SYSTEM SHALL BE DEEMED TO BE IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE EAGLE COUNTY INDIVIDUAL SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM REGULATIONS UNTIL
THE SYSTEM IS APPROVED PRIOR TO COVERING ANY PORTION OF THE SYSIEM.
INSTALLED ABSORPTION OR DISPERSAL AREA: -93.7 , 5 -_ SQUARE FEET (VIA mound sXstem )
INSTALLED 3 compartment TANK: 1500 GALLONS IS LOCATED DEGREES AND FEET FROM
�SQQ Site plan fnr 1nraYinn
COMMENTS: Engineer f c
ANY ITEM NOT MEETING REQUIREMENTS WILL BE CORRECTED BEFORE FINAL APPROVAL OF SYSTEM IS MADE. ARRANGE A RE -INSPECTION WHEN
WORK 1S COMPLETED.
ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH APPROVAL fT c1 t1.yK DATE: Nnvambpr 11, 1997
(Site Plan MUST be attached)
ISDS Permit # L2 6 2 / 7
APPLICATION FOR INDIVIDUAL SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM PERMIT
ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH OFFICE -- EAGLE COUNTY
P. O. BOX 179
EAGLE, CO 81.631
328-8755/927-3823 (El Jebel)
**************************************************************************
* PERMIT APPLICATION FEE $150.00 PERCOLATION TEST FEE $200.00
* MAKE ALL REMITTANCE PAYABLE TO: "EAGLE COUNTY TREASURER"
PROPERTY OWNER:
MAILING ADDRESS: C
PHONE: (916 )9Z6- 3coG
APPLICANT/CONTACT PERSON; 11 a S15� SAM*m+ Miby+PHONE: Q70 924,-I-)V3
MAILING ADDRESS: . f3e x i g Z 9 . L I v -,L, . C..
LICENSED ISDS CONTRACTOR: ScdhAvIS %(, PH:1NE: fg�a 1 Ryq�8�o6
COMPANY / DBA : _3)6nj %S �Y Chy kh �� ADDRE S : R c X 138 4 _ Z_W-yv@e Cam, % U, 3 Z -
PERMIT APPLICATION IS FOR: (t;-�N*ew Installation ( ) Alteration ( ) Repair
LOCATION OF PROPOSED INDIVIDUAL SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM:
Building Permit # III y7— (if known)
Legal Description: Subdivision: C,IZCM9-21 1?4v%6h Filing: —Block: Lot No. !3
Tax Parcel Number:
2-
/ 0 S- 0 3 - p .3
- 0 0 !
Lot
Size: /,/-7Z4c4,-
Street Address: 2.90
QtA CrC-cMe-2-1 RocA,
E9iW&J-9t_C0
'0637-
***************************************************************************
BUILDING,,TYPE: - (Check applicable category)
{ Residential/Single Family
{ ) Residential/Multi-Family*
( ) Commercial/Industrial*
TYPE OF WATER SUPPLY: (Check applicable category)
( ) Well ( ) Spring ( ) Surface
(Vr Public Name of Supplier:
Number
Number
Type _
of Bedrooms fT
of Bedrooms
*These syste s require desig by a Registered Professional Engineer
SIGNATURE: )% 417W Date:
********* ******* ** ******* ***************************** *** ***********
TO BE COMPLET rn
B THE COUNTY _
AMOUNT PAID: RECEIPT #: DATE: I`
CHECK # : CASHIER:
Community Development Department
(970) 328-8730
Fax. (970) 328-7185
TDD: (970) 328-8797
EAGLE COUNTY, COLORADO
Date: July 11, 1997
TO: Davis Excavating
Eagle County Building
P.O. Box 179
500 Broadway
Eagle. Colorado 81631-0179
FROM: Environmental Health Division
RE: Issuance of Individual Sewage Disposal System Permit No. 1708-97. Tax
Parcel # 2105-083-03-001. Property Location: 290 Old Creamery Rd.,
Edwards, Heuga residence.
Enclosed is your ISDS Permit No. 1708-97. It is valid for 120 days. The enclosed copy of the
permit must be posted at the installation site. Any changes in plans or specifications
invalidates the permit unless otherwise approved.
Systems designed by a Registered Professional Engineer must be certified by the Engineer
indicating that the system was installed as specified. Eagle County does not perform final
inspections on engineer designed systems. Your TCO will not be issued until our office
receives this certification.
Permit specifications are minimum requirements only, and should be brought to the property
owner's attention.
This permit does not indicate conformance with other Eagle County requirements.
If you have any questions, please feel free to contact the Environmental Health Division at 328-
8755.
cc: files
LKP Engineering, Luiza Petrovska
Community Development Department
(970)328-8730
Fax: (970) 32B-7185
TDD: (970) 328-8797
EAGLE COUNTY, COLORADO
November 13, 1997
Debbie Heuga
CIO Summit Habitat
P.O. Box 1829
Edwards, CO 81632
Eagle County Building
P.O. Box 179
500 Broadway
Eagle, Colorado 81631-0179
rr/2/uj
RE: Final of ISDS Permit No. 1708-97, Tax Parcel #2105-083-03-001. Property location;
290 Old Creamery Rd., Edwards, CO.
Dear Ms. Heuga:
This letter is to inform you that the above referenced ISDS Permit has been inspected and
finalized. Enclosed is a copy to retain for your records. This permit does not indicate compliance
with any other Eagle County requirements. Also enclosed is a brochure regarding the care of
your septic system.
Be aware that later changes to your building may require appropriate alterations of your septic
system.
If you have any questions regarding this permit, please contact the Eagle County Environmental
Health Division at (970) 328-8755.
Sincerely,
Janet Kohl
Environmental Health Department
Eagle County Community Development
ENCL:Informational Brochure
Final ISDS Permit
cc: files
11/10/1997 11:26 970-B27-9089
LKP ENGINEERING. INC PAGE 01
November 10,1997
Mr. Dave Stanish
Summit Habitats, Inc.
P.O. Box 1829
F,dwards, CO 81632
RE: Inspection of Septic System Installation
Lot 13, Creamery Ranch Subdivision
Eagle County, Colorado
Project No, 9745
Dear Dave-
q D
01,10
w �
h� ek c
At the request of Mr. Scott D", the Installer, on November 5, 1997, v:e visited the construction
site on Lot 13, Creamery Ranch Subdivision, south of Edwards, Eagle County, Colorado. The purpose of our
site visit was to observe the installation of the septic system.
They installed the system in overall compliance with the septic system design, Draining No.
9745SD.DWG, dated June 30,1997,
The system was connected on the north side of the main residence. The building sower was bet'Ween
the garage and the maim building. They installed I500-Sallon, three compWtmarnts, a prows, concrete septic
tank with a single auto siphon.
The mound system was installed as sho%iL on tho above-m+emti wing. One cleanout will be
installed, on the delivery pipe between the tank and the mound. Two dm uts or inspection ports, were
installed, one on each side of the absorption bed.
If you have any questioxw, please do not hesitate to call
Sincerely,
UP Engineering,
Luiza Petrovska, P]
President
cc, Ms. Heather Savalox, Eagle Cotmty EnvirorM tal Health Division, fax: 328-7165
cwnFqCSwrWwM=T*740n wro
A.O. Box 1452, Avon, Colorado 81620 11 (970) 8271-90M Tel 11 (970) 827-9089 Fax
t HEPWORTH-PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL, INC. 5020 Road 154
Glenwood Springs, CO 81601
' May 14, 1997 Fax 970 9455-8454
Phone 970 945-7988
Summit Habitats • /ds`
Attn: Dave Stannish
P.O. Box 2755
Avon, Colorado 81620 Job No. 194 445
Subject: Percolation Testing, Lot 13, Creamery Ranch Subdivision, Eagle County,
Colorado.
Dear Mr. Treat:
As requested, we performed percolation testing at the subject site for design of an
infiltration septic disposal system. Hepworth-Pawlak Geotechnical, Inc. previously
performed a subsurface study for foundation design at the site and reported our findings
under Job No. 194 445, dated October 27, 1994. A previous feasibility percolation test
was done on Lot 13 under Job No. 194 280, dated June 15, 1994.
The profile pit and percolation test holes were excavated on May 12, 1997 with a
backhoe. Holes 14 inches to 18 inches in depth were hand dug in the bottom of three pits
for percolation testing. The holes were pre-soaked on May 12, 1997. Percolation testing
was performed on May 13, 1997 by a representative of Hepworth-Pawlak Geotechnical,
Inc. The results are presented on Table I. Percolation test locations are shown on Fig. 1.
Approximately 4 inches of water from the pre-soaking was remaining in percolation holes
P-1 and P-2 prior to percolation testing on May 13, 1997.
The subsoils exposed in the Profile Pit consisted of 2 feet of topsoil overlying sandy sil
Lay um with varying amounts of gravel to the maximexp ore o eet. No free
water was observed in the Profile Pit on May 12, 1997. The subsoils in percolation hole
P-3 appeared to be more porous then the soils in the other holes.
The percolation test results indicate an engineered system will be required at the current
proposed disposal site. Additional testing and relocation of the disposal area may
determine a site suitable for a conventional infiltration system.
If you have any questions or if we can be of further assistance, please call our office.
Sincerely,
HEPWORTH-PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL, INC.
'Zo u s
Louis Eller 1NiL.p�TGr
rti �,'y VIr TZ •�
Rev. b
22
LEE/ra
attachment9�
COL
CC: To17nSnn-F"L;,1:i .-.tin- bill S-ipinnton
s
APPROXIMATE SCALE
1" =
r
Q
P-2
P-3A 0I
/ BORING 2
/ 1 A
PROFILE ■ 1 P-1
PIT
1
LOT 13 '
1
1
0 BORING 1
BUILDING
ENVELOPE
LOT 14
❑ PIT 13
AND PREVIOUS
PERC LOCA11ON
0
194 445 HEPWORTH IICAL- PAWLAOK LOCATION OF PERCOI. ATION TEST HOLES Fiq 1
?WORTH-PAWLAK GEOTECHNIL INC.
TABLE I
PERCOLATION TEST RESULTS JOB NO. 194 445
HOLE NO.
HOLE DEPTH
(INCHES)
LENGTH OF
INTERVAL
IMIN)
WATER DEPTH
AT START OF
INTERVAL
(INCHES)
WATER DEPTH
AT END OF
INTERVAL
(INCHES)
DROP IN
WATER
LEVEL
(INCHES)
AVERAGE
PERCOLATION
RATE
(MINANCH)
P-1
32
30
11 112
11 318
118
-�
1201
11 318
11 114
118
11 114
11
114
P-2
36
30
11 518
11 112
118
120
11 112
11 114
114
11 114
11 118
118
P-3
37
15
refill
refill
6 518
5 314
718
=14
12 112
10
2 112
10
8 114
1 314
8 114
7
1 114
7
6
1
10 314
9 112
1 114
Note: Percolation test holes were excavated with a backhoe and presoaked on May 12, 1997.
Percolation testing was performed May 13, 1997 by a representative of Hepworth-Pawlak
Geotechnicai, Inc.
HepworthPawlak beoteon its
I lul J. I - i--
(- J
1jEPWoIi'T:4-PAWLAX GEOTECHMCAL, INC.
Em
5021i knad 154
Glenwood 4-or p. -O 81Wl
Fax ;43 445-6431
Pliolie 11.1.1IMS 91M
,SUBSUR'' ACE STUDY
FOR FOUNDIVTI N DESIGN
PROPOSED HUEGA RESIDENCE
LOT 13, CREAMERY RANCH SUBDWISION
EACTLE COUNTY, COLORADO
JOB NO, 194 445
OCTOBER 27, 1994
PREPARED FOR:
SUMMIT HABITATS
ATTN: SANDY TREAT
P.O. BOX 2755
AVON, COLORADO 81620
mepwortnrawiak aeUtecrl ILL•JUJ—:J4D-04D4
1'I�YI 11 ar 1V •JL VI .Qv - i
HEPWORTH-PAWLAX GGOTE•CHNIC:AL, 1IN
October 27, 1994
Glenwood Spnnp, CO 811A11
Pas :0Li 945-M.54
phone ?03 945•7938
Sunirnit Habitats
Attn: Sundy Treat
P.O. Box 2755
,von, Colorado 81620 Job No. 194 445
Subject, Subsurface Study for Foundation Design, Proposed Huega Residence,
Lot 13, Creamery Ranch Subdivision, Eagle County, Colorado.
Gentlemen:
As requested, we have conducted a subsurface study for design of foundations at the
subject site.
Subsurface conditions encountered in the exploratory l�oriog<�dr�lletiitLrEte_nra}pslsea
building area consisted of 12 to over la feet of stiff, sandy clay overlying dense sand
and grovel. • Laboratory testing indicates that the clays are expansive. Groundwater was
not encountered at the time of drilling or when checked four days later.
The residence should be founded with straight -shaft piers drilled into the lower more
granular soil designed for an allowable end bearing pressure of 5,000 psf, a skin
friction value of 300 psf for that portion of the pier below five feet, and a minimum
dead lead pressure of 1U,000 psf based on pier end area only.
The report. which follows describes our investigation, summarizes our findings, and
presents our recommendations. It is important that we provide consultation during
design, and field services during construction to review and monitor the implementation
of the feotechnical recommendations.
If you have any questions regarding this report, please contact us.
Sincerely,
HL-PWORTH-PAWLAK*-GEOTi:LHivit�itL' , INC-,- - -
Richard C. 14cp orth, P.E.
B-) : DEE
RCHlro
nepworinrawi at•: k3eoteeti c Lt- : Ous— )4b-�5ut)4 Mar 71, 10:52 No .009 P .03
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PURPOSE AND SCOPE, OF STUDY 1
PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION .................... I ............. 1
SITE CONDITIONS .........................................
FIELD EXPLORATION ................... 2
SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS ................................... ?
FOUNDATION BEARING CONDITIONS ................ I .......... 3
DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS .................. I ............. 4
FOUNDATIONS ....................................... 4
FOUNDATION AND RETAINING WALLS ..................... 5
FLOOR SLABS.......................................1 G
UNDERDRAIN SYSTEM ................................. S
SITE GRADING ....................................... S
SLJRFACE DRAINAGE ................................. 10
L12-MITATIONS............................................ 10
FIGURE J - LOCATION OF EXPLORATORY BORINGS
FIGURE 2 - LOGS OF EXPLORATORY BORINGS
FJ!:faRE LEGEND AND NOTES... -
FIGURE 4 & 7 SWELL -CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS
TABLE I - SUMMARY OF LABORATORY TEST RESULTS
i8pworT H t- dW I c1r. U�u��••
PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF STUDY
This report presents the results of a subsurface study for a proposed residence. to
be located can Lot 13, Creamery Ranch Subdivision, Colorado. The project site is
shown on Fig. 1. The purpose of the study was to develop recommendations for
foundation design. The study was conducted in accordance with our ;agreement fOr
geotechnical engineering services to summit Habitats. dated September 23,
1994•
A fielti exploration program consisting of exploratory borings was conducted to
obtain information on subsurface conditions. samples obtained during the field
exploration were tested in the laboratory to determine compressibility or swell
characteristics and classification of the soils. 'The results of the field exploration and
laboratory testing were analyzed to develop recommendations for foundation types,
depths and allowable pressures for the proposed building foundation. This report
sumrrirlrizes the data obtained during this study and presents our conclusions,
recoiniuendations and other geotecluiical engineering considerations based on the
proposed construction and the subsurface conditions encountered.
PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION
At the time of our study, design plans for the residence bad not been finalized,
but a 4,00t? square foot residence is planned. The building is proposed in the area
roughly between the exploratory boring locations shown on Fig• 1. We assume
excavation for the building will have a maximum cut depth of one level, about 10 feet
hpinw rho �xictin� vrntitind cipfacc, For the numose i)f nor nalv�sis. foundation loadings
r
for the structure were assumed to be relatively 11gI�� and wpical of the nrnno%ed type of
constructiotl .
If building loadings. location or grading plans are significantly different from
those described above, we should be notified to reevaluate the recommendations
ct.1;'i11'-d kl, lhi.' IC,, _
-h
SrTE CONDITIONS
The lot varies from steep on the west to strongly sloping on the east.
Construction will be on the east part. The general slope is down to the north and east.
A drainage borders the north Side of the lot and is about 10 feet lower than Boring 2. A
new paved road is im the cast side. Some. cobbles are exposed on the higher ground oil
the wetit. Vegetation consists of grass on the east and sagebrush on the west.
FIELD E.XPLOILMON
The field exploration for the project was conducted on Septeinber 29, 1994.
Two exploratory borings were drilled at the locations shown can Fig. 1 to evaluate the
subsurface conditions. The borings were advanced with a 4-inch diameter continuous
flight auger powered by a truck -mounted Longyear BK-51 IUD drill rig. The borings
were legged by a representative of Hepworth-Pawlak Geotechnir.al. Inc..
Samples of the subsoils were taken with to 2-inch I.D. California sampler. The
sampler was driv,6 into the subsoils at various depths'wilh blows from a 140-pound
hammer falling 30 inches. This test is similar to Elie standard penetration test described
by ASTM Method D-15$6. The penetration resistance values are an indication of the
relative density or consistency of the subsoils. Depths at which the samples were taken
and the penetration resistance values are shown on the Logs of Exploratory Borings,
Fig. 2. The samples were returned to our laboratory for review by the project engineer
and testing.
SUBSURf, ACE CONDITIONS
Graphic logs of the subsurface conditions encountered at the site are shown on
Fig. 2. Below about one foot of organic topsoil. the subsoils consist of stiff, sanely
cl,ly to clavey sand. At a depth of about 12 feet in Boring 1 the subsoils became a clay
+ H-P GrOTECH
mepwortm aw1dK l3t!UTCLII 1LL• )UJ-y4_;--04.P4 I Pap A.I },•�, ,.... .,. .�,.
-S-
and gravel mixture. The clay portions of the soils possess a low to moderate expansion
potential when wetted.
Laboratory testing performed on samples obtained during the Field exploration
included in -situ moisture content and dry density, grain size analyses and liquid and
plastic limits. Swell -consolidation testing was performed on relatively undisturbed
drive samples of the clay subsoils. The swell -consolidation test results, presented all
Fig. 4, indicate low compressibility under light to moderate surcharge loadings and the
upper clay soils possess a moderate expansion potential when wetted under a constant
light surcharge. The lower clay soils showed a low expansion potential. No free water
was encountered in LIM horings at the time of drilling and the subsoils were slightly
moist to moist. The holes were dry when cbecked 4 days after drilling. Free water was
measured in borings drilled on Lot 14.
FOUNDXrION BEAWNG CONDITIONS
The upper clay subsoils encountered at the
foundations placed on the expansive soils similar to those encountered :t this site cry n
experience movement causing structural distress if the clay is subjected to changes in
moisture content. A drilled pier foundation can be used to penetrate the expansive soils
to place the bottom of the piers in a zone of more stable moisture conditions and make
it possible to load the piers sufficiently to resist uplift movements. Using a pier
foundation, each column is supported on a single drilled pier and the building walls are
founded on grade beams supported by a series of piers. Loads applied to the piers are
transmitted1-o—-through -peripheral -ihew-siresscs and.
partially through end bearing pressure. In addition to their ability to reduce differential
movements caused by expansive soils, straight -shaft piers have the advantage of
providing relatively high supporting capacity. The piers can be constructed relatively
quickly and sliould experience a relatively stnall amount of movement.
H-P GEOTECH
-4-
DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS
FOUNDATIONS
Based on the data obtained during the field and laboratory studies, we
recommend straight -shaft piers drilled into the lower granular soil be used to support
thy: proposed structure.
The design and construction criteria presented below should be observed for a
straight -shaft pier foundation system:
1) The piers should be designed for an allowable end bearing pressure of 5,000 psf
and .slji-1 tr r..tion vijx f,t .300 ixsf far rJ3ar .pmjrm itf fb }j r below
rive feet below the top of the pier.
�) Piers should have a minimum pier length of 20 feet.
31 Piers should also too designed fora minimum dead load pressure of 10,000 psf
hased on pier end area only, if the minimum dead load requirement cannot be
achieved, the pier length should be extended beyond the minimum penetration to
make up the dead load deficit. This can he accomplished by ,assuming the skin
friction for that portion of the pier below 20 feet deep acts to resist uplift.
4) Piers should he designed to resist lateral loads assuming a modulus of horizontal
subgrade reaction of 50 lef in the clay soils. The modulus values given are for a
long, 1-toot wide pier and must be corrected for Pier size.
5) Piers should he reinforced thew full length with one #5 reinforcing rod for each
16 inches of pier perimeter to resist tension created by the swelling materials.
G) A 4-inch void form should be provided beneath grade beams to Prevent the
swelling soil and rock from exerting uplift forces on the grade beams and to
concentrate pier loadings. A void form should also be provided beneath pier
caps.
7) Concrete utilized in the piers should be a fluid tnix with sufficient slump so than
concrete will fill the void between the reinforcing steel and the pier hole.
3) Pier holes should be properly cleaned prior to the placement of concrete.
H-? GEo f ECH
nL-VuIUi 6Ilr cmiciM, tic UuCL11 IL-L— V•-$ V/tom �� �v•.. .,......._ ....
-S-
Cobbles were encountered in the lower soil and stratum and could cause caving
and difficult drilling. The drilling contractor should mobilize equipment of
sufficient size to effectively drill through possible coarse sails.
9) Although free water was not encountered in the borings drilled at the site, some
seepage in the pier holes may be encountered during drilling. If water cannot be
removed prior to placement of concrete, the tremie method should be used after
the hole has been cleaned of spoil. In no case should concrete be placed in more
than • inches of water.
10) Care should be taken to prevent the forming of mushroom -shaped tops of the
piers which can increase uplift force on the piers from Swelling soils.
11) A representative of the soil engineer should observe pier drilling operations on a
lLll--time basis.
FOUNDATION AND RETAINING WALLS
_......................_ ......Fourldatief, walls i::rd reta2ri3r: c ."rtrtiG:L'r�, :vhrc!. ale'.att}ra!!, 5::rro:ted ::..^.d c:•a::
be expected to undergo only a slight amount of deflection should be designed for a
lateral earth pressure computed on the basis of an equivalent fluid unit weight of GO pcf
for backfili consisting of the on -site soils. Cantilevered retaining structures which are
separate from the house and can be expected to deflect .sufficiently .ta mobilize the full
active earth pressure condition should be designed for a lateral earth pressure computed
on the basis of an equivalent fluid unit weight of 45 pcf for backfRi7MasiSdug•Uf-ilre --••
on -sitar soils.
All foundation and retaining structures should be designed for appropriate
hydrostatic and surcharge pressures such as adjacent footings, traffic. construction
materials and equipment. The pressures recommended above assume drained conditions
behind the walls and a horizontal backfill surface. The buildup of water behind a wall
or an upward sloping backfrll surface will increase the lateral pressure imposed on a
foundation wall or retaining structure. An underdrain should he provided to prevent
liydro,;tatir nrossure buildup behind walls.
H-P GEOTECIA
-6
Backfill should be placed in uniform lifts and compacted to at least 95 % of the
maximum standard Proctor density at a moisture content slightly above optimum.
Backfill in pavement areas should be compacted to at least 95Vo of Elie maximum
standard Procter density. Care should be taken not to overcompact the backfill or use
large equipment near the wail since this could cause excessive lateral pressure on the
w,111. Some settlement of deep fecundation wall backfill should be expected even if the
material is placed correctly and could result in distress to facilities constructed on the
backfill.
Shallow spread footings may be used for support of retaining, walls separate
from the !louse, provided some differential movement and distress can be tolerated.
Footings should be sized for a maximum allowable bearing pressure of 3,000 psf. 'rile
lateral resistance of rctair�iiignli ioutirig�" 111i"e oti"etittic�ii�i?�5t't{iC S`liC�ifi,
resistance of the footing on the foundation materials and passive earth pressure against
the side of the footing. Resistance to sliding at the bottoms of the fatxings east he
calculated based on a coefficient of friction of .35. Passive pressure against the sides of
the footings can be calculated using an equivalent fluid unit weight of 250 pcf. The
coefficient of friction and passive pressure: values recommended above assume ultimate
soil strength. Suitable factors of safety should be included in the design to limit the
strain which will occur at the ultimate strength, particularly in the case of passive
resistance. Fill placed �igainst the sides of the footings to resist lateral loads should be
compacted to at least 95`yo of the maximum standard Proctor density at a moisture
content near optiitntm.
FLOOR SLABS
Floor slabs present a problem where expansive soils are present near floor slab
elevation because sufficient deeid load cannot be imposed on them ro resist the uplift
pressure generated when the materials are wetted and expand. We recommend tha4
structural floors with crawl space below be used for all floors in the building that will
he sensitive to upward movemt:.rit.
H-P GEOTECH
-7-
.Slab-can-grade construction may be used such as in the garage area provided the
risk of di�tress is undcLsiuXid liy t111` uwiici—' •t+V TC l?rrlr'acnd �1 Lit23'�Yi lcii3t ✓ £{:l.'% (if
nonexpanstve structural till below floor slabs in order to mitigate slab movement due to
expansive soils.
To reduce the effects of some differential movement, nonstructural floor ~labs
Should be separated from all bearing walls, columns and partition walls with expansion
.joints which allow unrestrained vertical movement. Interior non -bearing partitions
resting on floor slabs should he provided with a slip joint at the bottom of the wall so
that, if the slat) moves, the movement cannot be transmitted to the upper structure.
This dceail is d,,50 :rj per trnt`fbr wallboards- Slip JOML$
which allow at least 2 inches of vertical movement are recomi:A nded. All ^!"n,bintt
r .lm. ir
lines should he pressure tested before hackfilling to help reduce the potential for
wetting. ?vlechanical units that are slab supported should be provided with a flexible
connection to pipes and ducts above. Floor slab control joints should be used to reduce
damage due to shrinkage crackmg.' 3u11it Spacing itiju S114u IOU
established by the designer based on experience and the intended slab use.
A minimum 4-inch layer of tree -draining gravel should he placed immediately
beneath basement level slabs -on -grade. This material should consist of minus 2-inch
77 1r- t -50% pa-pag Lhe-`0, 'y.c..,t, nttr�l+4e.!. r:}.CE•til�iv�Jii7� ii:v'.srs-. ... .....
d�yi�rC}�.'cil� ,q)`{yI •lL'zS ll?rikl \� ', .III f V N4au VYY . L• i
No. 200 sieve. The free -draining gravel will aide in drainage below the slabs and
should be connected to the underdrain system,
Required fill beneath slabs can consist of a suitable imported granular inati~611,
excluding topsoil and oversized rocks. The suitability of structural fill materials should
soil engineer prior to piiii ei►,�iit. The 1rl',-shoulu he :;preµd ir► thin
be evaluated by the .
horizontal lifts, adiusted to at or above optimum moisture content. and compticted to
95 % of the maximum stasrdard Proctor density. All vegetation, topsoil and loose or
disturbed soil should he removed prior to \fill placement.
The above recommendations will not prevent slab heave if the expansive soils
underlying slabs -inn -grade become wet. However, the recommendations will reduce the
H-P Gco f=CH
Nepwortw,awlak UeQteC11 +rL-.DuO-:7:4-)-0µ--)4 4A%A1.,.A,1 .0h
f
.4
h
4
1.2
effects if slab heave occurs.
UNDERDRAIN SYSTEM
Although groundwater was not encountered during our exploration, it has been
our experience in mountainous areas and where clay soils are present, that local perched
groundwater may develop during times of heavy precipitation or seasonal runoff.
Frozen ground during spring runoff can create a perched condition, Therefore, we
recommend below grade construction such as crawl space and basement areas be
protected from wetting by an underdrain system. 'rlie drain should also act to prevent
buildup of hydrostatic pressures behind foundation walls.
Tlie underdrain system should consist of a drainpipe surrounded by free-drahs ng
granular material placed at the bottom of the wall backfill. The drain lines should be
placed at each level of excavation and at least foot below lowest adjacent finish grade,
and sloped at a minimum 1 % grade to a suitable gravity outlet. Free -draining granular
material used in the drain system should consist of minus 2-inch aggregate with less
than 50% passing the No. 4 sieve and less than 2% passing the No. 200 sieve, The
drain gravel should be at least 2 feet sleep. An impervious liner such as 20 mil PVC
ntay be placed below the drain gravel in a trough shape and attached' to the grade beam
with mastic to keep drain water from flowing beneath the grade beam and wetting the
underlying soils.
SITE GRADING
Fill material used inside building limits and within 3 feet of pavement grade
should consist of nonexpansive, granular material. Fill should be placed and compacted
to at least 95 °Y of the maximum standard Proctor density near the optimum moisture
content. Fill ohnnld nnr cnntain cnncentratinns of organic matter or other deleterious
substances. The soil engineer should evaluate the suitability of proposed fill materials
prior to placement. In fill areas, the natural soils should he scarified to a depth of
6 inchcs, ndjustcd to a moisture content ne.lr op'irnUm and compacted to provide a
is-P GEOTCCH
( �:pf iU;�>f NO.UUy V.1Z
-9-
urnforI6: v�iu� av� r11
The natural soil encountered during this study will he expansive when placed in
" a cori-F Cto L.Fi{:{,(' •Ski.". orris-ls-s 1f11.ild r.m.be used.2.s.. 11 - .... ....._ ..
n material beneath building areas or directly beneath pavement areas, The natural soil
can be used for fill material near the bottom of fills outside building areas.
5.
A detailed slope stability evalua ian.artd.zesultam recommendations are beyond.
the scope of this report. However, general guidelines are presented below so planning
and design of the structures can be accomplished by the project designers and
contractor. After initial planning and design are completed, we should be contacted to ..
review the information so recommendations for additional investigation or consultation
may he made.
1) Permanent unretained cuts in the overburden soils less than 10 feet in height
should not exceed 2 horizontal to 1 vertical. The risk of slope instability will be
significantly increased if seepage is encountered in -CUES,...
2) Fills up to 10 feet in height can be used if the fill slopes do not exceed
2 horizontal to 1 vertical and they are properly compacted and drained. The
ground surface underlying all till should be. prepared by removing all organic
matter, scarifying to a depth of 6 inches and compacting to 95%n of the
maximum standard Proctor density prior to till placement. Fills should be
benched into hillsides exceeding 5 horizontaI to 1 vertical.
3) Good surface drainage should be provided around all permanent cuts and tills
and steep natural slopes to direct surface runoff at
Slopes and other stripped areas should be protected against erosion by
revegetation or other methods.
4) Site grading, drain details and building jdiiasusbould he.prepared by qualified
engineers familiar with the area. A construction sequence plan of excavating,
wall construction and bracing and backfilling indicating the time required.should
he prepared by the contractor.
NMI
EUM H-P GECTECH -
ntpwui I,:Irawiae, Qt-.uUCI-11 ILL-•.JUJ-_14J V4J4
rye i � a i t �+ • ,.+ t � , M F v �,+ � � . L �
-10-
SURFACE'• DRAINAGE
The following drainage precautions should be observed during construction and
maintained at all times after the residence has been completed:
1) Excessive wetting or drying of the foundation excavations and underslah areas
should be avoided dune in& zons;truedon.• --Dry ing-could• increase-tbe expanAon-••
potential of the soils.
2) Exterior backfill should be adjusted to near optimum moisture and compacted to
at least 95 % of the maximum standard Proctor density in pavement areas and to
at least 90% of the maxhuum standard Proctor density in landscape areas. Free -
draining wall backfill should be capped with about 2 to 3 feet of the on -site soils
to reduce surface ��3te it.filtr:ttion�
3) The ground surface surrounding the exterior of the building should be sloped to
drain away from the foundation in all direCLiU115. 'w a reconuiiund a utiuiutuui
slope of 12 inches in the first 10 feerin unpaved areas and .aIninitnasn'slopelifi --' "
3 inches in the first lA feet in paved areas.
4) Roof downspouts and drains should discharge well beyond the limits of all
backfill.
5) Landscaping which requires regular heavy irrigation should be located at least
10 feet from foundation walls.
LIMITATIONS
This report has been prepared in accordance with generally accepted
geotecltnical engineering principles and practices in this area at this time, We make no
other warranty either expressed or implied. The conclusions and recommendations
submitted in this report are based upon the data obtained from the 4xplorator y haring;
drilled at the locations indicated on Fig. 1, the proposed type of construction and our
experience in the area, Our findings include, interpolation and extrapolation of the
subRurface conditions identifsed at the exploratory borings and variations in the
H-P GEOTECH
•I1- -
subsurface conditions may not become evident until excavation is performed, If
conditions encountered during construction appear to be different from those described
in this report, we should he notified at once so reevaluation of the recommendations
may be made. .
This report hits been prepared for the etelusivc use by Our client for design
ible for technical interpretations by others of our
purposes. We are not respons
information. As the project evolves, 'we should provide continued consultation and field
services during construction to review and monitor the implementation of our
recomtnendtttions, and to verify that the recommendations have been appropriately
interpreted. Significant design changes may require additional analysis or modifications
of the recommendations presented herein, We recommend on -site observation of
excavations and foundation bearing strata and testing of structural till by a
representative of the soil engineer.
Sincerely,
HEPWUR'fIj-PAWLAK CEOTECHNICAL, INC.
Richard C. liepworth. P.E.
Reviewed BY:
Daniel E. Hardin, P.E.
RCII/ro
H-P (3EOTECH
ritjjwut. tijr aw i a K UCULCL11 ILL• 0 %0
Approximate Scale Bench Mark% Invert
40' Of Storm Culvert;
Fl§�v. SO 00 ". Assumed.
11
Lot
w 1.
Building
Envelope
i
Boring 1
Lot 13
�� r� Mw •r.rr�
Lot 14
Pit 13
percolation Test
Job No 194 280
{t
I
i
1
� m
0
19444, I H PWORT�H- PAWLAK I Location of Exploratory Borings , Fig. 1
r'%
LEGEND:
TOPSOIL: silty, sandy clay, slightly moist, dark brown, organic rich.
CLAY (CL): sandy to SAND (SC) clayey, stiff to very stiff, moist, reddish -
" brown.
o SAND AND GRAVEL (SC -GC); clayey with cobbles, moist, reddish.
Relatively undisturbed drive sample; 2-inch I.D. California liner sample.
NOTES.,
1. Exploratory borings were drilled on September 29, 1994 with a 4-inch diameter
continuous flight power auger.
2. The exploratory borings were measured approximately by pacing from property corners
shown on the site plan provided.
3. Elevations of exploratory borings were measured by instrument level and refer to Bench
Mark on Fig. 1.
4. The exploratory boring locations should be considered accurate only to the degree
implied by the method used.
5. The lines between materials shown on the exploratory boring logs represent the
approximate boundaries between material types and transitions may be gradual.
6, No free water was encountered in the borings at the time of drilling. Fluctuations in
water level may occur with time.
7. Laboratory Testing Results:
WC = Moisture Content (%)
DD = Dry Density (pcf)
-200 = Percent passing No. 200 sieve
HEPWOaTH-PAWLAK LEGEND AND NOTES
194 445 r-en�rr-rIUKiII%A I in^
Fig, 3
3
2
-3
jkw
3
ff-
-3
NO
_ IV
n
194 445 HEPWORTH-PAWLAK••
GEOTECHNICAL, 1ne. FSW,ELL-CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS I Pig. 4
ki
2
-3
-4
3
2
_3
-4
SAMPLE i
n10 Feet
u�wdupon
Wetting
OISTURE CONTENT PERCENT
DRY UNIT WEIGHT Pcr
iSAMPLE OF,
I FROM,
■■IIIIII��I��INI
hll�l�
�III��IIN�I
��nm■ni�uiui�mi
�■uiu
ma■unuu
min1uii
3.94 445 HEPWORTH-PAWLAK
GEOTECHNICAL, Inc. SWELL -CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS I Fig. 5
i
TRACT D
\ w _
\ CLEANOUT PORT
\ A
61
1-1/2-inch Iameter Later<a`/
\ Perforated with 1/4-inch holes
\ spaced at 30 Inches. \ J
3-Inch Diameter Central Manifold
\ 3-Inch Diameter Delivery Pipe \
1500 GALLON SINGLE AUTO SIPHON SEPTIC TANK \
PLAN
. ./.......
.../.../........
"door h"rt a"ese
SECTION / • . / /
5
a
5' -
24"
" A
"
8
"
otM.nsk"
cq-ds»
chambor
Per Cyd,
W
6
8
A
8
Ir - R°
3, - 10°
1100
5W
E70
W
Gd•n•
10"
BUILDING ENVELOPE
NOTE- The above septic tank is produced by Front Range Precast Concrete
SOT 13 �
NOTE. SITE PLAN BY PERSONAL ARCHITECTURE, DATED APRIL 9, 199Z
6
DESIGN CALCULATIONS FOR A MOUND SYSTEM
Design percolation rate T > 12 minutes per In -L �l .
-, owest Ground Water elevation was measured at 4 feet bellow the ground surface. MOUND
TYPE SYSTEM with a pressurzed distribution network is recommended for this site. Loading
Rate for a Medium Texture Sand = 1.2 gpd/sf
Number of bedrooms =A-ax
Maximum daily Flow =
Qmax = 5 bdrs x 2 persons/bdrm x 75 gallons/person/day x 1509
Qm ax = V25 gp
SEPTIC TANK
V = Qmax/24hrs x 30 hrs "
V = 14 gallons
Use 500 i1allon Single Auto Siphon Septic Tank by Front Range Precast Concrete or
equiv
ABSORP T/ON AREA
A = Qmax/1.2gpd/sf
A = 112511.2 = 937. 5 s. f.
The absorption bed dimension within the Mound System will be 11 feet wide by 85 feet long. �J2
The absorption bed shall be parallel to the surface contours.
The perimeter of the mound shall be 111 feet long and 62 feet wide.
Site Preparation �°
Stake out the mound perimeter. but and remove any excessive vegetation. Install the delivery
pipe from the dosing chamber to the mound. Backfill and compact the pipe trench.
Plow the area within the mound perimeter. Plowing should not be done when the soll is too
wet.1�6rade the uneven areas.
Fill Placement
Place the fill material over `he prepared site. The fill material should consist of Medium
Texture Sand with the follow'ng characteristics:
>259 0.25 — 200mm
<30 — 351 0.05 — C 25mm
<5 — 109 0.002 0.05mm
The infiltration rate of 7 Medium Texture Sandi 1.2 gpdd the height of the sand fill
should be the elevation of the top of the absorption ape the sides of the mound to
the recommended slope, as shown on the details.
Distribution Network Placement
Carefully place the coarse ag9regate on the bed. The coarse aggregate shall consist of 3/4
to 2-1/2 inch rock. Level toe aggregate to a minimum depth of 6 inches. Assemble the
distribution network over the aggregate. The distribution network shall consist of four 42—feet
laterals, 1-1/2 inch diameter (two on each sid a 3—inch diameter center anifold). The
inverts of the laterals shall 5e perforated wit 1/4 inch holes spaced ever 30 'nches. For
the pressure distribution network use schedule pvc (ASTM D 2665) or A (ASTM 2661)
pipe.
The laterals shall be laid level. Place additional aggregate over the crown of the pipes of at
least 2 inches depth. Place a suitable backfil/ barrier, such as filter fabric, over the aggregate.
Covering of the Mound System
�P/ace a finer textured soil, ,uch as clay or silt loam over the top of the bed, to a minimum
tfhickness of 6 inches.
Place 6 inches of good quoity topsoil over the entire mound surface. Plant grasses adaptable
to the climate over the mound system.
S_rohon Selection
Due to the sufficient e/evathn difference (greater than the required 3.7 feet) between the
siphon discharge invert and the lateral inverts, Single Auto Siphon in its own compartment,
capable of delivering 281 galons per cycle should be used.
ump Selection
As a second alternative, a pump capable of delivering 71 gpm against 8.5 feet of head can
be used. The elevations between the pump invert and the manifold invert should be field
verified. If this alternative is used, the pumping system must also include pump controls and
an alarm system.
LnsQection Pipe
stall a 4 inch diameter inpection pipe on both ends of the Gravel Bed. The pipe shall be
open on the bottom. The bottom of the pipe shall be at the some elevation as the bottom
of the grovel bed. The bottom 8 inches of the inspection pipe shall be perforated. The pipe
shall be covered with a ven cap.
NO TFS
1. Ahe building sewer line from the house Fo the septic tank shall have a maximum slope of 1/4 inch per
foot. Bends in the building sewer shall be Ignited to 45 degrees.
2. Vfhe septic tank shall be installed level. The tank shall have removable covers or manholes to within 8
inches of the finished grade, for inspection and cleaning.
3. void vehicle traffic over the system.
4. All installations shall meet the rules and regulations of the Eagle County Environmental Health Division, for
Individual Sewage Disposal Systems.
5. The Septic System Installation shall beinspected by the Design Engineer prior to backfilling.
1-1/2 NCH PERFORATED LATERALS
FILTE? FABRIC C�Y-
CLAYFILL OR TOPSOIL
TOISOIL
3-INCH DIAMETER MANIFOLD PIPE r
2.9'
• . • ' '• ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, .. �- 3/4" TO 2-1/2" ROCK
•••••�•••••••••• �— MEDIUM SAND FILL
............... • :'.EARED AND RAKED SUBGRADE
CROSS SECTION A -A
NO7" TO SCALE
0
rz
a
U
W
0
v
�
�
Q
v
W
U O
w
�WO
O
�1
LLJ
W
W
O W
J 0
Wt�
y1
m
cr_
Q
•
rn
O
o�
O E
N ('�
t.p N
r- 00
a
d
w
00
Oo
v
U
O x
•~
O
O
N 00
00
W
r CY)
V
x t\
m �
e�
O
�
a:
N
0 RE�teis -"
BA CKFILL
e . • c
� 29526 • -o: Ste=
�- oar• .�4,\
• ••••
TO S
OR p)UMpN '' Will III ���
DRAWN BY.• L. P.
CHECKED BY L.P.
PROJECT ND.: 9745
DATE- 06-30 97
DRAWING NO.: 9745SD. D WG
SHEET 1 OF i
P.O. Box 724, Eagle, CO 81631 Tel (970) 390-0307 www.LKPEngineering.com
October 21, 2020
Patrick Horvath &
Debbie Heuga
P.O. Box 690
Edwards, CO 81632
horvathpatrick@me.com
RE: OWTS Consultation – Mound System Repair
Lot 13, Creamery Ranch
290 Old Creamery Road, Edwards
Eagle County, Colorado
Project No. 20-3443-ISDS Permit #1708-97
Dear Patrick:
On September 3 and 9, 2020, we visited your property on Lot 13, Creamery Ranch, 290
Old Creamery Road, Edwards, Eagle County, Colorado. The purpose of our site visits was to
determine the cause of effluent backing up into the septic tank and troubleshooting the Soil
Treatment Area (STA) with the mound system.
The existing system was constructed on November 5, 1997. It was designed for a five-
bedroom residence and consists of a 1500-gallon, 3-compartment, concrete septic tank with a
single, auto siphon and a soil treatment area with a mound system. The approximate dimensions
of the mound system basal area are 111 feet long and 62 feet wide. The absorption area of the
mound was designed to be 85 feet long and 11 feet wide. The pressure distribution system
consisted of 4 laterals, two on each side of a central manifold. The laterals were 1.5-inch
diameter, sch40 pvc, perforated with ¼-inch holes at 30-inch intervals. The central manifold was
about 6 feet long, 3-inch diameter sch40 pvc. The effluent delivery pipe was also 3-inch
diameter, sch40 pvc and was connected to top of the central manifold with a 90° vertical bend.
The dosing was designed to be with a siphon with 281 gallons per cycle.
Findings: While troubleshooting, balls (slightly larger than a tennis ball) were found in
the cleanouts of the effluent line. The area at the central manifold and both ends of the laterals
was excavated, by Travor with Altitude Septic, LLC. The laterals were filled with black biomat
matter as well as leaves. The gravel in the absorption bed was clean and was covered with filter
fabric. Also, the covers on the septic tank were uncovered. Only the inlet and the outlet
compartments had risers. The cover for the opening on the middle compartment did not have a
riser and was buried.
Repair: Travor brought a jetting service company and they cleaned the laterals. The
manifold was replaced with a new section of 3-inch diameter sch40 pvc and new connections
were constructed to tie in the four laterals. On the ends of all four of the laterals, flushing
assemblies were installed. We had recommended an effluent filter for the second compartment of
the septic tank, but after digging down to the opening it was determined that the tee is under the
tank cover and not within the area of the access opening. A new riser was constructed on the
Heuga-Horvath Septic Repair
Page 2 of 2
October 22, 2020
Project 20-3443
P.O. Box 724, Eagle, CO 81631 Tel (970) 390-0307 www.LKPEngineering.com
access of the middle compartment and all the covers were brought to grade. The siphon was also
tested and it dosed as required.
There is no other warranty either expressed or implied.
If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to call.
Sincerely,
LKP ENGINEERING, INC.
Luiza Petrovska, PE
cc: Eagle County Environmental Health Department, e-mail: environment@eaglecounty.us
J:\_WP X4-LKP\_2020\20-3443SEPTIC-STA-MOUND REPAIR.DOCX
10/22/2020
1
Luiza
From:Altitude Septic, LLC <altitudeseptic@gmail.com>
Sent:Thursday, October 15, 2020 9:33 PM
To:Luiza
Cc:horvathpatrick@me.com
Subject:290 Old Creamery, Pictures of repairs
Attachments:290 Old Creamery Pictures.zip
Good evening,
Here are the pictures of the completed repairs to the septic system at 290 Old Creamery. The
manifold was removed, and the laterals were jetted in order to clear the orifices before rebuilding the
manifold. The end of the lateral lines was exposed in order to install flushing assemblies to
accommodate future maintenance. The middle compartment of the septic tank was uncovered to
install an effluent filter but the opening is over the wall between the first two compartments making the
filter installation impossible between the second and third compartments. Risers were added to bring
the middle lid within a couple inches of the surface. The dosing siphon was checked for operation
after the laterals were cleaned and found to be operating properly.
Please call me if you have any further questions.
Thanks,
Travor
‐‐
Altitude Septic, LLC
970‐471‐0913
AltitudeSeptic.com
AltitudeSeptic@gmail.com
` ____, s
of
� Y�
a w
� � ��, �
�(
^. ,
�, ��
Y� i'
4A � - ,.
�'
9;,
drL 1 ; �'
�����3NN � � �
Let
VlAl
Ile
-
,Vp JIF
,urn i
.w +uf�. .,.z
f`:
M+jl
_ w�'
