Laserfiche WebLink
� 4 <br /> On May 23, 2005, at 0800 hrs, percolation testing commenced for parcels 7, 6, 5, 4, and 3. All <br /> test in were pre-saturated with 12 inches of water, approximately 24 hours before the start <br /> of testing. There was standing water after the 24-hour soak period in the pert tests that failed, as <br /> depicted in Table 1. Consequently, EHD Perc Test Procedure#1 was conducted for these <br /> borings. There was no standing water after the 24-hour soak period in the other test borings with <br /> passing rates. Therefore, Percolation EHD Test Procedure #2 was performed for these test <br /> borings. <br /> On May 24, 2005, at 0800 hrs, perc testing commenced for parcels 8, 9, 10 and 11 under the <br /> procedures referenced above. On May 25, 2005, perc testing commenced at 0600 hrs for parcels <br /> 4, 1 and 2, also under the referenced procedures. Since the first shallow and deep perc tests for <br /> parcel 4 failed, the tests were re-run further into the interior of the parcel. <br /> The last half hour of the tests were witnessed by David Van Dyne of the San Joaquin County <br /> Environmental Health Department. The following Table summarizes and illustrates the pertinent <br /> data for each proposed parcel, including potential septic system structures based on the depth of <br /> passing perc rates, proposed acreage,post soak period status and perc test results for the <br /> respective perc test depths: <br /> Page -5- <br /> Chesney Consulting <br />