Laserfiche WebLink
- July 5,2002 <br /> Job Number: LG02-1.68 <br /> Page 6 <br /> a four 4 hour test would be acceptable. Both percolation test holes were r <br /> { } p p p e soaked 24-hours , <br /> prior to the percolation test. <br /> A four (4)hour test was conducted <br /> { } percolation on June 4, 2002an accordance with the <br />' iequirements of SJC PHS-EHD: The Iast ''/Z hour of the test was observed by Johnny Yoakum, <br /> R.E.H.S. of that office. The result of the shallow percolation test indicates a non-satisfactory <br /> "T ercolation rate of 83'min/in 3 ft de th and satisfactory percolation rate of 8.9 min/in 25-ft <br /> depth) for the deep test. SJC PHS-EHD requires a deep percolation test to be performed in this <br /> area of the county,if the shallow test fails-the percolation test which has occurred. The county <br /> required the deep test to pass for site approval. The deep test did achieve a satisfactory <br /> percolation rate.that:meets the requirements of SJC PHS-EHD. <br /> VII. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS <br /> In conclusion, a satisfactory percolation`rate was achieved orithe property. The shallow <br /> percolation test failed but the deep test passed'which meets the percolation test requirements set <br /> forth by SJC PHS-EHD. The percolation rate of the,deep test was measured <br /> at 8.9 minutes per <br /> inch. No ground water was encountered in the 25-foot'exploratory boring.- The depth to ground <br /> water according to the most recent San Joaquin County Flood Control and Water Conservation <br /> t District ground-water maps is'between'50 and 60 feet below theround. <br /> g surface-at the site. The <br /> { ground water flow direction and gradient is northeast between 4 to'7 feet pre mile. <br /> Based on the results of this studyly, we believe the sods are suitable for the existing'septic <br /> systems. We.believe that due to the relatively low expected-use of 20 employees and the <br /> relatively,large size of the parcel,the use of the septic system will not negatively impact the <br /> ground water quality of the area. We believe the existing septic systems located on'the site are <br /> adequate for the facility: ' <br /> VIII. LIMITATIONS <br /> The conclusions of this report are based on the inforrriation provided regarding the <br /> existing and proposed development, the use of the subject property, and the site conditions as <br /> . they existed at the time we excavated our test hole and performed the percolation test. It was <br /> assumed that the test hole-and percolation test results are representative of the subsurface <br /> conditions in the general area. <br /> I <br /> X I <br /> f <br /> 1 <br />