HomeMy WebLinkAbouthydrogeologic evaluation report application
wp83ap.doc • rev. 6/2021 BRP WP 83 • Hydrogeological Evaluation • Page 1 of 3
Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection
Bureau of Resource Protection–Groundwater Discharge Permit Program
BRP WP 83 Application to Prepare a
Hydrogeological Evaluation
Please do not mail.
Submit through ePlace.
See instructions.
A. General Information
Important: When
filling out forms
on the computer,
use only the tab
key to move your
cursor - do not
use the return
key.
1. Applicant Information:
Jeffrey Colby Town of Yarmouth
Name Company Name (If applicable)
74 Town Brook Road
Address
West Yarmouth
City/Town
MA
State
508-398-2231
Telephone
02673
Zip Code
jcolby@yarmouth.ma.us
Email address
2. Applicant Contact Information (if different from above):
Contact Name Company Name (If applicable)
Title
Address
City/Town
State
Telephone
Zip Code
email address
B. Project Information
1. Has a pre-scoping meeting been held with MassDEP personnel?
Yes No If yes, date of pre-scoping meeting: 11/30/2010
2. Has a public notice been placed in the Environmental Monitor that the scope of work has been
prepared and will be submitted to MassDEP in accordance with 314 CMR 5.09(1)(b)?
Yes No If yes, date of Environmental Monitor: 12/22/2010
3. Is there a discharge presently located on the site?
Yes No If yes, answer the following:
When did the discharge begin? Date of startup: 1998
Description of discharge:
Sprayfield for disposal of excess treated water water from the Yarmouth Dennis Septage Treatment
Plant which is not used for reuse as irrigation water at the Bayberry Hills Golf Course.
wp83ap.doc • rev. 6/2021 BRP WP 83 • Hydrogeological Evaluation • Page 2 of 3
Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection
Bureau of Resource Protection–Groundwater Discharge Permit Program
BRP WP 83 Application to Prepare a
Hydrogeological Evaluation
Please do not mail.
Submit through ePlace.
See instructions.
B. Project Information (cont.)
4. Improvements - Are you required by any Federal, State or local authority to meet any implementation
schedule for the construction, upgrading or operation of wastewater treatment equipment or practices
or any other environmental programs which may affect the discharges described in this application?
This includes, but is not limited to; permit conditions, administrative or enforcement orders,
enforcement compliance schedule letters, stipulations, court orders, and grant or loan conditions.
Yes No
If yes, answer the following:
Description of order or agreement (include enforcement document number, if applicable):
The Town of Yarmouth has an Approved CWMP/SEIR with MEPA. The 5-phase, 40 year
implementation schedule has been approved by other state and local agencies. EEA Number 14659
Identification No. of Affected Treatment Facility Not applicable
Description of Project
Not applicable
Not applicable
Final Compliance Date
C. Site Information
1. GPS Coordinates:
a) Enter Latitude and Longitude to the nearest whole second for the proposed site.
Latitude: 41°39'40"N
Longitude: 70°13'33"W
b) Provide a narrative description of the site and the feature to be permitted. As an example: “The
site is on the west side of Main Street, the third building north of High Street. The disposal field
lies 100 feet off the southwest corner of the building.”
c) Attach a site map based on the MassGIS Coordinate Information Tool that clearly indicates the
site. The Coordinate Information Tool is available at
http://maps.massgis.state.ma.us/images/dep/xyinfo/get_xy.html.
C.1.b. Narrative Description
The Buck Island Road site is located south of Buck Island Road between West Yarmouth Road and
Winslow Gray Road. The approximately 150 acre site includes existing buildings and parking lots,
cleared uplands, forested areas, and cranberry bogs. Wetlands are located in the eastern, western and
southern portions of the site. Existing buildings include the Yarmouth Water Department building which
contains offices and maintenance facilities. The site is currently used for effluent recharge from the
Yarmouth-Dennis Septage Treatment Plant using sprayfield irrigation. The town-owned bogs in the
western portion of the site and north of Buck Island Road are leased to a local farmer.
23 BOG ROAD
10 CygnetRoad
30-32WinslowGray Road
32 CheckerberryLane
4351000-18G
4351000-14G
4351000-19G
4351000-05G
4351000-13G
4351000-24G
4351000-11G
4351000-06G
4351000-23G
4351000-17G
4351000-12G
MCCAFFREYZC P:\Yarmouth\McCaffrey\MXD\Yarmouth_GroundwaterDischPermit.mxd 7/13/2022
Town of Yarmouth, MA N
1 in = 1,800 ft
Legend
Mile Site Buffer
Proposed Recharge Area
!A Public Water Supplies
!A Private Domestic Water Wells
DEP Wellhead Protection Zone II
0 0.25 0.50.125 Miles
C.3 Public or private drinking water supply wells within 2,500 feet of Buck Island recharge site
Well Location Type of Well
(Public/Private)
Status Safe
Yield
Depth
(ft)
Direction
from Site
Installation
Date
MassDEP
Well ID
10 Cygnet
Road
Private
(Domestic Use)
Connected to
Town water
NA 13* Cross-
gradient
7/19/1987 291605
30-32 Winslow
Gray Road
Private
(Domestic Use)
Connected to
Town water
NA 104 Down-
gradient
4/18/1988 291585
32
Checkerberry
Lane
Private
(Domestic Use)
Connected to
Town water
NA 27 Down-
gradient
7/3/1990 291555
23 Bog Road Private
(Domestic Use)
Not currently on
Town water
NA 25 Down-
gradient
11/2/2012 615945
*Updated from 2011 Hydrogeologic Report to reflect depth in MassDEP database of 13 feet.
NA – not applicable
DRAFT
Buck Island Road
Hydrogeology Report
Yarmouth, MA
June 28, 2011
www.cdm.com
i
Contents
Executive Summary ........................................................................................................... ES-1
1. Introduction ........................................................................................................ 1-1
1.1 Purpose .................................................................................................................. 1-1
1.2 Site Location .......................................................................................................... 1-2
1.3 Approach ................................................................................................................ 1-2
Section 2. Site Sensitive Areas ............................................................................................. 2-1
2.1 Groundwater Protection Areas .............................................................................. 2-1
2.2 Sensitive Habitats ................................................................................................. 2-2
Section 3. Previous Site Investigations ................................................................................. 3-1
3.1 1984 Facilities Plan and Modeling ......................................................................... 3-1
3.2 Sprayfield Wells ..................................................................................................... 3-3
3.3 Water Department Boring Logs ............................................................................ 3-5
3.4 Infiltrometer Tests ................................................................................................ 3-6
3.5 MEP Measured Discharge at Plashes Brook ......................................................... 3-6
3.6 USGS Groundwater Levels .................................................................................... 3-6
3.7 USGS Preliminary Discharge Screening ............................................................... 3-6
Section 4. Current Investigation .......................................................................................... 4-1
4.1 Soil Borings ............................................................................................................ 4-1
4.2 Conductivity Estimates ......................................................................................... 4-2
4.3 Estimated Range of Site Water Levels .................................................................. 4-4
Section 5. Groundwater Model ........................................................................................... 5-1
5.1 USGS Sagamore Flow Model .................................................................................. 5-1
5.2 Model Refinement ................................................................................................. 5-1
5.3 Steady-state Model Validation ..............................................................................5-2
5.4 Transient Model Validation .................................................................................. 5-3
6. Predictive Simulation Analysis ............................................................................. 6-1
6.1 Proposed Infiltration Basins Capacity .................................................................. 6-1
6.2 High Water Level Simulation ............................................................................... 6-2
6.3 Cranberry Bog Recharge Simulation .................................................................... 6-2
6.4 Impacts to Estuaries and Waterbodies ................................................................ 6-2
7. Conclusions ......................................................................................................... 7-1
8. References .......................................................................................................... 8-1
ii
Figures
1. Location Map
2. Public Water Supplies and Zone II Areas
3. NHESP Priority Habitats and Estimated Habitats
4. Facilities Plan Investigations
5. Sprayfield Site Development and Other Investigations
6. Depth to Groundwater and Min/Max Water Level Elevations
7. USGS Wells with Long-Term Water Level Data
8. Current Investigation Borings and Wells
9. Clay and Silt Extent and Depth
10. Local Model Revised Grid and Simulated Clay Extent
11. Model Recharge Areas
12. Model Cross-Section North-South
13. Model Cross-Section East-West
14. Steady-State Model Simulation
15. Transient Water Level Simulation
16. Simulated Depth to Water for 1.2 MGD Recharge
17. Change in Average Annual Groundwater Elevation
18. Transient Recharge Capacity
19. Water Table Elevation for Recharge in Cranberry Bog Simulation
20. Simulation of Proposed Recharge with Particle Pathlines
Tables
1. Groundwater Supply Wells within 0.5 Miles of the Buck Island Road Site
2. 1984 Facilities Plan Boring Log Summary
3. 1984 Facilities Plan Test Pit Summary
4. Sprayfield Test Pit and Boring Summary
5. Sprayfield Site Water Level Summary
6. Sprayfield Site Water Quality Summary of Metals Detections
7. Sprayfield Water Quality Summary of Nutrient Results
8. Water Department Building Boring Log Summary
9. Current Investigation Boring Log Summary
10. Hydraulic Conductivity Estimated from Grain Size
11. Model Properties Near Buck Island Road Site
Appendices
A. Test Pit Logs and Boring Logs - Previous Investigations
B. Boring Logs and Soil Testing Results – Current Investigation
C. Workplan for Hydrogeologic Services
D. Environmental Monitor Notice of Workplan
E. MassDEP Approval of Workplan
ES-1
Executive Summary
On behalf of the Town of Yarmouth, CDM conducted a hydrogeologic study of the Buck Island
Road site in support of the wastewater treatment facilities Single Environmental Impact Report
(SEIR) and facilities design efforts. The study focused on characterization of the site hydraulic
capacity for discharge of treated effluent, and the potential impacts of such recharge, including
water table rise, and increased base flow and discharge to surface waters.
The Buck Island Road site is an upland area currently used for disposal of treated septage plant
effluent via an above-ground spray irrigation system. The town-owned cranberry bogs to the
north and west of the site are leased to a local farmer. Other waterbodies near the site include
Gray Brook which drains the bogs to the west and flows south to the Parkers River and Plashes
Pond to the northeast of the site which feeds Plashes Brook. Plashes Brook flows east of the
site and joins Parkers River to the south.
Prior hydrogeologic studies resulted in a wide range of predicted hydraulic loading capacities
for the Buck Island Road site. The 1984 Facilities Plan by Wright Pierce, which included local
site-specific groundwater modeling, predicted a site capacity 0.47 million gallons per day
(MGD). However, subsequent site-specific testing as part of that study demonstrated the
potential for a significantly higher capacity. Cooperative studies by the United Stated
Geological Survey (USGS) produced an estimated site hydraulic capacity of at least 1.64 MGD,
based on application of their regional-scale Sagamore Lens groundwater flow model. Results
are documented in Appendix I of the 2010 Draft Comprehensive Wastewater Management Plan
(CWMP).
The wide range of prior estimates demonstrated the need for further locally-detailed data
collection and groundwater modeling. Therefore, the CWMP included additional field work
and groundwater flow modeling. These plans were discussed with the Massachusetts
Department of Environmental Protection (MassDEP) and the Cape Cod Commission (CCC),
and with their agreement toward expediting implementation, the hydrogeologic study was
made part of the SEIR and design stages of the overall wastewater management program.
This hydrogeologic evaluation report summarizes activities conducted toward completion of
the Work Plan for Hydrogeologic Services Related to the Buck Island Road Site. Model results
indicate that the Buck Island Road site is estimated to have the capacity to recharge up to 2
MGD under average annual hydrologic conditions if approval is granted to waive the 4-foot
separation between the bottom of the infiltration basins and the high groundwater table. This
report details the previous site development and modeling and current site investigations and
model results. Highlights of the report are discussed below.
Executive Summary
ES-2
Extensive work has been conducted at the Buck Island Road site as part of previous site development.
Test pits and boring logs from previous investigations are included in Appendix A of this report. Previous
investigations include:
Facilities Plan for the sprayfield site development published in 1984 (Wright-Pierce) which
includes well installations, test pits and groundwater modeling;
well installations as part of the sprayfield site development for the Yarmouth-Dennis Septage
Treatment Facility effluent in the early 1990s and continued water level measurements;
borings drilled in support of the Water Department building design;
infiltrometer tests conducted in 2005 by CDM;
discharge measurements of Plashes Brook recorded in 2004 and 2005 as part of the Massachusetts
Estuary Project (MEP);
historical monthly water levels collected by the USGS; and
preliminary steady-state modeling of recharge capacity by the USGS.
Additional field work was conducted in December 2010 and January 2011 including 24 soil borings to
further assess the subsurface conditions in the proposed infiltration basins and to support building
design, water level measurements, and grain size analysis of selected soil samples. Results are included in
Appendix B of this Report
Based on the available information an existing groundwater model was refined and validated. The model
was used to evaluate the impacts of proposed infiltration basins under annual average (steady-state)
conditions and transient conditions representing typical seasonal variability on a monthly basis. The
following scenarios were simulated:
Steady-state model with infiltration on upland areas of the site
Steady-state model with infiltration on upland areas of the site with the groundwater mound
allowed to reach the bottom of the basins
Transient simulation of infiltration on upland areas of the site
Steady-state model with infiltration on upland areas of the site and a historical high water table
Steady-state model with infiltration on upland areas of the site and infiltration basins in a small
area of the cranberry bogs in the western portion of the site
The CWMP recommends that sewer construction be implemented in 5 phases. Phases 1 and 2 will
address areas in Lewis Bay and Parkers River and have less than 1 MGD of flow. Phases 3 will include the
additional areas within the Lewis Bay and Parkers River watersheds and include expansion of the
wastewater treatment plant and infiltration basins. Phases 4 and 5 will include the remaining CWMP
recommended areas.
An adaptive management approach will be used to evaluate the site capacity for Phase 3 flows. During
Phase 1, groundwater levels on and off-site and water levels and flows in Plashes Brook and in the bogs to
the west of the site will be monitored. This data, along with discharge volumes, Yarmouth Water supply
Executive Summary
ES-3
well pumping rates, and pumping and operations data from bog operators will be used to validate the
model and further revise it if necessary. An assessment can then be made on the best path forward for
achieving higher loading rates to the Phase 1 infiltration basins, including requesting a reduction in the
required separation distance to groundwater, changes in bog operations, conversion of a small area of the
cranberry bogs to a recharge area and/or additional infiltration basins in the southern part of the site
uplands.
1-1
Section 1
Introduction
This report summarizes activities conducted as part of the Work Plan for Hydrogeologic
Services Related to the Buck Island Road Site, including previous investigations, current site
work and groundwater modeling. Based on the available information and groundwater model
results, the Buck Island Road site is estimated to have the capacity to recharge up to 2 million
gallons per day (MGD) average annual recharge. The first phase of infiltration basin
construction will consist of up to 12 acres of infiltration basins with an annual average recharge
capacity of 1.2 MGD. Basin layout and site plans are presented as part of the CWMP. Prior to
treatment plant expansion, an adaptive management approach is recommended to determine
the optimum configuration of additional infiltration basins on the uplands and in a small area
within the current cranberry bogs in the western portion of the site. The adaptive
management approach will utilize results from loading tests during Phase 1 recharge of
wastewater flows and revised modeling. The Buck Island Road site is an upland area currently
used for disposal of treated septage plant effluent via an above-ground spray irrigation facility.
The town-owned cranberry bogs to the north and in the western portion of the site are leased
to a local farmer. Other waterbodies near the site include Gray Brook which drains the bogs in
the western portion of the site and flows south to the Parkers River and Plashes Pond to the
northeast of the site which feeds Plashes Brook. Plashes Brook flows east of the site and joins
Parkers River to the south.
Appendices to this report include tests pit and boring logs from previous investigations in
Appendix A, boring logs and soil testing results in Appendix B, the Workplan for
Hydrogeologic Services in Appendix C, the Environmental Monitor Notice in Appendix D and
the MassDEP workplan approval in Appendix E.
1.1 Purpose
The hydrogeologic studies described in this report were performed to predict and assess the
impacts of effluent recharge from the proposed wastewater treatment facility on groundwater
and nearby surface waters. Infiltration will occur via basins at the ground surface in the site
uplands for Phases 1 and 2 wastewater flows. Infiltration for Phases 3 to 5 will occur in the
basins in the site uplands and/or constructed within a small portion of the current cranberry
bog area in the western portion of the site. An adaptive management approach will be used
during Phase 1 to assess the future configuration and capacity of the infiltration basins for the
later phases.
The hydrogeologic study included the evaluation of groundwater hydraulics impacts, including
water table mounding and potential increases in groundwater discharges to nearby surface
water bodies and wetlands. The hydrogeologic study also included an assessment of
groundwater flow and nitrogen loading to surface waters. Specific areas of concern with the
Buck Island Road site include impacts of additional flow and nitrogen loads to the Parkers
River to the south and impacts to cranberry bogs in the western portion of the site.
Section 1 • Introduction
1-2
Based on the Massachusetts Estuaries Project (MEP) Report for the Parkers River Watershed from May
2010, the amount of recharge at the Buck Island Road site is limited to about 2.0 MGD annual average
flow due to nitrogen sensitivity. Thus the goal of the study and modeling was to show that 2.0 MGD of
flow can be recharged in an acceptable manner at this site.
1.2 Site Location
The Buck Island Road site is located south of Buck Island Road between West Yarmouth Road and
Winslow Gray Road, shown on Figure 1. The approximately 150 acre site includes existing buildings and
parking lots, cleared uplands, forested areas, and cranberry bogs. Wetlands are located in the eastern,
western and southern portions of the site. Existing buildings include the Yarmouth Water Department
building which contains offices and maintenance facilities. The site is currently used for effluent recharge
from the Yarmouth-Dennis Septage Treatment Plant using sprayfield irrigation. The town-owned bogs in
the western portion of the site and north of Buck Island Road are leased to a local farmer.
1.3 Approach
Hydrogeologic data collection, field testing, and data analysis were conducted for the Buck Island Road
site. The hydrogeologic assessment resulted in an estimate of the site capacity and impacts of
groundwater and surface water from the proposed infiltration basins.
Regional and site information was compiled, including data and reports describing the topography,
geology, groundwater, surface water, soils data, and previous groundwater modeling.
A site walk with the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection (MassDEP) was
conducted on November 30, 2010. A hydrogeologic work plan was developed and submitted for
review to the MassDEP and is included in Appendix C.
Field work was conducted in December 2010 and January 2011. Field work included drilling and
monitoring well installations and water level measurements. Grain size analysis was conducted on
selected soil samples.
Historical water level data from the United States Geological Survey (USGS), sprayfield monitoring
wells and measured site water levels were used to map the water table elevations and assess
seasonal variations.
The regional groundwater model developed by the USGS was adapted and modified to assess site
capacity. Modifications included grid discretization, inclusion of additional surface water features
and stratigraphy modifications.
The updated groundwater model was used to assess steady-state and transient loading capacity for
various infiltration basin configurations at the site. Impacts to the groundwater table and surface
water were assessed.
Modeling and recommended infiltration basin design is based on an adaptive managmenet approach
which utilizes the multiple phase sewer construction recommended in the CWMP. Phases 1 and 2 of
sewer construction will address areas in Lewis Bay and Parkers River and have less than 1 MGD of
flow. Phases 3 will include the additional areas within the Lewis Bay and Parkers River watersheds
and include expansion of the wastewater treatment plant and infiltration basins. Phases 4 and 5 will
include the remaining CWMP recommended areas.
2-1
Section 2
Site Sensitive Areas
The Buck Island Road site is located within the watersheds for Gray Brook and Plashes Brook.
Both brooks flow into the Parkers River which is also fed by Seine Pond. Nitrogen loading from
effluent recharge at this site must meet limits established as part of the MEP for the Parkers
River watershed.
2.1 Groundwater Protection Areas
Yarmouth public water supply wells and delineated Zone II areas are located north of the Buck
Island Road site, shown on Figure 2. Parts of two Zone II areas are within a half-mile of the site
including for four public supply wells near Higgins-Crowell Road to the north and east and for
public supply wells 10 and 11 to the north. The closest public supply wells, wells 18 and 19, are
located just over a half mile northeast of the site near Chickadee Lane. Because the site is
located outside of the Zone II Areas for the water supply wells, potential impacts one public
water supply wells from groundwater discharge at the site did not need to be assessed.
A review of groundwater supply wells near the site identified two irrigation wells located at the
site and three nearby domestic water supply wells, listed in Table 1 below. The irrigation wells
at the Buck Island Road site were installed to provide irrigation water to the grass at the
sprayfield site when effluent is not available for irrigation.
Table 1 Groundwater Supply Wells within 0.5 Miles of the Buck Island Road Site
Location Use Type Depth (ft) Direction from
Site
IW-1, Irrigation Well at Buck
Island Road site
Irrigation Sand 27 On-Site
IW-2 Irrigation Well at Buck
Island Road site
Irrigation Sand 27 On-Site
10 Cygnet Road Domestic
Use
Sand 27 Cross-gradient
30-32 Winslow Gray Road Domestic
Use
Sand 104 Down-gradient
32 Checkerberry Lane Domestic
Use
Sand 27 Down-gradient
Source: Mass DEP Well Completion Reports
Section 2 • Site Sensitive Areas
2-2
2.2 Sensitive Habitats
The site does not contain habitats listed for the Natural Heritage and Endangered Species Program
(NHESP) Priority Habitats and Estimated Habitats. Identified habitats within a half-mile of the site
include Seine Pond to the southwest and Horse Pond and Big Sandy Pond to the northeast are shown on
Figure 3. There are no NHESP certified vernal pools within a half-mile of the site as of the February 2010.
The project is not anticipated to adversely affect state-protected species. Please overwrite this text to
continue writing. If you are placing text from another document, please have your “cut, copy, paste”
options set to “Match Destination Formatting.”
3-1
Section 3
Previous Site Investigations
Extensive work has been conducted at the Buck Island Road site as part of previous site
development. Boring and test pit locations are shown on Figure 4. Previous investigations
include:
Facilities Plan for the sprayfield site development published in 1984 (Wright-Pierce)
which includes well installations, test pits and groundwater modeling;
well installations as part of the sprayfield site development for the Yarmouth-Dennis
Septage Treatment Facility effluent in the early 1990s and continued water level
measurements;
borings drilled in support of the Water Department building design;
infiltrometer tests conducted in 2005 by CDM;
discharge measurements of Plashes Brook recorded in 2004 and 2005 as part of the MEP;
historical monthly water levels collected by the USGS; and
preliminary steady-state modeling of recharge capacity by the USGS.
3.1 1984 Facilities Plan and Modeling
The Facilities Plan included boring and well installations at 7 locations, surface water
measurements at 12 locations, 12 test pits, and groundwater modeling (Wright Pierce 1984).
Water level measurements indicated a southeastward gradient of 2 feet (ft) per 1000 ft and a
vertical gradient of 0.007 ft/ft throughout the site except in the immediate vicinity of Plashes
Brook. Gradients measured at around 80 ft below ground surface indicated an upwards flow.
Based on the 1984 results, bedrock is at a depth of over 300 ft below ground surface and will
have little impact on shallow groundwater flow.
Boring logs indicate soils with fine to coarse sand and occasional silts or clay. Water was
observed in the boreholes at between 1.5 ft below ground surface near Plashes Brook to 8.2 ft
below ground surface on the site uplands. Clay lenses were encountered at a depth of 39.5 to
59 ft below ground surface (bgs) at the deepest boring, B-7, which was drilled to 126 ft. A
summary of boring logs from the 1984 report is provided in Table 2 below.
Section 3 • Previous Site Investigations
3-2
Table 2 1984 Facilities Plan Boring Log Summary
Boring Location Total
Depth (ft)
Summary Water Depth
in Borehole
(ft bgs)
Well Name
B-1 East of cranberry bogs,
northern portion of site
22 Fine to coarse sand 6.5 MW-1
B-2 East of cranberry bogs,
middle of site
22 Fine to coarse sand,
little silt
5.6 MW-2
B-3 North of southern-most
cranberry bog
22 Fine to coarse sand,
silt
Not recorded MW-3
B-4 West of Plashes Brook,
northern portion of site
22 Fine to coarse sand 5.1 MW-4
B-5 West of Plashes Brook,
middle of site
22 Fine to coarse sand Not recorded MW-5
B-6 West of Plashes Brook,
southern portion of site
22 Fine to coarse sand,
little silt
1.5 MW-6
B-6A West of Plashes Brook,
southern portion of site
12 Fine to coarse sand,
some silt
Not recorded
B-7 Middle of site, uplands 126 Fine to coarse sand,
clay lenses at 39.5’ to
59’
8.2 MW-7
Tests pits indicate surficial soils with fine to medium sand at most locations. Water was encountered at
between 3 ft below ground surface near Plashes Brook to 10.5 ft below ground surface on the site uplands.
Findings are summarized in Table 3 below.
Table 3 1984 Facilities Plan Test Pit Summary
Test Pit Location Total
Depth (ft)
Summary Depth of Flowing
Water (ft bgs)
TP-1 East of cranberry bog 6.5 Fine to medium sand 3.2
TP-2 Southern portion of site 8.0 Fine sand 6.2
TP-3 East of cranberry bog 7.5 Fine sand 6.0
TP-4 Middle of site on the uplands 11.0 Fine to very fine sand 10.5
TP-5 West of Plashes Brook 6.0 Fine sand 4.3
TP-6 Middle of the site on the uplands 10.5 Very find sand 9.8
TP-7 East of cranberry bog 6.2 Fine to medium sand 4.8
TP-8 Near Buck Island Road and site
access road
6.0 Fine sand not recorded
TP-9 Near junction of Buck Island Road
and West Yarmouth Road
8.0 Fine to medium sand 8.0
TP-10 West of Plashes Brook next to Buck
Island Road
8.5 Fine to medium
sand/silt
8.0
TP-11 East of Plashes Brook next to Buck
Island Road
5.0 Fine sand 3.0
TP-12 East of Plashes Brook 6.0 Fine to medium sand 3.2
Section 3 • Previous Site Investigations
3-3
Hydraulic conductivity was measured at four borings using a falling head permeability test. Results
indicate the surficial soils are moderately permeable. Hydraulic conductivity estimates range from a
value of 9.32 x 10-5 cm/sec to a value of 1.6 x 10-4 cm/sec. Testing in wells at the site after the modeling was
completed for the 1984 reported suggested higher hydraulic conductivity values of 1.4 x 10-1 cm/sec or 400
ft/day.
Modeling of the Buck Island Road site for the 1984 Facilities Plan predicted a total loading capacity of at
least 100 million gallons over a 7-month period, or about 0.47 MGD applied via an above ground spray
irrigation system over 22 acres at a rate of 0.5 gallons per day per square foot (gpd/ft2). However, the
report indicates that this estimated rate was based on a local groundwater flow model that used a
significantly lower-than-observed horizontal hydraulic conductivity for the main water-bearing, shallow
unit.
3.2 Sprayfield Wells
Additional boring logs and test pits were dug and wells were installed in the late 1980s and early 1990s as
part of the sprayfield site development for effluent from the septage treatment facility. Test pits were dug
at four locations on the uplans of the site, as shown on Figure 5 and summarized in Table 4 below.
Percolation tests at two of these locations indicate that the soils are highly permeable.
Table 4 Sprayfield Test Pit and Boring Summary
Name Location Total
Depth (ft)
Summary Depth to
Water (ft bgs)
TP-301 West of Water Department
building, northern portion of site
8 Medium to fine sand 7
TP-303 North of Water Department
building, northern portion of site
10 Medium to fine sand Greater than
10
TP-304 Water Department building 8 Medium to fine sand Greater than 8
TP-305 East of Water Department building,
northern portion of site
9 Medium to fine sand,
trace silt
Greater than 9
B-300 Irrigation Well 1, east of site
between cleared area and Plashes
Brook
41.5 Fine to coarse sand Not recorded
B-300A Irrigation Well 1, east of site
between cleared area and Plashes
Brook
30 Fine to coarse sand,
little gravel
Not recorded
Wells were installed at 15 locations as part of the sprayfield site development, but boring logs could not
be located. Water levels at eight of the site wells were measured monthly from 2003 to the present as
part of the sprayfield operations and monitoring. Water level data is summarized in Table 5 below and
on Figure 6.
Section 3 • Previous Site Investigations
3-4
Table 5 Sprayfield Water Level Summary
Well Location Min. Water
Elev.
(ft NAVD88)
Max. Water
Elev.
(ft NAVD88)
Average
Water Elev.
(ft NAVD88)
Average
Depth to
Water
(ft bgs)
MW-1 West of uplands 8 17.05 12.5 7.78
MW-11A Uplands, dog training center 8.6 13.1 11.4 7.05
MW-14A Middle portion of cleared
uplands
8 11.7 9.8 6.44
MW-16 Southern portion of cleared
uplands
6.18 11.7 9.3 6.62
MW-17 East of Plashes Brook 6.5 13.08 9.5 6.38
MW-22A Site entrance near Buck Island
Road
10.25 15.84 12.9 9.72
MW-23A West of Plashes Brook 5.57 10.24 7.4 7.74
IW-1 Irrigation well, east side of site 6.33 10.2 8.5 4.23
Water quality samples were collected at sprayfield site wells during periods when the sprayfield was used
for disposal of treated effluent. Samples were analyzed for nutrients and metals. Values of pH ranged
from 4.1 to 6.9 at the site wells during the sampling events. Specific conductance of groundwater in the
wells ranged from 70 to 520 microSiemens per centimeter (µS/cm) for the sampling events.
Metals analysis was conducted for cadmium, copper, lead, mercury, chromium and zinc during 10 sample
events between 2003 and 2010. Metals were below reporting levels for all samples except as noted in
Table 6 below. Lead, copper and zinc were detected at low concentrations in at least one sample.
Table 6 Sprayfield Site Water Quality Summary of Metals Detections
Well Metal Date Concentration (mg/L)
IW-1 Zinc 9/26/2003 0.6
MW-11A Zinc 10/22/2003 0.5
MW-1 Lead 12/17/2004 0.005
MW-11A Lead 12/17/2004 0.006
MW-14A Lead 12/17/2004 0.008
MW-16 Lead 12/17/2004 0.006
MW-22A Lead 12/17/2004 0.008
MW-1 Lead 12/31/2007 0.005
MW-11A Lead 12/31/2007 0.005
MW-22A Lead 12/31/2007 0.007
MW-23A Lead 12/31/2007 0.007
IW-1 Lead 12/16/2009 0.032
MW-1 Lead 12/16/2009 0.013
MW-1 Zinc 12/16/2009 0.4
MW-16 Lead 12/16/2009 0.006
MW-17 Lead 12/16/2009 0.022
IW-1 Lead 11/23/2010 0.012
MW-1 Zinc 11/23/2010 0.5
Section 3 • Previous Site Investigations
3-5
Well Metal Date Concentration (mg/L)
MW-11A Lead 11/23/2010 0.021
MW-11A Zinc 11/23/2010 0.06
MW-14A Copper 11/23/2010 0.39
MW-14A Lead 11/23/2010 0.012
MW-14A Zinc 11/23/2010 0.19
MW-16 Lead 11/23/2010 0.01
MW-17 Lead 11/23/2010 0.012
MW-23A Lead 11/23/2010 0.008
Nutrient analysis was conducted for 13 sample events at sprayfield site wells during 2003 and 2010,
generally between September and December with the exception of a sampling event in June 2009.
Groundwater samples were analyzed for ammonia, nitrate, nitrite, orthophosphate, total Kjeldhal
nitrogen (TKN) and total phosphorus (total P). Ranges of detected concentrations are summarized by
well and analyte in Table 7 below.
Table 7 Sprayfield Site Water Quality Summary of Nutrient Results
Well Ammonia
(mg/L)
Nitrate
(mg/L)
Nitrite
(mg/L)
OrthoPhosphate
(mg/L)
TKN
(mg/L)
Total P
(mg/L)
MW-1 ND to 0.2 0.03 to 5 ND to 0.27 ND to 0.2 ND to 2.6 ND to 0.5
MW-11A 0.2 to 6.9 0.04 to 1.1 ND to 0.2 0.1 to 0.7 0.5 to 10 0.38 to 1.1
MW-14A ND to 0.8 0.04 to 6.4 ND to 0.41 ND to 0.4 ND to 2.5 ND to 0.6
MW-16 ND to 2.4 0.02 to 8.1 0.02 to 0.2 ND to 0 0.4 to 2.8 ND to 0.1
MW-17 ND to 1.1 0.17 to 3.1 ND to 0.2 ND to 0.16 ND to 26 ND to 0.18
MW-22A ND to 1.3 0.02 to 4.8 ND to 0.2 ND to 0.1 ND to 9.5 ND to 0.5
MW-23A ND to 2.9 ND to 2.5 ND to 0.2 ND to 0.2 ND to 4.4 ND to 0.9
WW-1 ND to 2.1 0.02 to 0.69 ND to 0.07 ND to 0.3 ND to 3.5 ND to 0.6
3.3 Water Department Boring Logs
Four additional borings were installed in 1998 to support the construction of the Water Department
Building (CDM 1998). A shallow clay layer up to 7 ft thick was recorded in the northern and southern
corner borings. Results are summarized in Table 8 below.
Table 8 Water Department Building Boring Log Summary
Boring Location Total Depth (ft) Summary
B-101 North corner of building 22 Medium to fine sand, clay at 8’ to 15’
B-102 East corner of building 35 Coarse to fine sand, silt, gravel at 18’ to 35’
B-103 South corner of building 20 Coarse to fine sand, clay at 10’ to 12’
B-103A South corner of building 20 Fine sand, clay at 11’ to 12’
B-104 West corner of building 35 Coarse to fine sand, gravel at 23’ to 25’
Section 3 • Previous Site Investigations
3-6
3.4 Infiltrometer Tests
Infiltrometer tests were conducted at the Buck Island Road site in May 2005 using a double-ring
infiltrometer with concentric rings of 12-inches and 24-inches following ASTM standard D-3385. Soil
evaluations were performed by a Massachusetts Certified Soil Evaluator. Test locations are shown on
Figure 5. Results of the two tests are documented in Appendix I of the CWMP. Groundwater was
encountered at approximately 8.5 ft below ground surface. Soils ranged from medium to coarse sands
and gravel. Based on the testing a design loading rate of up to 5 gallon per day per square foot (gpd/ft2)
for open sand bed disposal systems was established based on MassDEP’s “Guidelines for Design,
Construction, Operation and Maintenance of Small Wastewater Treatment Facilities with Land Disposal.”
3.5 MEP Measured Discharge at Plashes Brook
As part of the Massachusetts Estuaries Project (MEP) evaluation of the Parkers River watershed, stage
data was recorded in Plashes Brook at Winslow Gray Road from May 2004 to November 2005 to capture
two summer seasons of flow record. Flow was measured every 4 to 6 weeks to develop a rating curve.
Based on the observed data, the average annual flow was estimated to be 3,109 m3/day or 0.8 MGD.
Observed baseflow was low during summer months and as high as 1.3 MGD during the spring of 2005.
3.6 USGS Groundwater Levels
Water level data were obtained for wells near the site from the USGS National Water Information System
(NWIS). Three wells were identified in Yarmouth. MA-YAW85 is located at Willow Street and Route 6,
MA-YAW 89 is located on Forest Road and MA-YAW 94 is located in West Yarmouth. One well was
identified at the Barnstable Airport, MA-A1W 230. Well locations are shown on Figure 7. These wells
have approximately 30 years of data with measurements every month to two months. Data for MA-YAW
89 and MA-YAW 94, which are closest to the site and best represent site conditions, confirm that the
water table was near the historical high during March 2010. March 2010 water levels were used to create
the steady-state groundwater model used to simulate site recharge capacity during high water level
periods discussed in Section 6.2. .
3.7 USGS Preliminary Discharge Screening
The USGS Sagamore Flow Lens Model was used to screen preliminary discharge sites as part of the 2010
Draft CWMP. Results are documented in Appendix I of the 2010 Draft CWMP. The USGS model, which
did not include the clay layer encountered during recent site investigations, had a relatively coarse model
grid, and used most of the site for discharge area, suggesting the site had a discharge capacity of at least
1.64 MGD assuming a total area of 47 acres with recharge at 1 gpd/ft2.
4-1
Section 4
Current Investigation
The current site investigation included soil borings to further assess the subsurface conditions
in the proposed infiltration basins and to support building design, water level measurements,
and grain size analysis of selected soil samples. Water quality sampling at infiltration basin
wells has not yet been completed.
4.1 Soil Borings
As part of the current investigation, 24 soil borings, shown on Figure 8 and summarized in
Table 9, were drilled in December 2010 and January 2011 and four wells were installed to
provide additional information on subsurface conditions at the site. Subsurface materials
generally consist of fine to medium or coarse sand. Clay was encountered in several of the
borings at around 40 ft below ground surface. This is consistent with the boring log from MW-
7, drilled as part of the 1984 study, which encountered a clay or silt lens beneath the southern
portion of the cleared uplands. In order to further delineate the extent of the clay, CDM drilled
deeper borings at fewer locations than specified in the original site work plan, following
discussions with MassDEP and CCC. In total 8 borings were installed in the areas of the
proposed infiltration basins. A total of 16 borings were installed as part of the geotechnical
work to support the wastewater treatment facility design. Figure 9 shows the extent and depth
of clay and silt encountered. The presence or absence of clay and silt is noted for all borings
with a total depth of greater than 40 ft along with the total boring depth. Clay was not
encountered in borings of less than 40 ft total depth except as noted at borings B-101 and B-103.
Based on the borings, clay is present beneath the southern portion of the site with a thickness
of 10 ft. The clay thins in the middle of the site and appears to pinch out by B-202 and B-218. A
localized shallow clay lens is present underneath the Water Department Building. The current
bog operator to the west reported that clay was encountered in test borings he drilled a couple
of years ago to the west of the bogs. To be conservative, the clay is assumed to extend from just
south of B-202 and B-218 to Winslow Gray Road and from west of the bogs east underneath
Plashes Brook.
Section 4 • Current Investigation
4-2
Table 9 Current Investigation Boring Log Summary
Boring Location Total
Depth
(ft)
Clay and Silt Depth (ft) Water Depth
(ft bgs)
B-201 WWTP area 35 None 8.1
B-202 WWTP area 62 13.5 to 18.5 (silt, clay and sand) 7.3
B-203 WWTP area 37 None 8.8
B-204 WWTP area 40 None 7.5
B-205 WWTP area 45 36.5 to 44.5 (clay and silt) 7.3
BW-206 WWTP area 32 None 7
B-207 WWTP area 41 None Not recorded
B-208 WWTP area 46 37.5 to 42.5 (silt) Not recorded
B-209 WWTP area 40 None 7.9
B-210 WWTP area 27 None 7.9
B-211 WWTP area 31 None 8.1
B-212 WWTP area 31 None 7.8
B-213 WWTP area 31 None Not recorded
B-214 WWTP area 36 None 8.8
B-216 WWTP area 15 None 8.2
B-217 West of water building 15 None 8.4
BW-218 NE corner cleared area 56 32.5 to 42.5 (sand and silt) 11.7
B-222 Center cleared area 46 37.5 to 46 (silt and clay) 7.5
B-224 SW corner, N of B-225 16 None 7.5
BW-225 SW corner cleared area 100 41.5 to 51.5 (silt and clay) 6.5
B-228 Southern part of cleared area 26 None 6
B-229 Southern part of cleared area 21 None Not recorded
BW-231 SE corner cleared uplands 56 37.5 to 45 (silt and clay) 6.1
B-237 Eastern edge of bogs 17 None 7
4.2 Conductivity Estimates
Grain size was analyzed for 34 samples from 20 boring locations. Hydraulic conductivity values were
estimated from the effective grain size (d10) using the Hazen method. Almost all samples consisted of
poorly graded sand, some with gravel or silt. Estimates of hydraulic conductivity (K) are shown in Table
10 below sorted by depth. Hydraulic conductivity values generally increase with depth. The hydraulic
conductivities of the sand samples ranged from 15 ft/day to 374 ft/day with an average of 109 ft/day.
Estimates of vertical and horizontal anisotropy are based on an assumption of horizontal conductivities
values being ten times vertical values.
Section 4 • Current Investigation
4-3
Table 10 Hydraulic Conductivity Estimated from Grain Size
ID
Sample
Depth
(ft)
Effective
grain size,
d10 (mm) Sample description
K
(cm/sec)
K
(ft/day)
Kh
(ft/day)
Kv
(ft/day)
B-206 1 0.1481 poorly graded sand with silt 2.2 x 10-02 62 197 20
B-211 1 0.1669 poorly graded sand 2.8 x 10-02 79 250 25
B-217 1 0.1362 well graded sand 1.9 x 10-02 53 166 17
B-228 3 0.083 poorly graded sand with silt 6.9 x 10-03 20 62 6
B-204 4 0.1249 poorly graded sand 1.6 x 10-02 44 140 14
B-205 4 0.1773 poorly graded sand 3.1 x 10-02 89 282 28
B-209 5 0.1059 poorly graded sand 1.1 x 10-02 32 101 10
B-212 5 0.1756 poorly graded sand 3.1 x 10-02 87 276 28
B-214 5 0.0717 poorly graded sand with silt 5.1 x 10-03 15 46 5
B-222 5 0.1012 poorly graded sand 1.0 x 10-02 29 92 9
B-231 5 0.0763 poorly graded sand with silt 5.8 x 10-03 17 52 5
B-201 6 0.1539 poorly graded sand 2.4 x 10-02 67 212 21
B-203 6 0.1716 poorly graded sand 2.9 x 10-02 84 264 26
B-210
6 0.1687 poorly graded sand with
gravel 2.8 x 10-02 81 255 26
B-225 7 0.2587 poorly graded sand 6.7 x 10-02 190 600 60
B-205 9 0.1905 poorly graded sand 3.6 x 10-02 103 325 33
B-218 9 0.1119 poorly graded sand 1.3 x 10-02 36 112 11
B-213 10 0.175 poorly graded sand 3.1 x 10-02 87 274 27
B-202 11 0.1354 poorly graded sand 1.8 x 10-02 52 164 16
B-204
14 0.2458 poorly graded sand with
gravel 6.0 x 10-02 171 542 54
B-207 15 0.2494 poorly graded sand 6.2 x 10-02 176 558 56
B-208 15 0.1232 poorly graded sand 1.5 x 10-02 43 136 14
B-213
15 0.3612 poorly graded gravel with
sand 1.3 x 10-01 370 1170 117
B-214 15 0.1662 poorly graded sand 2.8 x 10-02 78 248 25
B-222 15 0.312 poorly graded sand 9.7 x 10-02 276 873 87
B-206 16 0.3633 poorly graded sand 1.3 x 10-01 374 1183 118
B-212 20 0.2821 poorly graded sand 8.0 x 10-02 226 713 71
B-209 25 0.2617 poorly graded sand 6.8 x 10-02 194 614 61
B-203 26 0.1758 poorly graded sand 3.1 x 10-02 88 277 28
B-211
30 0.2279 poorly graded sand with
gravel 5.2 x 10-02 147 465 47
B-206
31 0.2346 poorly graded sand with
gravel 5.5 x 10-02 156 493 49
B-207 35 0.2786 poorly graded sand 7.8 x 10-02 220 696 70
B-208 40 0.0156 sandy silt 2.4 x 10-04 0.7 2.2 0.2
B-202
46 0.2005 poorly graded sand with
gravel 4.0 x 10-02 114 360 36
Section 4 • Current Investigation
4-4
4.3 Estimated Range of Site Water Levels
Published water level hydrographs from long-term USGS observation wells nearby suggest that water
levels at the Buck Island Road site should vary by about 2 feet during a typical year. However, observed
data from the seven years of sprayfield well monitoring indicate that the range is greater than two feet for
many wells including MW-22A and MW-1 near the northern part of the site. Minimum and maximum
water level elevations and depth to water are shown for site wells on Figure 6. The greater range in water
levels is likely due to the impact of bog and stream water levels.
Water level data for sprayfield wells is available for March and April of 2010 which is a good estimate of
expected high water table elevations based on the long-term historical water levels at USGS well MA-
YAW 94. Since site water level data are available for over 7 years including a high water table period that
approaches the highest water levels for the full period of long-term data, the sprayfield well monitoring
data was used as the primary approach to evaluate high water table conditions.
5-1
Section 5
Groundwater Model
Groundwater flow modeling was based on the regional USGS Sagamore Flow Lens Model and
refined to include a smaller grid near the site, site water features and the clay layer
encountered in boring logs. The revised model was validated for steady-state and transient
conditions and used to assist in the design of infiltration basins on the site.
5.1 USGS Sagamore Flow Model
The USGS Sagamore Flow Lens Model, used as a basis for hydrogeologic modeling of the Buck
Island Road site, was developed by the USGS using MODFLOW and is documented in
“Simulated Water Sources and Effects of Pumping on Surface and Ground Water, Sagamore and
Monomoy Flow Lenses, Cape Cod, Massachusetts” (Walter and Whealan 2004). This model was
used to develop watershed delineations for the MEP nitrogen loading analysis and for
preliminary assessment of Yarmouth effluent recharge sites in the 2010 Draft CWMP.
Model layers and properties near the site are shown in Table 11. The water table near the site is
located in models layers 6 and 7 and therefore model layers 1 to 5 are inactive and not shown.
Specific yield was set to 0.25 for all layers and specific storage was set to 1.5 x 10-5. For ponds,
specific yield was set to 1 and specific storage to 1.5 x 10-9. Ponds were simulated with a
horizontal hydraulic conductivity of 100,000 ft/day. General areal recharge is 27 inches/yr.
Ponds have an annual recharge of 16 in/yr and wetlands, including bogs, have an annual
recharge of 0 in/yr.
The model vertical datum is NGVD29 feet. Since site survey data was recorded using a vertical
datum of NAVD88 ft, a correction factor of 0.88 ft should be subtracted from the model
elevations to convert from NGVD29 to the site elevations in NAVD88 (Milbert 1999). Specified
elevations in the text and figures are in NAVD88 unless otherwise specified.
5.2 Model Refinement
The USGS Sagamore Flow Lens Model extends from the Cape Cod Canal in the northwest to
the Bass River in the east. The model extent includes part or all of the towns of Bourne,
Sandwich, Falmouth, Mashpee, Barnstable and Yarmouth. The entire model extent was used
for groundwater simulations, but the model grid was refined near the site to improve estimates
of site recharge capacity. Refinements include simulation of bogs and ponds near the site,
inclusion of Gray Brook west of the site, discretization of the model grid and inclusion of the
clay layer at 40 ft below ground surface. Estimated horizontal conductivity values based on the
grain size analysis are between 46 and 1183 ft/day at the site. These values are consistent with
values used in the USGS model and therefore horizontal conductivity values were not adjusted
in the model during validation.
Section 5 • Groundwater Model l
5-2
Table 11 Model Properties Near Buck Island Road Site
Model
Layer
Layer Mid-point Elevation
(ft NGVD29)
Layer
Thickness (ft)
Horizontal
Conductivity (ft/day)
Vertical Conductivity
(ft/day)
6 15 10 210 40
7 4.5 11 210 40
8 -5.5 9 170 22
9 -15 10 170 22
10 -25 10 100 10
11 -35 10 100 10
12 -45 10 100 10
13 -55 10 100 10
14 -65 10 50 5
15 -75 10 50 5
16 -85 10 50 5
17 -95 10 50 5
18 -120 40 50 5
19 -190 100 30 2
20 -250 to -270 10 to 40 10 1
The model grid was refined from 400 ft by 400 ft grid cells to 100 ft by 100 ft cells near the site as shown on
Figure 10. Bogs west of the site were added to the model using the same hydraulic conductivity values used
for ponds shown in green on Figure 10. Bog depths were estimated from survey data. Recharge areas were
refined to match the ponds and bogs in the area of the revised grid as necessary. Recharge areas near the
site are shown on Figure 11.
Streams and rivers in the USGS Sagamore Lens Model were simulated using the Stream package. The
Stream package allows flow into and out of the streams based on stream bed properties and heads and
calculates flow in streams based on upstream flow segments and groundwater flow. For simplicity in the
Buck Island Road site model, the River package was used for most streams. The river package allows flow in
and out of the model but does not calculate flow in the streams. Plashes Brook and Gray Brook, which
drains the bogs to the west of the site, were included in the Buck Island Road site model using the stream
package in order to calculate the impact of increased water levels on stream flow. Stream locations are
shown on Figure 11 as gray lines. Stream inverts were estimated from survey data.
The localized clay layer was represented within model layer 10 based on the estimated extent to the north
and the west as shown on Figure 10 and in cross-section on Figure 12 (north-south cross-section) and Figure
13 (east-west cross-section). To be conservative, in regard to lateral flow capacity and water table
mounding, it was assumed that the clay layer extends to the east beneath Plashes Brook and to the south to
Winslow Gray Road. Horizontal and vertical conductivity values for the clay were set to 0.001 ft/day.
5.3 Steady-state Model Validation
Since the USGS Sagamore Model was developed and validated to regional water levels for 2003, the site-
specific model was also validated to average 2003 water levels at the sprayfield wells. Water levels in 2003
were slightly higher than average based on the historical water levels at MA-YAW 89 and 94. The annual
average flow measured in Plashes Brook and the MEP estimated discharge to Gray Brook were also used as a
validation check. Stream bed conductivity and invert elevations were adjusted to match the annual average
Section 5 • Groundwater Model l
5-3
flow in Plashes Brook, estimated discharge to Gray Brook and observed water levels at the sprayfield wells.
Hydraulic conductivity values were not adjusted in the model. Comparison of observed and calculated
heads is shown in Figure 14.
Differences in the simulated and observed water levels in the northernmost monitoring wells are likely due
to the influence of the bogs on observed water levels. During winter months and fall harvest, the flooding
of the bogs raises the water levels in the wells closest to the bogs. To assess the impact of higher heads in
the bogs, the steady-state model was run with fixed heads in the bogs. Simulated water level in the
northern wells increased by an amount similar to the increase seen in observed heads during periods of bog
flooding. Heads in the bogs will not be fixed for steady-state simulations to simulate site recharge capacity.
5.4 Transient Model Validation
In order to assess the ability of the site to handle variations in effluent discharge rates with seasonally
varying wastewater flow rates and groundwater levels, a transient simulation was developed. Water supply
pumping rates for the transient model were estimated by multiplying the steady-state pumping rates by
monthly peaking factors from the CWMP. Monthly recharge rates were taken from the USGS model
documentation (Walter and Whealan 2004). The groundwater model was run for three years using 2003
conditions for each year in order to reduce the impacts of the starting conditions. The 2003 conditions
were selected to be consistent with modeling conducted by the USGS for the MEP. Comparison of the
transient heads at the sprayfield wells to 2003 monthly water levels is shown on Figure 15. Impacts of bog
operations can be seen in some of the wells, in particular MW-22A and MW-1. Based on conversations with
the bog operator, the bogs are flooded in the fall for harvest, then again during January and February to
protect the plants during the winter. Raising the bog water elevations increases the water elevations
observed in some wells on-site. The model does not include the high water in the bogs during these time
periods and therefore simulates lower water levels than observed at northernmost site wells during the fall
and winter. Simulation of observed water levels is excellent during all season for wells located in the other
portions of the sprayfield.
6-1
Section 6
Predictive Simulation Analysis
The locally-refined and validated groundwater flow model was used to evaluate the impacts of
proposed infiltration basins under annual average (steady-state) conditions and transient
conditions representing typical seasonal variability on a monthly basis
The following scenarios were simulated:
Steady-state model with infiltration on upland areas of the site
Steady-state model with infiltration on upland areas of the site with the groundwater
mound allowed to reach the bottom of the basins
Transient simulation of infiltration on upland areas of the site
Steady-state model with infiltration on upland areas of the site and a historical high
water table
Steady-state model with infiltration on upland areas of the site and infiltration basins in
a small area of the cranberry bogs in the western portion of the site
6.1 Proposed Infiltration Basins Capacity
An area of 12 acres in the southern portion of the currently cleared Buck Island Road site and
extending south into the wooded area was identified for the Phase 1 infiltration basins, shown
on Figure 15. Basin elevations were set at 18.1 near the proposed WWTP and step down to 17.1 ft
NAVD88 from north to south. Recharge capacity to the infiltration basins was modeled by
fixing the model head at an elevation of 4 ft below the basin surface elevation and running the
model in steady-state. Based on the simulations, the proposed infiltration basins are predicted
to accommodate up to an average annual recharge of 1.2 MGD. The depth to water with the
proposed recharge area is shown on Figure 16. If the four foot separation between the
infiltration basins and the top of the groundwater mound is waived to allow groundwater to
rise to the bottom of the basins recharge capacity would be approximately 2.0 MGD. Figure 17
shows the change in average annual groundwater levels near the site for 1.2 MGD of recharge.
Groundwater levels on site will increase up to 4 feet. Off-site increases will be less than 1 foot,
with the exception of the area immediately east of the site between Plashes Brook and Winslow
Gray Road. The average annual water level will increase up to 1.5 feet for the nearest residential
neighbors on Circuit Road.
Based on the transient simulation results, the recharge capacity at the proposed initial phase of
infiltration basins is predicted to vary between 0.99 and 1.5 MGD during a typical year if a 4-
foot separation is maintained. Figure 18 shows the predicted seasonally-varying site capacity
and the CWMP estimated monthly flows. Transient results indicate that there is sufficient
capacity during the year to accommodate Phase 1 and 2 wastewater flows.
Section 6 • Predictive Simulation Analysis
6-2
6.2 High Water Level Simulation
Historical high water level conditions were simulated with a steady-state model to evaluate the site
infiltration capacity during historical high water level periods. Water levels from March 2010 were used
as target water levels for this simulation. In order to simulate the target water levels, the natural recharge
rate was adjusted to 53 inches/year for general recharge and 21 inches/year for wetlands and ponds.
Heads were fixed at four feet below the proposed infiltration basins bottom elevations of 17.1 to 18.1 ft
NAVD88. Results from this simulation suggest that at periods of high water levels such as in March 2010,
up to 0.56 MGD of effluent could be disposed of at the site. This is greater than the proposed Phase 1
winter recharge of 0.43 MGD and close to the proposed spring recharge of 0.59 MGD. Near historical
high water levels such as occurred in March 2010 could be mitigated by lowering water levels in the bogs
and decreasing the required separation distance from the infiltration basins to the top of the groundwater
mound for a limited period if necessary.
6.3 Cranberry Bog Recharge Simulation
As part of the adaptive management approach a potential recharge area within the cranberry bogs was
assessed. A steady-state simulation was conducted that included effluent discharge in a small area of the
cranberry bog in the western portion of the site in addition to the 12 acres of upland infiltration basins.
The simulation assumed that the northern portion of the cranberry bogs in the western part of the site
would be used for infiltration.
The simulation results indicated that up to 2.0 MGD of effluent could be infiltrated, while maintaining a
four foot separation between the bottom of the basins and the groundwater mound in the upland
infiltration basins. However, water in the recharge area constructed in the cranberry bog area was
simulated to raise the water table 4 ft to an elevation of 14.1 ft NGVD29 as shown on Figure 19. This
elevation is at or near the top of the existing cranberry bog berms.
6.4 Impacts to Estuaries and Waterbodies
The predictive simulations indicate that effluent recharge to the infiltration basins will produce increases
in baseflow to Plashes Brook and Gray Brook. Site infiltration loading rates of about 2.0 MGD are
estimated to increase the average annual flow in Plashes Brook from 0.8 MGD to 1.5 MGD. Flow in Gray
Brook is estimated to increase from a model estimated average annual flow of 1.6 MGD to 2.5 MGD. The
largest portion of the recharged effluent, 45%, is estimated to flow to Gray Brook, 31% is estimated to flow
to Plashes Brook and the remaining 25% is estimated to flow under Plashes Brook and discharge to Seine
Pond. Figure 20 shows the simulated flow paths from the Phase 1 infiltration basins to the downgradient
surface waters.
Surface water quality impacts of the planned groundwater discharge at the site have been previously
addressed as part of the CWMP and MEP assessment efforts. Based on the MEP Report for the Parkers
River Watershed from May 2010, the amount of recharge at the Buck Island Road site is limited to about
2.0 MGD annual average flow due to nitrogen sensitivity.
7-1
Section 7
Conclusions
The Buck Island Road site is estimated, based locally-detailed groundwater flow modeling, to
be sufficient for disposal of an average annual flow of 1.2 MGD of effluent spread over 12 acres.
Transient modeling shows sufficient capacity throughout the year for estimated Phase 1 and 2
build-out flows of 0.812 MGD including estimates for inflow and infiltration (I/I).
Disposal of an average annual flow of up to 2.0 MGD can be achieved by allowing the
groundwater mound to reach the bottom of the infiltration basins in a limited portion of the
infiltration basin area, and/or through infiltration in the area of the cranberry bogs in the
western portion of the site. Given the very high quality of the treated effluent, the 4-foot
separation criterion, which is based on assumed septic system effluent, is not essential for
protection of water resources. Therefore, a higher site capacity can be realized with an
approved reduction in the separation distance.
An adaptive management approach will be used to evaluate the site capacity for Phase 3 flows.
During Phase 1 groundwater levels on and off-site, water levels in the bogs and flows in Plashes
Brook and in the bogs to the west of the site will be monitored. This data, along with discharge
rates and volumes, Yarmouth Water supply well pumping rates, and pumping and operations
data from the bog operators, will be used to validate the model and further revise it if
necessary. An assessment can then be made on the best path forward for achieving higher
loading rates at the Phase 1 infiltration basins, including relaxation of the distance to
groundwater criterion, changes in bog operations, conversion of a small area of the cranberry
bogs to a recharge area and/or additional infiltration basins in the southern portion of the site.
The groundwater monitoring network for the site will include at least one monitoring well
immediately beyond each of the four corners of the basin area as well as water level monitoring
points in selected locations within the cranberry bog area in the western portion of the site and
in Plashes Brook.
8-1
Section 8
References
CDM 2011. Phase 1 – Preliminary Design – WWTP Boring Logs, Town of Yarmouth,
Massachusetts. CDM, Cambridge, Massachusetts. February 2011.
CDM 2010. Expanded Environmental Notification Form and Draft Comprehensive Wastewater
Management Plan. Town of Yarmouth, Massachusetts. Prepared by CDM, Cambridge,
Massachusetts, September 2010.
CDM 1998. Water Department Building Borehole Logs, Town of Yarmouth, Massachusetts.
CDM, Cambridge, Massachusetts. December 1998.
Frimpter, M.H. and M.N. Fisher, 1983. Estimating Highest Ground-Water Levels for
Construction and Land Use Planning – A Cape Cod, Massachusetts, Example. USGS Water-
Resources Investigations Report 83-4112. September 1983.
Heisen, K.J. Personal communication with Bob Hallett, cranberry bog operator, December 2010.
MEP 2010. Linked Watershed-Embayment Model to Determine Critical Nitrogen Loading
Threshold for the Parkers River Embayment System, Yarmouth, Massachusetts. Final Report,
May 2010.
Milbert, D.G., 1999. VertCON 2.0 National Geodetic Survey (NGS) Height Conversion
Methodology. Accessed at http://www.ngs.noaa.gov/TOOLS/Vertcon/vertcon.html.
U.S. Geological Survey, 2001, National Water Information System data available on the World
Wide Web (Water Data for the Nation), at URL [http://waterdata.usgs.gov/nwis/].
Walter, D.A., and A.T. Whealan, 2005, Simulated Water Sources and Effects of Pumping on
Surface and Ground Water, Sagamore and Monomoy Flow Lenses, Cape Cod, Massachusetts:
USGS Investigations Report 2004-5181.
Wright-Pierce 1989. Contract and Specifications for Yarmouth Water Pollution Control Facility
Contract No. 3 Spray Irrigation Facility. Town of Yarmouth, Massachusetts. Prepared by
Wright-Pierce, Topsham, Maine. March 1989.
Wright-Pierce 1984. Facility Plan for Wastewater and Septage Management. Town of
Yarmouth, Massachusetts. Prepared by Wright-Pierce, Topsham, Maine, January 1984.
Yarmouth-Dennis Septage Treatment Facility. Monthly Groundwater Discharge and
Monitoring Reports. 2003 to 2011.
Figure 1
Location Map
Buck Island Road Hydrogeology Report
Figure 2
Public Water Supplies and Zone II Areas
Buck Island Road Hydrogeology Report
Figure 3
NHESP Priority Habitats and Estimated Habitats
Buck Island Road Hydrogeology Report
Figure 4
Facilities Plan Investigations
Buck Island Road Hydrogeology Report
Plashes Brook
Gray
Brook
Seine
Pond
Parkers
River
Plashes
Pond
Big Sandy
Pond
Horse
Pond
Bassetts
Lot Pond
MEP Stage
Sprayfield
Figure 5
Sprayfield Site Development and Other Investigations
Buck Island Road Hydrogeology Report
Plashes
Brook
Gray
Brook
Seine
Pond
Plashes
Pond
Bassetts
Lot Pond
Sprayfield
Figure 6
Depth to Groundwater and Min/Max Water Level Elevations
Buck Island Road Hydrogeology Report
Figure 7
USGS Wells with Long-Term Water Level Data
Buck Island Road Hydrogeology Report
Sprayfield
Site
Route 6
Barnstable
Airport
Figure 8
Current Investigation Borings and Wells
Buck Island Road Hydrogeology Report
Figure 9
Clay and Silt Extent and Depth
Clay/Silt Depth (Total Depth of Boring)
Buck Island Road Hydrogeology Report
Clay was not encountered in borings of less than 40 ft except B-101 and B-103
Figure 10
Local Model Revised Grid and Simulated Clay Extent
Buck Island Road Hydrogeology Report
Area of Revised Grid
Clay Extent
Plashes
Pond
Bog
Bog
Seine
Pond
Plashes
Brook
Gray
Brook
Site
Figure 11
Model Recharge Areas
Buck Island Road Hydrogeology Report
Plashes
Brook
Gray
Brook
Seine
Pond
Parkers
River
Plashes
Pond
Big Sandy
Pond
Horse
Pond
Bassetts
Lot Pond
Sprayfield
Site
General Recharge: 27 in/yr
Wetland/Bog Recharge: 0 in/yr
Pond Recharge: 16 in/yr
Inactive Model Cells
Figure 12
Model Cross-Section North-South
Buck Island Road Hydrogeology Report
Clay
Pond
Kx = 210 ft/day,
Kz = 40 ft/day
Kx = 170 ft/day,
Kz = 22 ft/day
Kx = 100 ft/day,
Kz = 10 ft/day
Figure 13
Model Cross-Section East-West
Buck Island Road Hydrogeology Report
Clay
Ponds
Figure 14
Steady-State Model Simulation
Buck Island Road Hydrogeology Report
Water Elevations in NGVD29
12 ft
10 ft
8 ft
A
A
A
A
A
A
Figure 15
Transient Water Level Simulation
Buck Island Road Hydrogeology Report
5
10
15
0 365 730 1095feetdays
MW-17 Modeled MW-17 Observed
5
10
15
0 365 730 1095feet
days
MW-16 Modeled MW-16 Observed
5
10
15
0 365 730 1095feetdays
MW-14A Modeled MW-14A Observed
10
15
20
0 365 730 1095feetdays
MW-1 Modeled MW-1 Observed
5
10
15
0 365 730 1095feetdays
IW-1 Modeled IW-1 Observed
Water Elevations in NGVD29
5
10
15
0 365 730 1095feetdays
MW-11A Modeled MW-11A Observed
5
10
15
0 365 730 1095feetdays
MW-23A Modeled MW-23A Observed
10
15
20
0 365 730 1095feetdays
MW-22A Modeled MW-22A Observed
A
A
A
Figure 16
Simulated Depth to Water for 1.2 MGD Recharge
1.2 MGD Recharge with Bed Elevations from 18.1 to 17.1 ft NAVD88
Buck Island Road Hydrogeology Report
Recharge Area
Plashes
Brook
Cranberry
Bog
Figure 17
Change in Average Annual Groundwater Elevation
1.2 MGD Recharge with Bed Elevations from 18.1 to 17.1 ft NAVD88
Buck Island Road Hydrogeology Report
Plashes
Brook
Cranberry
Bog
Figure 18
Transient Recharge Capacity
Recharge Bed Elevations from 18.1 to 17.1 ft NAVD88
Buck Island Road Hydrogeology Report
0.00
0.20
0.40
0.60
0.80
1.00
1.20
1.40
1.60
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov DecRecharge (MGD)Month
Simulated Effluent Recharge Capacity Estimated Phase 2 Effluent Flows
Figure 19
Water Table Elevation for Recharge in Cranberry Bog Simulation
Buck Island Road Hydrogeology Report
14.1
Groundwater contours are labeled in ft NAVD88
12.1 ft
10.1 ft
8.1 ft
Figure 20
Simulation of Proposed Recharge with Particle Pathlines
1.2 MGD Recharge with Bed Elevations from 18.1 to 17.1 ft NAVD88
Buck Island Road Hydrogeology Report
Recharge Area
Groundwater contours labeled in ft NAVD88
Plashes
Pond
Seine
Pond
Plashes
Brook
Gray
Brook
Appendix A
Test Pit Logs and Borings Logs – Previous Investigations
Buck Island Road Hydrogeology Report
Spray Irrigation Site Test Pit Logs 1981 12 pages
Spray Irrigation Site Boring Logs 1982 8 pages
Spray Irrigation Site Test Pit and Boring Logs 1988 9 pages
Water Department Building Test Pits and Boring Logs 1998 13 pages
Spray Irrigation Site Test Pit Logs 1981
12 pages
Spray Irrigation Site Boring Logs 1982
8 pages
Spray Irrigation Site Test Pit and Boring Logs 1988
9 pages
Water Department Building Test Pits and Bo ring Logs 1998
13 pages
Appendix B
Boring Logs and Soils Testing Results – Current Investigation
Buck Island Road Hydrogeology Report
Waste Water Treatment Plant Boring Logs 2010 to 2011 50 pages
Waste Water Treatment Plant Soil Lab Testing Results 2011 41 pages
Waste Water Treatment Plant Boring Logs 2010 to 2011
50 pages
11
3
6
4
TopsoilSand11
S-1
11
4
11
13
4
Wet, medium dense, brown, fine to medium
SAND, trace silt
11
11
3
8
11
13
24
SS
SS
SS
SS
Wet, medium dense, brown, fine to coarse
SAND, little silt24S-4
S-3
S-2
11
Depth
Dry, medium dense, red brown, fine to
medium SAND, trace siltt
6" of Topsoil
24
10
24
7
12
Wet, loose, gray, fine to medium SAND,
trace silt
Material Description
PID/OVM(ppm)SampleLength (in)StrataGraphic LogSampleRecovery (in)Blows per6 inchesSampleNumberElev.
Depth
(ft)Remarks
AS - Auger/Grab Sample
CS - California Sampler
BQ - 1.5" Rock Core
NQ - 2" Rock Core
HP - Hydro Punch
SS - Split Spoon
ST - Shelby Tube
WS - Wash Sample
GP - GeoprobeSampleType
Reviewed by:
18.0
13.0
8.0
3.0
-2.0
0
5
10
15
BL YARMOUTH BORING LOGS.GPJ - 4/14/11Boring Number: B-201
Client: Town of Yarmouth
Project Location:
Project Name: Phase I - Preliminary Design - WWTP
Project Number: 1125-77883
Sheet 1 of 2Boring Number:
B-201
CAMP DRESSER & McKEE
Stiff: 8-15
V. Stiff: 15-30
Hard: >30
Date:
Hammer Weight/Drop Height/ Spoon Size: 140 lb / 30 in /2 in O.D.
and 35-50%
some 20-35%
little 10-20%
trace <10%
moisture, density, color
Abandonment Method: Fill with cuttingsN: 2704538 E: 1004404
Bore Hole Location:
Logged By: M. Cronin
Total Depth (ft.): 35
Drilling Date: Start: 1/13/2011 End: 1/13/2011
Drilling Contractor/Driller: New Hampshire Boring, Inc. / Roger Burns
Drilling Method/Casing/Core Barrel Size: Drive and Wash / 4"/
8.1 1/13/2010
Depth to Initial Water Level (ft):
TimeDate
Surface Elevation (ft.): 18.0
Burmister Classification
V. Soft: <2
Soft: 2-4
M. Stiff: 4-8
V. Loose: 0-4
Loose: 4-10
M. Dense: 10-30
Dense: 30-50
V. Dense: >50
Fine Grained (Clay):Granular (Sand):
Sample Types Consistency vs Blowcount/Foot
Sand21
Wet, very dense, brown, fine to coarse
SAND, little silt, trace fine gravel
Wet, very dense, brown, fine to coarse
SAND, little fine gravel, little silt
Wet, very dense, brown, fine to coarse
SAND, little silt
Wet, dense, brown, fine to coarse SAND,
little silt
END OF BORING = 35'
4
17
33
20
19
21
46
S-5
SS
S-6
S-7
S-8
SS
30
SS
24
24
24
24
10
8
14
SS
Boring Number:
B-201
26Blows per6 inchesSampleRecovery (in)Graphic LogStrataSampleLength (in)PID/OVM(ppm)SampleTypeElev.
Depth
(ft)
Sheet 2 of 2
Project Name: Phase I - Preliminary Design - WWTP
Project Number: 1125-77883
Client: Town of Yarmouth
Project Location:
Boring Number: B-201
BL YARMOUTH BORING LOGS.GPJ - 4/14/1120
25
30
35
40
45
-2.0
-7.0
-12.0
-17.0
-22.0
-27.0
CAMP DRESSER & McKEE
45
32
24
19
42
44
26SampleNumber RemarksMaterial Description
Sandy Silt or Clay17
8
10
3
SandSand Topsoil
18
S-4
S-1
16
8
17
14
7
12
17
6
16
12
18
SS
24
24
24
24
SS
SS
SS
Wet, dense, brown, SILT & CLAY and fine to
medium SAND, trace fine gravel
Wet, medium dense, gray, fine SAND, trace
silt, trace fine gravel
Wet, dense, brown, fine to medium SAND,
trace silt
Dry, medium dense, red brown, fine to
coarse SAND, trace silt
12
8
8
7
S-3
6" of Topsoil
Remarks
SampleLength (in)StrataGraphic LogSampleRecovery (in)Blows per6 inchesSampleNumberSampleTypeStiff: 8-15
V. Stiff: 15-30
Hard: >30
Material Description
AS - Auger/Grab Sample
CS - California Sampler
BQ - 1.5" Rock Core
NQ - 2" Rock Core
HP - Hydro Punch
SS - Split Spoon
ST - Shelby Tube
WS - Wash Sample
GP - Geoprobe
and 35-50%
some 20-35%
little 10-20%
trace <10%
moisture, density, color
Elev.
Depth
(ft)
Client: Town of Yarmouth
Project Location:
18.3
13.3
8.3
3.3
-1.7
0
5
10
15
BL YARMOUTH BORING LOGS.GPJ - 4/14/11Boring Number: B-202Date:PID/OVM(ppm)Reviewed by:
Project Name: Phase I - Preliminary Design - WWTP
Project Number: 1125-77883
Sheet 1 of 3Boring Number:
B-202
CAMP DRESSER & McKEE
V. Soft: <2
Soft: 2-4
M. Stiff: 4-8
7.3N: 2704535 E: 1004364
Bore Hole Location:
Logged By: M. Cronin
Total Depth (ft.): 62
Surface Elevation (ft.): 18.3
Drilling Date: Start: End:
Hammer Weight/Drop Height/ Spoon Size: 140 lb / 30 in /2 in O.D.
Drilling Method/Casing/Core Barrel Size: Drive and Wash / 4"/
1/13/2010
Depth to Initial Water Level (ft):
TimeDateDepth
S-2
Drilling Contractor/Driller: New Hampshire Boring, Inc. / Roger Burns
V. Loose: 0-4
Loose: 4-10
M. Dense: 10-30
Dense: 30-50
V. Dense: >50
Fine Grained (Clay):Granular (Sand):
Consistency vs Blowcount/FootSample Types Burmister Classification
Abandonment Method: Fill with cuttings
12
Wet, dense, gray, fine to coarse SAND, little
silt
Wet, dense, gray, fine to coarse SAND, little
fine gravel, little silt
Wet, dense, brown, fine to coarse SAND,
some fine gravel, little silt
8
8
12
7
12S-5
8
8
15
9
21 Wet, dense, gray, fine to coarse SAND, little
silt, trace fine gravel
SandWet, very dense, brown, fine to coarse
SAND, some fine gravel, trace silt
Wet, dense, brown, fine to coarse SAND,
some fine gravel, little silt
8
S-10
S-9
S-8
S-7
S-6
24
24
24
24
24
SS
SS
SS
SS
SS
SS
24SampleNumber PID/OVM(ppm)SampleLength (in)StrataGraphic LogBlows per6 inchesSampleTypeElev.
Depth
(ft)Material Description Remarks
SampleRecovery (in)Client: Town of Yarmouth
Project Location:
-1.7
-6.7
-11.7
-16.7
-21.7
-26.7
20
25
30
35
40
45
BL YARMOUTH BORING LOGS.GPJ - 4/14/11Project Name: Phase I - Preliminary Design - WWTP
Project Number: 1125-77883
Sheet 2 of 3Boring Number:
B-202
CAMP DRESSER & McKEE
Boring Number: B-202
21
28
20
26
26
22
19
28
15
17
18
29
42
23
47
29
27
40
6 Wet, medium dense, brown, fine to coarse
SAND, some fine gravel, little silt
Wet, very dense, gray, fine to medium
SAND, little silt
END OF BORING = 62'Sand59
6
20
7
9
58
9S-11 24
S-12
S-13
SS
Wet, medium dense, brown, fine to coarse
SAND, some fine gravel, little silt
SS
24
24
2
4
18
12
SS Graphic LogStrataSampleLength (in)PID/OVM(ppm)CAMP DRESSER & McKEE
14
Sheet 3 of 3
SampleNumberProject Name: Phase I - Preliminary Design - WWTP
Project Number: 1125-77883
Client: Town of Yarmouth
Project Location:
Boring Number: B-202
BL YARMOUTH BORING LOGS.GPJ - 4/14/1150
55
60
65
70
-31.7
-36.7
-41.7
-46.7
-51.7
Boring Number:
B-202
20
65 SampleRecovery (in)Blows per6 inchesRemarksMaterial Description
Elev.
Depth
(ft)SampleType
Wet, medium dense, brown, fine to medium
SAND, trace fine gravel, trace silt
5
9
15
8
TopsoilDepth
Sand19
S-1
17
16
27
21
12
Wet, dense, brown, fine to medium SAND,
trace silt
15
9
8
20
10
17
Wet, medium dense, brown, fine to medium
SAND, trace fine gravel, trace siltSS
SS
SS
SS
24
24
S-4
S-3
S-2 15
Dry, medium dense, brown, fine to medium
SAND, trace silt
7" of Topsoil
24
7
Date
15
24 11
Material Description
PID/OVM(ppm)SampleLength (in)StrataGraphic LogSampleRecovery (in)Blows per6 inchesSampleNumberElev.
Depth
(ft)Remarks
AS - Auger/Grab Sample
CS - California Sampler
BQ - 1.5" Rock Core
NQ - 2" Rock Core
HP - Hydro Punch
SS - Split Spoon
ST - Shelby Tube
WS - Wash Sample
GP - GeoprobeSampleType
Reviewed by:
18.0
13.0
8.0
3.0
-2.0
0
5
10
15
BL YARMOUTH BORING LOGS.GPJ - 4/14/11Boring Number: B-203
Client: Town of Yarmouth
Project Location:
Project Name: Phase I - Preliminary Design - WWTP
Project Number: 1125-77883
Sheet 1 of 2Boring Number:
B-203
CAMP DRESSER & McKEE
Stiff: 8-15
V. Stiff: 15-30
Hard: >30
Date:
Drilling Date: Start: 1/13/2011 End: 1/14/2011
and 35-50%
some 20-35%
little 10-20%
trace <10%
moisture, density, color
Abandonment Method: Fill with cuttingsN: 2704490 E: 1004405
Bore Hole Location:
Logged By: M. Cronin
Surface Elevation (ft.): 18.0
Hammer Weight/Drop Height/ Spoon Size: 140 lb / 30 in /2 in O.D.
Drilling Contractor/Driller: New Hampshire Boring, Inc. / Roger Burns
Drilling Method/Casing/Core Barrel Size: Drive and Wash / 4"/
8.8 1/14/2011
Depth to Initial Water Level (ft):
Time
Total Depth (ft.): 37
Sample Types
V. Soft: <2
Soft: 2-4
M. Stiff: 4-8
V. Loose: 0-4
Loose: 4-10
M. Dense: 10-30
Dense: 30-50
V. Dense: >50
Fine Grained (Clay):
Consistency vs Blowcount/Foot Burmister Classification
Granular (Sand):
Sand16
Wet, dense, brown, fine to medium SAND,
trace silt
Wet, dense, brown, fine to medium SAND,
trace fine gravel, trace silt
Wet, very dense, brown, fine to medium
SAND, trace fine gravel, trace silt
Wet, dense, brown, fine to medium SAND,
trace fine gravel, trace silt
END OF BORING = 37'
6
9
11
18
14
13
17
S-5
SS
S-6
S-7
S-8
SS
17
SS
24
24
24
24
9
8
10
SS
Boring Number:
B-203
25Blows per6 inchesSampleRecovery (in)Graphic LogStrataSampleLength (in)PID/OVM(ppm)SampleTypeElev.
Depth
(ft)
Sheet 2 of 2
Project Name: Phase I - Preliminary Design - WWTP
Project Number: 1125-77883
Client: Town of Yarmouth
Project Location:
Boring Number: B-203
BL YARMOUTH BORING LOGS.GPJ - 4/14/1120
25
30
35
40
45
-2.0
-7.0
-12.0
-17.0
-22.0
-27.0
CAMP DRESSER & McKEE
18
38
26
23
16
42
30SampleNumber RemarksMaterial Description
11
6
2
Sand Topsoil
18
Wet, medium dense, brown, fine to medium
SAND, trace silt
Wet, medium dense, brown, fine to medium
SAND, little fine gravel, trace silt
Wet, dense, brown, fine to medium SAND,
trace silt
7
S-1
12
7
7
17
8
17
12
8
7
5
21
17
3
6" of Topsoil
7
Moist, medium dense, brown, fine to medium
SAND, trace silt
SS
SS
SS
SS 24
24
S-5
S-4
S-3
S-2
16
6
4
SS
16
Dry, loose, brown, fine to medium SAND,
trace silt
24
24
24 16
Remarks
SampleLength (in)StrataGraphic LogSampleRecovery (in)Blows per6 inchesSampleNumberSampleType9
Material Description
AS - Auger/Grab Sample
CS - California Sampler
BQ - 1.5" Rock Core
NQ - 2" Rock Core
HP - Hydro Punch
SS - Split Spoon
ST - Shelby Tube
WS - Wash Sample
GP - Geoprobe
and 35-50%
some 20-35%
little 10-20%
trace <10%
moisture, density, color
Elev.
Depth
(ft)
Client: Town of Yarmouth
Project Location:
18.1
13.1
8.1
3.1
-1.9
0
5
10
15
BL YARMOUTH BORING LOGS.GPJ - 4/14/11Boring Number: B-204Date:PID/OVM(ppm)Reviewed by:
Project Name: Phase I - Preliminary Design - WWTP
Project Number: 1125-77883
Sheet 1 of 2Boring Number:
B-204
CAMP DRESSER & McKEE
Drilling Method/Casing/Core Barrel Size: Drive and Wash / 4"/
Abandonment Method: Fill with cuttings
Stiff: 8-15
V. Stiff: 15-30
Hard: >30
Bore Hole Location:
Logged By: M. Cronin
Total Depth (ft.): 40
Surface Elevation (ft.): 18.1
Drilling Date: Start: 1/13/2011 End: 1/13/2011
V. Soft: <2
Soft: 2-4
M. Stiff: 4-8
Drilling Contractor/Driller: New Hampshire Boring, Inc. / Roger Burns
7.5 1/13/2011
Depth to Initial Water Level (ft):
TimeDateDepth
Hammer Weight/Drop Height/ Spoon Size: 140 lb / 30 in /2 in O.D.
V. Loose: 0-4
Loose: 4-10
M. Dense: 10-30
Dense: 30-50
V. Dense: >50
Fine Grained (Clay):Granular (Sand):
Consistency vs Blowcount/Foot
N: 2704452 E: 1004438
Burmister ClassificationSample Types
S-6
Wet, dense, gray, fine to medium SAND,
little fine gravel, trace silt
Wet, dense, brown, fine to medium SAND,
little fine gravel, trace silt
Wet, very dense, brown, fine to medium
SAND, little silt
Wet, very dense, brown, fine to medium
SAND, little silt
END OF BORING = 40'
6
5 Sand22
18
15
20
SS
S-7
S-8
S-9
SS
19
SS
24
24
24
24
10
4
SS
Boring Number:
B-204
SampleTypeSampleNumberBlows per6 inchesSampleRecovery (in)Graphic LogStrataSampleLength (in)PID/OVM(ppm)14
Remarks
Sheet 2 of 2
Project Name: Phase I - Preliminary Design - WWTP
Project Number: 1125-77883
Client: Town of Yarmouth
Project Location:
Boring Number: B-204
BL YARMOUTH BORING LOGS.GPJ - 4/14/1120
25
30
35
40
45
-1.9
-6.9
-11.9
-16.9
-21.9
-26.9
CAMP DRESSER & McKEE
45
16
21
31
47
22
19
33
41
Elev.
Depth
(ft)Material Description
20
5
5
2
Sand Topsoil
7
Wet, medium dense, brown, fine to medium
SAND, trace silt, trace fine gravel
Wet, medium dense, brown, fine to medium
SAND, trace silt
Wet, loose, brown, fine to medium SAND,
trace fine gravel, trace silt
7
S-1
5
5
3
9
6
4
6
6
10
10
4
4
3
6" of Topsoil
3
Dry, loose to medium dense, light brown, fine
to medium SAND, trace silt, trace fine gravel
SS
SS
SS
SS 24
24
S-5
S-4
S-3
S-2
13
12
6
SS
12
Dry, loose, brown, fine to coarse SAND,
trace silt
24
24
24 8
Remarks
SampleLength (in)StrataGraphic LogSampleRecovery (in)Blows per6 inchesSampleNumberSampleType9
Material Description
AS - Auger/Grab Sample
CS - California Sampler
BQ - 1.5" Rock Core
NQ - 2" Rock Core
HP - Hydro Punch
SS - Split Spoon
ST - Shelby Tube
WS - Wash Sample
GP - Geoprobe
and 35-50%
some 20-35%
little 10-20%
trace <10%
moisture, density, color
Elev.
Depth
(ft)
Client: Town of Yarmouth
Project Location:
18.0
13.0
8.0
3.0
-2.0
0
5
10
15
BL YARMOUTH BORING LOGS.GPJ - 4/14/11Boring Number: B-205Date:PID/OVM(ppm)Reviewed by:
Project Name: Phase I - Preliminary Design - WWTP
Project Number: 1125-77883
Sheet 1 of 2Boring Number:
B-205
CAMP DRESSER & McKEE
Drilling Method/Casing/Core Barrel Size: Drive and Wash / 4"/
Abandonment Method: Fill with cuttings
Stiff: 8-15
V. Stiff: 15-30
Hard: >30
Bore Hole Location:
Logged By: M. Cronin
Total Depth (ft.): 45
Surface Elevation (ft.): 18.0
Drilling Date: Start: 1/10/2011 End: 1/11/2011
V. Soft: <2
Soft: 2-4
M. Stiff: 4-8
Drilling Contractor/Driller: New Hampshire Boring, Inc. / Chris Knight
7.3 1/11/2011
Depth to Initial Water Level (ft):
TimeDateDepth
Hammer Weight/Drop Height/ Spoon Size: 140 lb / 30 in /2 in O.D.
V. Loose: 0-4
Loose: 4-10
M. Dense: 10-30
Dense: 30-50
V. Dense: >50
Fine Grained (Clay):Granular (Sand):
Consistency vs Blowcount/Foot
N: 2704380 E: 1004431
Burmister ClassificationSample Types
Wet, loose, gray, fine to medium SAND, little
silt
END OF BORING = 45'
B: Wet, medium dense, gray, fine to medium
SAND, trace silt
Wet, very stiff, gray, fine to medium SAND
some silt and clay
Wet, medium dense, gray, fine to medium
SAND, trace fine gravel, trace silt
Wet, dense, brown, fine to medium SAND,
trace fine gravel, trace silt
5
A: Wet, very stiff, gray, CLAY & SILT, little
fine to medium sand, trace fine gravel
B: (15"-16")
S-6
10
SandSandA: (0"-15")
16 Sandy Silt or ClaySS
SS
S-10
S-9
S-8
S-7
12
12
10
16
SS
SS
24
24
24
24
24
SS
12
Material Description
SampleLength (in)StrataGraphic LogSampleRecovery (in)Blows per6 inchesSampleNumberElev.
Depth
(ft)Remarks
9SampleType Project Name: Phase I - Preliminary Design - WWTP
Project Number: 1125-77883
-2.0
-7.0
-12.0
-17.0
-22.0
-27.0
20
25
30
35
40
45
BL YARMOUTH BORING LOGS.GPJ - 4/14/11Boring Number: B-205PID/OVM(ppm)Client: Town of Yarmouth
Project Location:
Sheet 2 of 2Boring Number:
B-205
CAMP DRESSER & McKEE
13
10
5
13
17
9
13
10
9
7
5
5
15
24
24
18
15
4
5
4
TopsoilSand10
S-1
29
9
12
15
7
Moist to wet, medium dense, brown, fine to
medium SAND, trace silt
12
20
7
9
7
25
24
SS
SS
SS
SS
Wet, dense, brown, fine to medium SAND,
trace fine gravel, trace silt24S-4
S-3
S-2
12
Depth
Dry, medium dense, red brown, fine to
medium SAND, trace fine gravel, trace silt
6" of Topsoil
24
12
24
12
15
Wet, medium dense, red brown, fine to
medium SAND, trace fine gravel, trace silt
Material Description
PID/OVM(ppm)SampleLength (in)StrataGraphic LogSampleRecovery (in)Blows per6 inchesSampleNumberElev.
Depth
(ft)Remarks
AS - Auger/Grab Sample
CS - California Sampler
BQ - 1.5" Rock Core
NQ - 2" Rock Core
HP - Hydro Punch
SS - Split Spoon
ST - Shelby Tube
WS - Wash Sample
GP - GeoprobeSampleType
Reviewed by:
18.0
13.0
8.0
3.0
-2.0
0
5
10
15
BL YARMOUTH BORING LOGS.GPJ - 4/14/11Boring Number: B-206
Client: Town of Yarmouth
Project Location:
Project Name: Phase I - Preliminary Design - WWTP
Project Number: 1125-77883
Sheet 1 of 2Boring Number:
B-206
CAMP DRESSER & McKEE
Stiff: 8-15
V. Stiff: 15-30
Hard: >30
Date:
Hammer Weight/Drop Height/ Spoon Size: 140 lb / 30 in /2 in O.D.
and 35-50%
some 20-35%
little 10-20%
trace <10%
moisture, density, color
Abandonment Method: Monitoring WellN: 2704453 E: 1004393
Bore Hole Location:
Logged By: M. Cronin
Total Depth (ft.): 32
Drilling Date: Start: 1/11/2011 End: 1/11/2011
Drilling Contractor/Driller: New Hampshire Boring, Inc. / Roger Burns
Drilling Method/Casing/Core Barrel Size: Drive and Wash / 4"/
7 1/11/2011
Depth to Initial Water Level (ft):
TimeDate
Surface Elevation (ft.): 18.0
Burmister Classification
V. Soft: <2
Soft: 2-4
M. Stiff: 4-8
V. Loose: 0-4
Loose: 4-10
M. Dense: 10-30
Dense: 30-50
V. Dense: >50
Fine Grained (Clay):Granular (Sand):
Sample Types Consistency vs Blowcount/Foot
45
END OF BORING = 32'
28'- Driller
noticed drilling
became more
difficultSand20
23
Wet, dense, brown, fine to medium SAND,
trace fine gravel, trace silt15
20
50
24
17
50
S-5
23
24S-6
S-7
SS
SS
Wet, very dense, gray, fine to coarse SAND
and fine GRAVEL, trace silt
24
Wet, dense, gray, fine to medium SAND,
little silt
24
11
12
10
50
SS StrataSampleLength (in)PID/OVM(ppm)CAMP DRESSER & McKEE
19
Sheet 2 of 2
Blows per6 inchesProject Name: Phase I - Preliminary Design - WWTP
Project Number: 1125-77883
Client: Town of Yarmouth
Project Location:
Boring Number: B-206
BL YARMOUTH BORING LOGS.GPJ - 4/14/1120
25
30
35
40
45
-2.0
-7.0
-12.0
-17.0
-22.0
-27.0
Boring Number:
B-206
Graphic LogSampleRecovery (in)RemarksMaterial Description
Elev.
Depth
(ft)SampleTypeSampleNumber
24
24
24
24
SS
SS
SS
S-5
SS
Burmister Classification
SS
10
Wet, dense, red brown, fine to medium
SAND, trace silt, trace fine gravel
Wet, dense, brown, fine to medium SAND,
trace silt
Wet, medium dense, gray, fine to medium
SAND, trace silt
Dry, medium dense, light brown, fine to
medium SAND, trace silt
7" of Topsoil
24
9
12
8
19
S-4
Stiff: 8-15
V. Stiff: 15-30
Hard: >30
Remarks
AS - Auger/Grab Sample
CS - California Sampler
BQ - 1.5" Rock Core
NQ - 2" Rock Core
HP - Hydro Punch
SS - Split Spoon
ST - Shelby Tube
WS - Wash Sample
GP - GeoprobeSampleType V. Soft: <2
Soft: 2-4
M. Stiff: 4-8
V. Loose: 0-4
Loose: 4-10
M. Dense: 10-30
Dense: 30-50
V. Dense: >50
Fine Grained (Clay):Granular (Sand):
Consistency vs Blowcount/FootSample Types
and 35-50%
some 20-35%
little 10-20%
trace <10%
moisture, density, color
S-3
S-2
S-1
Sheet 1 of 2Boring Number:
B-207
CAMP DRESSER & McKEE
Material Description
Elev.
Depth
(ft)PID/OVM(ppm)SampleLength (in)StrataGraphic LogSampleRecovery (in)Blows per6 inchesSampleNumberDrilling Date: Start: 1/6/2011 End: 1/6/2011
Abandonment Method: Fill with cuttingsN: 2704361 E: 1004477
Bore Hole Location:
Logged By: M. Cronin
Wet, dense, gray, fine to medium SAND,
little fine gravel, trace silt
Surface Elevation (ft.): 18.0
Hammer Weight/Drop Height/ Spoon Size: 140 lb / 30 in /2 in O.D.
Drilling Contractor/Driller: New Hampshire Boring, Inc. / Roger Burns
Drilling Method/Casing/Core Barrel Size: Drive and Wash / 4"/
NOT RECORDED
Depth to Initial Water Level (ft):
TimeDateDepth
Total Depth (ft.): 41
Client: Town of Yarmouth
Project Location:
18.0
13.0
8.0
3.0
-2.0
0
5
10
15
BL YARMOUTH BORING LOGS.GPJ - 4/14/11Boring Number: B-207Date:Reviewed by:
Project Name: Phase I - Preliminary Design - WWTP
Project Number: 1125-77883
12
10
9
5
SandTopsoil15
19
21
19
17
19
12
14
16
16
15
12
6
15
S-5
18
Wet, very dense, gray, fine to medium
SAND, little fine gravel, trace silt
Wet, medium dense, gray, fine to medium
SAND, little fine to coarse gravel, trace silt
Wet, medium dense, gray, fine to medium
SAND, little fine gravel, trace silt
Wet, dense, gray, fine to medium SAND,
little fine gravel, trace silt
END OF BORING = 41'
8
9
Sand10
13
5
12
SS S-6
S-7
S-8
S-9
12
SS
SS
SS
SS
24
24
24
24
24
10
CAMP DRESSER & McKEE
RemarksMaterial Description
Elev.
Depth
(ft)SampleTypeSampleNumberBlows per6 inchesSampleRecovery (in)Graphic LogStrataSampleLength (in)PID/OVM(ppm)Boring Number:
B-207
Sheet 2 of 2
Project Name: Phase I - Preliminary Design - WWTP
Project Number: 1125-77883
Client: Town of Yarmouth
Project Location:
Boring Number: B-207
BL YARMOUTH BORING LOGS.GPJ - 4/14/1120
25
30
35
40
45
-2.0
-7.0
-12.0
-17.0
-22.0
-27.0
19
17
10
6
13
17
33
11
11
17
20
38
13
15
S-1 SandTopsoil2
5
Wet, medium dense, light brown, fine to
medium SAND, trace silt
Wet, medium dense, light brown, fine SAND,
trace silt and clay
Wet, loose, light brown, fine to medium
SAND, trace silt
3
5
9
4
7
5
10
9
5
6" of Topsoil
9
9
5
4
SS
SS
SS
SS
SS
Dry, medium dense, light brown, fine to
medium SAND, trace silt
24
S-5
S-4
S-3
S-2
6
13
8
14
24
824
24
24
Dry, loose, light brown, fine to medium
SAND, trace silt
12
Remarks
SampleLength (in)StrataGraphic LogSampleRecovery (in)Blows per6 inchesSampleNumberSampleTypeStiff: 8-15
V. Stiff: 15-30
Hard: >30
Material Description
AS - Auger/Grab Sample
CS - California Sampler
BQ - 1.5" Rock Core
NQ - 2" Rock Core
HP - Hydro Punch
SS - Split Spoon
ST - Shelby Tube
WS - Wash Sample
GP - Geoprobe
and 35-50%
some 20-35%
little 10-20%
trace <10%
moisture, density, color
9
Elev.
Depth
(ft)
Client: Town of Yarmouth
Project Location:
18.0
13.0
8.0
3.0
-2.0
0
5
10
15
BL YARMOUTH BORING LOGS.GPJ - 4/14/11Boring Number: B-208Date:PID/OVM(ppm)Reviewed by:
Project Name: Phase I - Preliminary Design - WWTP
Project Number: 1125-77883
Sheet 1 of 2Boring Number:
B-208
CAMP DRESSER & McKEE
V. Soft: <2
Soft: 2-4
M. Stiff: 4-8
Drilling Method/Casing/Core Barrel Size: Drive and Wash / 4"/
N: 2704269 E: 1004462
Bore Hole Location:
Logged By: M. Cronin
Total Depth (ft.): 46
Surface Elevation (ft.): 18.0
Drilling Date: Start: 12/21/2010 End: 12/22/2010
Drilling Contractor/Driller: New Hampshire Boring, Inc. / Roger Burns
NOT RECORDED
Depth to Initial Water Level (ft):
TimeDateDepth
Hammer Weight/Drop Height/ Spoon Size: 140 lb / 30 in /2 in O.D.
V. Loose: 0-4
Loose: 4-10
M. Dense: 10-30
Dense: 30-50
V. Dense: >50
Fine Grained (Clay):Granular (Sand):
Consistency vs Blowcount/FootSample Types
Abandonment Method: Fill with cuttings
6
Burmister Classification
No Recovery
11
END OF BORING = 46'
Wet, medium dense, light brown, fine to
coarse SAND, little silt
Wet, medium dense, light brown, SILT, some
fine to medium sand
Wet, medium dense, light brown, fine to
coarse SAND, little silt, trace fine gravel
15
12
Wet, medium dense, light brown, fine to
coarse SAND, little silt, trace fine gravel
S-5
Sand Sandy Silt or Clay
0
12
SS
S-10
S-9
S-8
S-7
S-6
24
8
8SS
24
SS
24
24
24
SS
SS
SS
12
24
Material Description
25 StrataGraphic LogSampleRecovery (in)Blows per6 inchesSampleNumberPID/OVM(ppm)Elev.
Depth
(ft)Remarks
SampleTypeProject Name: Phase I - Preliminary Design - WWTP
Project Number: 1125-77883
-2.0
-7.0
-12.0
-17.0
-22.0
-27.0
20
25
30
35
40
45
BL YARMOUTH BORING LOGS.GPJ - 4/14/11Boring Number: B-208SampleLength (in)Client: Town of Yarmouth
Project Location:
Sheet 2 of 2Boring Number:
B-208
CAMP DRESSER & McKEE
32
10
12
41
11
12
9
11
11
10
5
9
8
11
13
7
10
11
35
7
Sand Topsoil
14
14
Wet, medium dense, gray, fine to medium
SAND, some silt
Wet, dense, gray, fine to medium SAND,
trace fine gravel, trace silt
10
S-1
15
16
17
10
15
15
11
8
9
5
7
9
Dry, medium dense, light brown, fine to
medium SAND, trace silt
17
Wet, medium dense, light brown, fine to
medium SAND, trace silt
SS
SS
SS
SS
SS
24
24
S-5
S-4
S-3
S-2 12
7" of Topsoil
16
24
14
Dry, medium dense, brown, fine to medium
SAND, trace silt, trace fine gravel
18
24
24 7
Remarks
SampleLength (in)StrataGraphic LogSampleRecovery (in)Blows per6 inchesSampleNumberSampleType12
Material Description
AS - Auger/Grab Sample
CS - California Sampler
BQ - 1.5" Rock Core
NQ - 2" Rock Core
HP - Hydro Punch
SS - Split Spoon
ST - Shelby Tube
WS - Wash Sample
GP - Geoprobe
and 35-50%
some 20-35%
little 10-20%
trace <10%
moisture, density, color
Elev.
Depth
(ft)
Client: Town of Yarmouth
Project Location:
17.9
12.9
7.9
2.9
-2.1
0
5
10
15
BL YARMOUTH BORING LOGS.GPJ - 4/14/11Boring Number: B-209Date:PID/OVM(ppm)Reviewed by:
Project Name: Phase I - Preliminary Design - WWTP
Project Number: 1125-77883
Sheet 1 of 2Boring Number:
B-209
CAMP DRESSER & McKEE
Drilling Method/Casing/Core Barrel Size: Drive and Wash / 4"/
Abandonment Method: Fill with cuttings
Stiff: 8-15
V. Stiff: 15-30
Hard: >30
Bore Hole Location:
Logged By: M. Cronin
Total Depth (ft.): 40
Surface Elevation (ft.): 17.9
Drilling Date: Start: 1/6/2011 End: 1/6/2011
V. Soft: <2
Soft: 2-4
M. Stiff: 4-8
Drilling Contractor/Driller: New Hampshire Boring, Inc. / Roger Burns
7.9 1/6/2011
Depth to Initial Water Level (ft):
TimeDateDepth
Hammer Weight/Drop Height/ Spoon Size: 140 lb / 30 in /2 in O.D.
V. Loose: 0-4
Loose: 4-10
M. Dense: 10-30
Dense: 30-50
V. Dense: >50
Fine Grained (Clay):Granular (Sand):
Consistency vs Blowcount/Foot
N: 2704188 E: 1004451
Burmister ClassificationSample Types
S-5
12
Wet, medium dense, gray, fine to medium
SAND, trace fine gravel, trace silt
Wet, medium dense, gray, fine to medium
SAND, trace fine gravel, trace silt
Wet, medium dense, gray, fine to medium
SAND, trace fine gravel, trace silt
Wet, dense, brown, fine to medium SAND,
trace fine gravel, trace silt
END OF BORING = 40'
3
9
Sand8
14
18
12
SS S-6
S-7
S-8
S-9
6
SS
SS
SS
SS
24
24
24
24
24
16
CAMP DRESSER & McKEE
RemarksMaterial Description
Elev.
Depth
(ft)SampleTypeSampleNumberBlows per6 inchesSampleRecovery (in)Graphic LogStrataSampleLength (in)PID/OVM(ppm)Boring Number:
B-209
Sheet 2 of 2
Project Name: Phase I - Preliminary Design - WWTP
Project Number: 1125-77883
Client: Town of Yarmouth
Project Location:
Boring Number: B-209
BL YARMOUTH BORING LOGS.GPJ - 4/14/1120
25
30
35
40
45
-2.1
-7.1
-12.1
-17.1
-22.1
-27.1
21
8
14
14
17
12
13
13
13
17
14
29
13
17
SS
24
24
24
24
SS
SS
SS
Total Depth (ft.): 27
Wet, dense, brown, fine to medium SAND,
trace silt
Wet, medium dense, brown, fine to medium
SAND, trace silt
Wet, medium dense, brown, fine to medium
SAND, some fine to coarse gravel, trace silt
Dry, medium dense, red brown, fine to
medium SAND, trace silt
6
8
7
9
6" of Topsoil
Burmister Classification
Granular (Sand):
Abandonment Method: Fill with cuttingsN: 2704387 E: 1004335
Bore Hole Location:
Logged By: M. Cronin
and 35-50%
some 20-35%
little 10-20%
trace <10%
moisture, density, color
S-4
S-3
S-2
S-1
AS - Auger/Grab Sample
CS - California Sampler
BQ - 1.5" Rock Core
NQ - 2" Rock Core
Sample Types
HP - Hydro Punch
SS - Split Spoon
ST - Shelby Tube
WS - Wash Sample
GP - Geoprobe
Consistency vs Blowcount/Foot
Stiff: 8-15
V. Stiff: 15-30
Hard: >30
V. Soft: <2
Soft: 2-4
M. Stiff: 4-8
V. Loose: 0-4
Loose: 4-10
M. Dense: 10-30
Dense: 30-50
V. Dense: >50
Fine Grained (Clay):
Material Description
PID/OVM(ppm)SampleLength (in)StrataGraphic LogSampleRecovery (in)Blows per6 inchesSampleNumber7.9
Elev.
Depth
(ft)Remarks
Surface Elevation (ft.): 18.0
Drilling Date: Start: 1/11/2011 End: 1/11/2011
Hammer Weight/Drop Height/ Spoon Size: 140 lb / 30 in /2 in O.D.
Drilling Contractor/Driller: New Hampshire Boring, Inc. / Roger Burns
SampleTypeReviewed by:
18.0
13.0
8.0
3.0
-2.0
0
5
10
15
BL YARMOUTH BORING LOGS.GPJ - 4/14/11Boring Number: B-210
Client: Town of Yarmouth
Project Location:
Project Name: Phase I - Preliminary Design - WWTP
Project Number: 1125-77883
Sheet 1 of 2Boring Number:
B-210
CAMP DRESSER & McKEE
1/11/2011
Date:
5
10
12
Drilling Method/Casing/Core Barrel Size: Drive and Wash / 4"/
11
14 Sand Topsoil
10
18
Depth to Initial Water Level (ft):
TimeDateDepth
11
9
12
12
12
16
9
11
10
24 Sand15
21
26
24
31
24
S-5
23
8
S-6
SS
SS
24
12
Wet, very dense, brown, fine to medium
SAND, trace silt, trace fine gravel
Wet, dense, gray, fine to medium SAND,
trace silt, trace fine gravel
END OF BORING = 27'
24
Client: Town of Yarmouth
Project Location:
CAMP DRESSER & McKEE Boring Number:
B-210
Sheet 2 of 2
PID/OVM(ppm)Project Name: Phase I - Preliminary Design - WWTP
Project Number: 1125-77883
SampleLength (in)Boring Number: B-210
BL YARMOUTH BORING LOGS.GPJ - 4/14/1120
25
30
35
40
45
-2.0
-7.0
-12.0
-17.0
-22.0
-27.0
Material Description Remarks
Elev.
Depth
(ft)SampleTypeSampleNumberBlows per6 inchesSampleRecovery (in)Graphic LogStrata
S-1
5
4
Sand Topsoil
9
22 Wet, dense, gray, fine to coarse SAND,
some fine gravel, little silt
Wet, medium dense, brown, fine to coarse
SAND, little silt, trace fine gravel
Wet, medium dense, brown, fine to medium
SAND, trace silt
13
16
13
22
10
14
8
19
4
24
6" of Topsoil
8
11
4
7
SS
SS
SS
SS
SS
Wet, dense, gray, fine to medium SAND,
trace silt
24
S-5
S-4
S-3
S-2
16
6
6
24
1024
24
24
Dry, medium dense, brown, fine to medium
SAND, trace fine gravel, trace silt
6
Material Description
Stiff: 8-15
V. Stiff: 15-30
Hard: >30SampleLength (in)StrataGraphic LogSampleRecovery (in)Blows per6 inchesSampleNumberElev.
Depth
(ft)Remarks
AS - Auger/Grab Sample
CS - California Sampler
BQ - 1.5" Rock Core
NQ - 2" Rock Core
HP - Hydro Punch
SS - Split Spoon
ST - Shelby Tube
WS - Wash Sample
GP - Geoprobe
and 35-50%
some 20-35%
little 10-20%
trace <10%
moisture, density, colorSampleType
Reviewed by:
18.0
13.0
8.0
3.0
-2.0
0
5
10
15
BL YARMOUTH BORING LOGS.GPJ - 4/14/11Boring Number: B-211PID/OVM(ppm)V. Soft: <2
Soft: 2-4
M. Stiff: 4-8
Client: Town of Yarmouth
Project Location:
Project Name: Phase I - Preliminary Design - WWTP
Project Number: 1125-77883
Sheet 1 of 2Boring Number:
B-211
CAMP DRESSER & McKEE
Date:
Drilling Method/Casing/Core Barrel Size: Drive and Wash / 4"/
N: 2704313 E: 1004325
Bore Hole Location:
Logged By: M. Cronin
Total Depth (ft.): 31
Surface Elevation (ft.): 18.0
Drilling Date: Start: 1/10/2011 End: 1/10/2011
Drilling Contractor/Driller: New Hampshire Boring, Inc. / Roger Burns
8.1 1/10/2011
Depth to Initial Water Level (ft):
TimeDateDepth
Hammer Weight/Drop Height/ Spoon Size: 140 lb / 30 in /2 in O.D.
V. Loose: 0-4
Loose: 4-10
M. Dense: 10-30
Dense: 30-50
V. Dense: >50
Fine Grained (Clay):Granular (Sand):
Consistency vs Blowcount/Foot
Abandonment Method: Fill with cuttings
Burmister ClassificationSample Types
END OF BORING = 31'Sand10
28
15
22
16
13
23
14
13
S-5
26
24
S-6
S-7
SS
Wet, dense, brown, fine to coarse SAND and
fine to coarse GRAVEL, trace siltSS
Wet, medium dense, gray, fine to coarse
SAND, little fine to coarse gravel, little silt24
24
6
12
12
SS
Project Name: Phase I - Preliminary Design - WWTP
Project Number: 1125-77883
SampleLength (in)PID/OVM(ppm)CAMP DRESSER & McKEE Boring Number:
B-211
Graphic LogSampleRecovery (in)Client: Town of Yarmouth
Project Location:
Boring Number: B-211
BL YARMOUTH BORING LOGS.GPJ - 4/14/1120
25
30
35
40
45
-2.0
-7.0
-12.0
-17.0
-22.0
-27.0
Sheet 2 of 2
StrataRemarksMaterial Description
Elev.
Depth
(ft)SampleTypeSampleNumberBlows per6 inches
S-1
6
3
Sand Topsoil
15
16 Wet, dense, gray, fine to medium SAND,
trace silt, trace fine gravel
Wet, dense, brown, fine to medium SAND,
trace fine gravel, trace silt
Wet, medium dense, brown, fine to medium
SAND, trace silt
15
22
16
11
12
18
15
12
5
17
6" of Topsoil
12
10
7
7
SS
SS
SS
SS
SS
Dry, medium dense, brown, fine to medium
SAND, trace silt
24
S-5
S-4
S-3
S-2
10
12
10
24
1024
24
24
Dry, medium dense, brown, fine to medium
SAND, trace silt
9
Material Description
Stiff: 8-15
V. Stiff: 15-30
Hard: >30SampleLength (in)StrataGraphic LogSampleRecovery (in)Blows per6 inchesSampleNumberElev.
Depth
(ft)Remarks
AS - Auger/Grab Sample
CS - California Sampler
BQ - 1.5" Rock Core
NQ - 2" Rock Core
HP - Hydro Punch
SS - Split Spoon
ST - Shelby Tube
WS - Wash Sample
GP - Geoprobe
and 35-50%
some 20-35%
little 10-20%
trace <10%
moisture, density, colorSampleType
Reviewed by:
18.0
13.0
8.0
3.0
-2.0
0
5
10
15
BL YARMOUTH BORING LOGS.GPJ - 4/14/11Boring Number: B-212PID/OVM(ppm)V. Soft: <2
Soft: 2-4
M. Stiff: 4-8
Client: Town of Yarmouth
Project Location:
Project Name: Phase I - Preliminary Design - WWTP
Project Number: 1125-77883
Sheet 1 of 2Boring Number:
B-212
CAMP DRESSER & McKEE
Date:
Drilling Method/Casing/Core Barrel Size: Drive and Wash / 4"/
N: 2704286 E: 1004376
Bore Hole Location:
Logged By: M. Cronin
Total Depth (ft.): 31
Surface Elevation (ft.): 18.0
Drilling Date: Start: 1/10/2011 End: 1/10/2011
Drilling Contractor/Driller: New Hampshire Boring, Inc. / Roger Burns
7.8 1/10/2011
Depth to Initial Water Level (ft):
TimeDateDepth
Hammer Weight/Drop Height/ Spoon Size: 140 lb / 30 in /2 in O.D.
V. Loose: 0-4
Loose: 4-10
M. Dense: 10-30
Dense: 30-50
V. Dense: >50
Fine Grained (Clay):Granular (Sand):
Consistency vs Blowcount/Foot
Abandonment Method: Fill with cuttings
Burmister ClassificationSample Types
END OF BORING = 31'Sand10
33
16
17
18
16
32
29
19
S-5
9
24
S-6
S-7
SS
Wet, dense, gray, fine to coarse SAND,
some silt, little fine gravelSS
Wet, dense, gray, fine to coarse SAND,
some silt, little fine gravel24
24
12
11
12
SS
Project Name: Phase I - Preliminary Design - WWTP
Project Number: 1125-77883
SampleLength (in)PID/OVM(ppm)CAMP DRESSER & McKEE Boring Number:
B-212
Graphic LogSampleRecovery (in)Client: Town of Yarmouth
Project Location:
Boring Number: B-212
BL YARMOUTH BORING LOGS.GPJ - 4/14/1120
25
30
35
40
45
-2.0
-7.0
-12.0
-17.0
-22.0
-27.0
Sheet 2 of 2
StrataRemarksMaterial Description
Elev.
Depth
(ft)SampleTypeSampleNumberBlows per6 inches
Sand Topsoil
S-1
5
Wet, dense, brown, fine to coarse SAND,
little silt, little fine gravel
Wet, medium dense, brown, fine to coarse
GRAVEL and fine to coarse SAND, trace silt
15
11
15
10
10
16
11
12
9
7
14
9
11
Dry, medium dense, brown, fine to medium
SAND, trace silt
9
Wet, medium dense, brown, fine to medium
SAND, trace silt, trace fine gravel
SS
SS
SS
SS
SS
24
24
S-5
S-4
S-3
S-2 14
11
6" of Topsoil
13
24
12
Moist, medium dense, brown and gray, fine
to medium SAND, trace silt
13
24
24 5
V. Soft: <2
Soft: 2-4
M. Stiff: 4-8StrataGraphic LogSampleRecovery (in)Blows per6 inchesSampleNumberSampleTypeElev.
Depth
(ft)PID/OVM(ppm)Remarks
AS - Auger/Grab Sample
CS - California Sampler
BQ - 1.5" Rock Core
NQ - 2" Rock Core
HP - Hydro Punch
SS - Split Spoon
ST - Shelby Tube
WS - Wash Sample
GP - Geoprobe
and 35-50%
some 20-35%
little 10-20%
trace <10%
moisture, density, color
12
Material Description
Client: Town of Yarmouth
Project Location:
17.9
12.9
7.9
2.9
-2.1
0
5
10
15
BL YARMOUTH BORING LOGS.GPJ - 4/14/11Boring Number: B-213Date:SampleLength (in)Reviewed by:
Project Name: Phase I - Preliminary Design - WWTP
Project Number: 1125-77883
Sheet 1 of 2Boring Number:
B-213
CAMP DRESSER & McKEE
NOT RECORDEDN: 2704200 E: 1004372
Stiff: 8-15
V. Stiff: 15-30
Hard: >30
Logged By: M. Cronin
Total Depth (ft.): 31
Surface Elevation (ft.): 17.9
Drilling Date: Start: 1/7/2011 End: 1/7/2011
Hammer Weight/Drop Height/ Spoon Size: 140 lb / 30 in /2 in O.D.
16
Drilling Method/Casing/Core Barrel Size: Drive and Wash / 4"/
Abandonment Method: Fill with cuttings
Depth to Initial Water Level (ft):
TimeDateDepth
Drilling Contractor/Driller: New Hampshire Boring, Inc. / Roger Burns
V. Loose: 0-4
Loose: 4-10
M. Dense: 10-30
Dense: 30-50
V. Dense: >50
Fine Grained (Clay):Granular (Sand):
Consistency vs Blowcount/FootSample Types
Bore Hole Location:
Burmister Classification
11
S-5
Wet, dense, brown, fine to coarse SAND,
little silt, little fine gravel
Wet, medium dense, brown, fine to coarse
SAND, little silt, little fine gravel
30
12
26
19
11
21
27
Sand24
S-6
S-7
SS
END OF BORING =31'
SS
24
24
13
13
10
SS StrataSampleLength (in)PID/OVM(ppm)CAMP DRESSER & McKEE
12
Sheet 2 of 2
Blows per6 inchesProject Name: Phase I - Preliminary Design - WWTP
Project Number: 1125-77883
Client: Town of Yarmouth
Project Location:
Boring Number: B-213
BL YARMOUTH BORING LOGS.GPJ - 4/14/1120
25
30
35
40
45
-2.1
-7.1
-12.1
-17.1
-22.1
-27.1
Boring Number:
B-213
Graphic LogSampleRecovery (in)RemarksMaterial Description
Elev.
Depth
(ft)SampleTypeSampleNumber30
5
Sand Topsoil
10
7
Wet, medium dense, gray, fine to medium
SAND, little silt
Wet, medium dense, brown, fine to medium
SAND, little fine gravel, trace silt
16
S-1
19
17
7
14
20
17
9
9
12
8
15
10
Dry, dense, red brown, fine to medium
SAND, trace silt
10
Wet, medium dense, brown, fine to medium
SAND, trace fine gravel, trace silt
SS
SS
SS
SS
SS
24
24
S-5
S-4
S-3
S-2 10
6" of Topsoil
11
24
6
Dry, dense, gray, fine SAND, little clayey silt
20
24
24 6
Remarks
SampleLength (in)StrataGraphic LogSampleRecovery (in)Blows per6 inchesSampleNumberSampleType17
Material Description
AS - Auger/Grab Sample
CS - California Sampler
BQ - 1.5" Rock Core
NQ - 2" Rock Core
HP - Hydro Punch
SS - Split Spoon
ST - Shelby Tube
WS - Wash Sample
GP - Geoprobe
and 35-50%
some 20-35%
little 10-20%
trace <10%
moisture, density, color
Elev.
Depth
(ft)
Client: Town of Yarmouth
Project Location:
18.9
13.9
8.9
3.9
-1.1
0
5
10
15
BL YARMOUTH BORING LOGS.GPJ - 4/14/11Boring Number: B-214Date:PID/OVM(ppm)Reviewed by:
Project Name: Phase I - Preliminary Design - WWTP
Project Number: 1125-77883
Sheet 1 of 2Boring Number:
B-214
CAMP DRESSER & McKEE
Drilling Method/Casing/Core Barrel Size: Drive and Wash / 4"/
Abandonment Method: Fill with cuttings
Stiff: 8-15
V. Stiff: 15-30
Hard: >30
Bore Hole Location:
Logged By: M. Cronin
Total Depth (ft.): 36
Surface Elevation (ft.): 18.9
Drilling Date: Start: 1/7/2011 End: 1/7/2011
V. Soft: <2
Soft: 2-4
M. Stiff: 4-8
Drilling Contractor/Driller: New Hampshire Boring, Inc. / Roger Burns
8.8 1/7/2011
Depth to Initial Water Level (ft):
TimeDateDepth
Hammer Weight/Drop Height/ Spoon Size: 140 lb / 30 in /2 in O.D.
V. Loose: 0-4
Loose: 4-10
M. Dense: 10-30
Dense: 30-50
V. Dense: >50
Fine Grained (Clay):Granular (Sand):
Consistency vs Blowcount/Foot
N: 2704539 E: 1004614
Burmister ClassificationSample Types
S-5
Wet, medium dense, gray, fine to medium
SAND, little silt, trace fine gravel
Wet, medium dense, gray, fine to medium
SAND, little silt, trace fine gravel
Wet, dense, gray, fine to medium SAND,
little fine to coarse gravel, little silt
END OF BORING = 36'
8 Sand16
9
14
10
SS
S-6
S-7
S-8
SS
11
SS
24
24
24
24
11
10
7
SS
Boring Number:
B-214
SampleNumberBlows per6 inchesSampleRecovery (in)Graphic LogStrataSampleLength (in)PID/OVM(ppm)10
Material Description
Sheet 2 of 2
Project Name: Phase I - Preliminary Design - WWTP
Project Number: 1125-77883
Client: Town of Yarmouth
Project Location:
Boring Number: B-214
BL YARMOUTH BORING LOGS.GPJ - 4/14/1120
25
30
35
40
45
-1.1
-6.1
-11.1
-16.1
-21.1
-26.1
CAMP DRESSER & McKEE
11
10
21
14
16
15
27SampleTypeElev.
Depth
(ft)Remarks
16
SS
24
24
24
24
SS
SS
16
SS
6" of Topsoil
Hammer Weight/Drop Height/ Spoon Size: 140 lb / 30 in /2 in O.D.
END OF BORING = 15'
Wet, dense, brown, fine to medium SAND,
little fine gravel, trace silt
Wet, dense, brown, fine to medium SAND,
trace silt
Dry, medium dense, brown, fine SAND, little
silt
19
14
9
S-4
Dry, dense, brown, fine to medium SAND,
trace silt
Burmister Classification
Abandonment Method: Fill with cuttingsN: 2704251 E: 1004573
Bore Hole Location:
Logged By: M. Cronin
Total Depth (ft.): 15
Surface Elevation (ft.): 18.0
Drilling Date: Start: 1/10/2011 End: 1/10/2011
V. Soft: <2
Soft: 2-4
M. Stiff: 4-8
S-3
S-2
S-1
HP - Hydro Punch
SS - Split Spoon
ST - Shelby Tube
WS - Wash Sample
GP - Geoprobe
and 35-50%
some 20-35%
little 10-20%
trace <10%
moisture, density, color
Stiff: 8-15
V. Stiff: 15-30
Hard: >30
V. Loose: 0-4
Loose: 4-10
M. Dense: 10-30
Dense: 30-50
V. Dense: >50
Fine Grained (Clay):Granular (Sand):
Consistency vs Blowcount/FootSample Types
Material Description
PID/OVM(ppm)SampleLength (in)StrataGraphic LogSampleRecovery (in)Blows per6 inchesSampleNumber1/10/2011
Elev.
Depth
(ft)Remarks
AS - Auger/Grab Sample
CS - California Sampler
BQ - 1.5" Rock Core
NQ - 2" Rock Core
Drilling Contractor/Driller: New Hampshire Boring, Inc. / Steve Buldoc
Drilling Method/Casing/Core Barrel Size: Drive and Wash / 4"/SampleTypeReviewed by:
18.0
13.0
8.0
3.0
-2.0
0
5
10
15
BL YARMOUTH BORING LOGS.GPJ - 4/14/11Boring Number: B-216
Client: Town of Yarmouth
Project Location:
Project Name: Phase I - Preliminary Design - WWTP
Project Number: 1125-77883
Sheet 1 of 1Boring Number:
B-216
CAMP DRESSER & McKEE
Depth to Initial Water Level (ft):
Date:
9
13
17
8.2
7
14 Sand Topsoil
15
19
TimeDateDepth
17
18
16
24
10
16
20
20
10
Topsoil22
19
11
2
Sand28
S-1
32
25
14
31
END OF BORING = 15'
12
4
26
35
9
3
4
24
24
SS
SS
SS
SS
S-4
S-3
S-2
Depth
Wet, very dense, brown, fine to medium
SAND, trace silt, trace fine gravel
Wet, very dense, brown, fine to medium
SAND, trace silt, trace fine gravel
No Recovery
Dry, loose, dark brown, fine to medium
SAND, trace silt, trace fine gravel
6" of Topsoil
24
24 14
12
0
12
Material Description
PID/OVM(ppm)SampleLength (in)StrataGraphic LogSampleRecovery (in)Blows per6 inchesSampleNumberElev.
Depth
(ft)Remarks
AS - Auger/Grab Sample
CS - California Sampler
BQ - 1.5" Rock Core
NQ - 2" Rock Core
HP - Hydro Punch
SS - Split Spoon
ST - Shelby Tube
WS - Wash Sample
GP - GeoprobeSampleType
Reviewed by:
17.2
12.2
7.2
2.2
-2.8
0
5
10
15
BL YARMOUTH BORING LOGS.GPJ - 4/14/11Boring Number: B-217
Client: Town of Yarmouth
Project Location:
Project Name: Phase I - Preliminary Design - WWTP
Project Number: 1125-77883
Sheet 1 of 1Boring Number:
B-217
CAMP DRESSER & McKEE
Stiff: 8-15
V. Stiff: 15-30
Hard: >30
Date:
Drilling Date: Start: 1/14/2011 End: 1/14/2011
and 35-50%
some 20-35%
little 10-20%
trace <10%
moisture, density, color
Abandonment Method: Fill with cuttingsN: 2704955 E: 1004213
Bore Hole Location:
Logged By: M. Cronin
Date
Surface Elevation (ft.): 17.2
Hammer Weight/Drop Height/ Spoon Size: 140 lb / 30 in /2 in O.D.
Drilling Contractor/Driller: New Hampshire Boring, Inc. / Chris Knight
Drilling Method/Casing/Core Barrel Size: Drive and Wash / 4"/
8.4 1/14/2011
Depth to Initial Water Level (ft):
Time
Total Depth (ft.): 15
Sample Types
V. Soft: <2
Soft: 2-4
M. Stiff: 4-8
V. Loose: 0-4
Loose: 4-10
M. Dense: 10-30
Dense: 30-50
V. Dense: >50
Fine Grained (Clay):
Consistency vs Blowcount/Foot Burmister Classification
Granular (Sand):
Wet, medium dense, brown, fine to coarse
SAND, little silt
10
Wet, dense, light brown, fine to coarse
SAND, little silt, trace coarse gravel
Wet, dense, brown, fine to medium SAND,
trace silt, trace fine gravel
Wet, dense, light brown, fine to coarse
SAND, little silt, trace fine gravel
Moist, medium dense, light brown, fine to
medium SAND, little silt
Dry, medium dense, light brown, fine to
medium SAND, trace silt
Dry, loose, light brown, fine to medium
SAND, trace silt
6" of Topsoil
21
4
18
15
7
11
2
Sand Topsoil
10
24
24
24
SS
SS
SS
SS
SS
SS
24
24
SS
17
16
12
12
17
13
18
15
24
S-7
S-6
S-5
S-4
S-3
S-2
S-1
24
HP - Hydro Punch
SS - Split Spoon
ST - Shelby Tube
WS - Wash Sample
GP - GeoprobeBlows per6 inchesSampleNumberSampleTypeElev.
Depth
(ft)Material Description Remarks
AS - Auger/Grab Sample
CS - California Sampler
BQ - 1.5" Rock Core
NQ - 2" Rock Core
12 Strataand 35-50%
some 20-35%
little 10-20%
trace <10%
moisture, density, color
Stiff: 8-15
V. Stiff: 15-30
Hard: >30
V. Soft: <2
Soft: 2-4
M. Stiff: 4-8
V. Loose: 0-4
Loose: 4-10
M. Dense: 10-30
Dense: 30-50
V. Dense: >50
Fine Grained (Clay):Granular (Sand):
Consistency vs Blowcount/Foot
18.3
13.3
8.3
3.3
-1.7
0
5
10
15
BL YARMOUTH BORING LOGS.GPJ - 4/14/11Boring Number: B-218Date:Reviewed by:SampleRecovery (in)Project Name: Phase I - Preliminary Design - WWTP
Project Number: 1125-77883
Graphic LogSheet 1 of 3Boring Number:
B-218
CAMP DRESSER & McKEE
PID/OVM(ppm)SampleLength (in)Client: Town of Yarmouth
Project Location:
9
Depth to Initial Water Level (ft):
Sample Types
DateDepth
12
16
Burmister Classification
11
12/23/2010
9
11
14
19
9
10
6
19
12
16
22
Abandonment Method: Monitoring Well
Time
11.7N: 2704426 E: 1004904
Bore Hole Location:
Logged By: M. Cronin
Total Depth (ft.): 56
Surface Elevation (ft.): 18.3
Drilling Date: Start: 12/22/2010 End: 12/23/2010
Hammer Weight/Drop Height/ Spoon Size: 140 lb / 30 in /2 in O.D.
Drilling Contractor/Driller: New Hampshire Boring, Inc. / Chris Knight
Drilling Method/Casing/Core Barrel Size: Drive and Wash / 4"/
No Recovery
Wet, dense, gray, fine to coarse SAND and
SILT
No Recovery
Wet, dense, brown, fine to coarse SAND,
little silt
No Recovery - Rock in tip
12
0
1
0
14
0
Sand Silty Sand Sand
Wet, medium dense, light brown, fine SAND,
little silt
16
SS
SS
SS
SS
SS
SS
24
S-9
12
S-13
S-12SS
S-10
S-8
S-7
24
24
24
24
24
24
S-11 Graphic LogSampleRecovery (in)Blows per6 inchesSampleNumberSampleTypeElev.
Depth
(ft)Material Description
PID/OVM(ppm)Remarks
-1.7
-6.7
-11.7
-16.7
-21.7
-26.7
20
25
30
35
40
45
BL YARMOUTH BORING LOGS.GPJ - 4/14/11Boring Number: B-218StrataProject Name: Phase I - Preliminary Design - WWTP
Project Number: 1125-77883
SampleLength (in)Sheet 2 of 3Boring Number:
B-218
CAMP DRESSER & McKEE
Client: Town of Yarmouth
Project Location:
12
15
15
13
23
12
13
24
8
15
13
14
25
16
22
17
13
32
13
26
11
15
15
13
12
Sand12
14
10
16
16
15
18
11
SS
SS
24
24S-15
10
4
Wet, medium dense, gray, fine SAND, some
silt
Wet, medium dense, light brown, fine SAND,
some silt
END OF BORING = 56'
S-14
Project Name: Phase I - Preliminary Design - WWTP
Project Number: 1125-77883
PID/OVM(ppm)CAMP DRESSER & McKEE Boring Number:
B-218
Graphic LogClient: Town of Yarmouth
Project Location:
Boring Number: B-218
BL YARMOUTH BORING LOGS.GPJ - 4/14/1150
55
60
65
70
-31.7
-36.7
-41.7
-46.7
-51.7
Sheet 3 of 3
SampleLength (in)StrataRemarksMaterial Description
Elev.
Depth
(ft)SampleTypeSampleNumberBlows per6 inchesSampleRecovery (in)
Wet, medium dense, light brown, fine to
medium SAND, trace fine gravel, trace silt
21
Wet, dense, light brown, fine to coarse
SAND, little silt
Wet, medium dense, light brown, fine to
coarse SAND, trace silt, trace fine gravel
Wet, dense, light brown, fine to coarse
SAND, trace silt, trace fine gravel
Moist, dense, light brown, fine to medium
SAND, trace silt, trace fine gravel
Dry, dense, light brown, fine to medium
SAND, little silt
Dry, dense, red brown, fine to coarse SAND,
little silt
6" of Topsoil
14
S-1 15
8
7
24
13
5
Sand Topsoil
6
SS
SS
SS
SS
SS
S-7
S-6
S-5
S-4
S-3
S-2
15
10
10
9
13
15
11
13
SS
24
24
24
24
24
24
24
SS
HP - Hydro Punch
SS - Split Spoon
ST - Shelby Tube
WS - Wash Sample
GP - GeoprobeBlows per6 inchesSampleNumberSampleTypeElev.
Depth
(ft)Material Description Remarks
AS - Auger/Grab Sample
CS - California Sampler
BQ - 1.5" Rock Core
NQ - 2" Rock Core
17 Strataand 35-50%
some 20-35%
little 10-20%
trace <10%
moisture, density, color
Stiff: 8-15
V. Stiff: 15-30
Hard: >30
V. Soft: <2
Soft: 2-4
M. Stiff: 4-8
V. Loose: 0-4
Loose: 4-10
M. Dense: 10-30
Dense: 30-50
V. Dense: >50
Fine Grained (Clay):Granular (Sand):
Consistency vs Blowcount/Foot
17.4
12.4
7.4
2.4
-2.6
0
5
10
15
BL YARMOUTH BORING LOGS.GPJ - 4/14/11Boring Number: B-222Date:Reviewed by:SampleRecovery (in)Project Name: Phase I - Preliminary Design - WWTP
Project Number: 1125-77883
Graphic LogSheet 1 of 3Boring Number:
B-222
CAMP DRESSER & McKEE
PID/OVM(ppm)SampleLength (in)Client: Town of Yarmouth
Project Location:
24
Depth to Initial Water Level (ft):
Sample Types
DateDepth
8
11
Burmister Classification
21
1/5/2011
21
9
10
16
17
24
26
13
8
7
17
Abandonment Method: Fill with cuttings
Time
7.5N: 2704002 E: 1004506
Bore Hole Location:
Logged By: M. Cronin
Total Depth (ft.): 46
Surface Elevation (ft.): 17.4
Drilling Date: Start: 1/5/2011 End: 1/5/2011
Hammer Weight/Drop Height/ Spoon Size: 140 lb / 30 in /2 in O.D.
Drilling Contractor/Driller: New Hampshire Boring, Inc. / Roger Burns
Drilling Method/Casing/Core Barrel Size: Drive and Wash / 4'/
Wet, dense, gray, fine to coarse SAND, little
silt, trace fine gravel
B: Wet, dense, gray, fine to medium SAND,
little silt
A: Wet, hard, gray, SILT and CLAY, trace
fine sand
Wet, loose, gray, fine to coarse SAND, little
silt, little fine gravel
Wet, dense, gray, fine to coarse SAND, trace
silt
24
Wet, very stiff, gray, SILT and CLAY, trace
fine sand
S-7
Sand Sandy Silt or ClaySandB: (22"-24")
A: (0"-22")
10
22
SS
SS
S-12
S-11
S-10
S-9
S-8
24
16
6
10SS
24
1224
24
24
24
SS
SS
SS
Remarks
StrataGraphic LogSampleRecovery (in)Blows per6 inchesSampleNumberSampleTypeMaterial Description
Elev.
Depth
(ft)
-2.6
-7.6
-12.6
-17.6
-22.6
-27.6
20
25
30
35
40
45
BL YARMOUTH BORING LOGS.GPJ - 4/14/11Boring Number: B-222SampleLength (in)Project Name: Phase I - Preliminary Design - WWTP
Project Number: 1125-77883
PID/OVM(ppm)Sheet 2 of 3Boring Number:
B-222
CAMP DRESSER & McKEE
Client: Town of Yarmouth
Project Location:
21
22
13
6
2
21
6
9
11
4
2
16
20
24
24
13
2
25
23
26
25
Blows per6 inchesSampleNumberSampleTypeElev.
Depth
(ft)Material Description Remarks
END OF BORING = 46'StrataSheet 3 of 3
-32.6
-37.6
-42.6
-47.6
-52.6
50
55
60
65
70
BL YARMOUTH BORING LOGS.GPJ - 4/14/11Boring Number: B-222
Client: Town of Yarmouth
Project Location:SampleRecovery (in)Graphic LogBoring Number:
B-222
CAMP DRESSER & McKEE
PID/OVM(ppm)SampleLength (in)Project Name: Phase I - Preliminary Design - WWTP
Project Number: 1125-77883
S-1 TopsoilEND OF BORING = 16'
Wet, dense, gray, fine to coarse SAND, trace
fine gravel, trace silt
Wet, medium dense, light brown, fine to
coarse SAND, trace silt, trace coarse gravel
Wet, medium dense, light brown, fine to
coarse SAND, trace silt
Moist, dense, light brown, fine to medium
SAND, trace silt
Dry, very dense, light brown, fine to medium
SAND, trace silt
Dry, medium dense, brown, fine to coarse
SAND, little silt
8
11
12
20
29
5
9
10
23
15
5
Sand6" of Topsoil
SS
SS
SS
SS
SS
24
S-6
S-5
S-4
S-3
S-2 23
8
12
18
17
SS
15
24
24
24
24
24 16
Consistency vs Blowcount/FootBlows per6 inchesSampleNumberSampleTypeElev.
Depth
(ft)Material Description Remarks
AS - Auger/Grab Sample
CS - California Sampler
BQ - 1.5" Rock Core
NQ - 2" Rock Core Graphic LogStrataHP - Hydro Punch
SS - Split Spoon
ST - Shelby Tube
WS - Wash Sample
GP - Geoprobe
and 35-50%
some 20-35%
little 10-20%
trace <10%
moisture, density, color
Stiff: 8-15
V. Stiff: 15-30
Hard: >30
V. Soft: <2
Soft: 2-4
M. Stiff: 4-8
V. Loose: 0-4
Loose: 4-10
M. Dense: 10-30
Dense: 30-50
V. Dense: >50
Fine Grained (Clay):
17
Project Name: Phase I - Preliminary Design - WWTP
Project Number: 1125-77883
17.0
12.0
7.0
2.0
-3.0
0
5
10
15
BL YARMOUTH BORING LOGS.GPJ - 4/14/11Boring Number: B-224Date:SampleRecovery (in)Client: Town of Yarmouth
Project Location:
Sample Types
Sheet 1 of 1Boring Number:
B-224
CAMP DRESSER & McKEE
PID/OVM(ppm)SampleLength (in)Reviewed by:
8
7.5
Granular (Sand):
Depth to Initial Water Level (ft):
TimeDateDepth
10
16
Drilling Method/Casing/Core Barrel Size: Drive and Wash / 4'/
15
23
28
10
14
8
15
21
Burmister Classification
1/5/2011
Drilling Contractor/Driller: New Hampshire Boring, Inc. / Roger Burns
Abandonment Method: Fill with cuttingsN: 2703957 E: 1004150
Bore Hole Location:
Logged By: M. Cronin
Total Depth (ft.): 16
Surface Elevation (ft.): 17.0
Drilling Date: Start: 1/5/2011 End: 1/5/2011
Hammer Weight/Drop Height/ Spoon Size: 140 lb / 30 in /2 in O.D.
Moist, loose, gray, fine to medium SAND,
trace fine gravel, trace silt
Wet, medium dense, gray, fine to coarse
SAND, trace silt, trace fine gravel
Wet, loose, gray, fine to coarse SAND, little
silt, trace fine gravelTopsoilDry, medium dense, gray, fine to coarse
SAND, trace silt, trace fine gravel
Dry, medium dense to dense, red brown, fine
to coarse SAND, trace silt, trace fine gravel
Dry, medium dense, red brown, fine to
medium SAND, trace silt, trace fine gravel
6" of Topsoil
10
Wet, medium dense, gray, fine to coarse
SAND, trace silt, trace fine gravel
6
S-1
5
11
16
12
8
4
5
13
17
12
Sand10
SS
SS
SS
S-7
S-6
S-5
S-4
S-3
S-2
10
17
16
16
13
12
SS
SS
24
24
24
24
24
24
24
SS
SS
6
HP - Hydro Punch
SS - Split Spoon
ST - Shelby Tube
WS - Wash Sample
GP - GeoprobeBlows per6 inchesSampleNumberSampleTypeElev.
Depth
(ft)Material Description Remarks
AS - Auger/Grab Sample
CS - California Sampler
BQ - 1.5" Rock Core
NQ - 2" Rock Core
Sample Types Strataand 35-50%
some 20-35%
little 10-20%
trace <10%
moisture, density, color
Stiff: 8-15
V. Stiff: 15-30
Hard: >30
V. Soft: <2
Soft: 2-4
M. Stiff: 4-8
V. Loose: 0-4
Loose: 4-10
M. Dense: 10-30
Dense: 30-50
V. Dense: >50
Fine Grained (Clay):Granular (Sand):
4
16.0
11.0
6.0
1.0
-4.0
0
5
10
15
BL YARMOUTH BORING LOGS.GPJ - 4/14/11Boring Number: B-225Date:Reviewed by:SampleRecovery (in)Project Name: Phase I - Preliminary Design - WWTP
Project Number: 1125-77883
Graphic LogSheet 1 of 4Boring Number:
B-225
CAMP DRESSER & McKEE
PID/OVM(ppm)SampleLength (in)Burmister Classification
Client: Town of Yarmouth
Project Location:
10
Consistency vs Blowcount/Foot
TimeDateDepth
13
9
1/10/2011
9
6.5
15
15
11
10
4
3
10
14
14
3
Abandonment Method: Monitoring Well
Depth to Initial Water Level (ft):
N: 2703814 E: 1004069
Bore Hole Location:
Logged By: M. Cronin
Total Depth (ft.): 100
Surface Elevation (ft.): 16.0
Drilling Date: Start: 1/6/2011 End: 1/10/2011
Hammer Weight/Drop Height/ Spoon Size: 140 lb / 30 in /2 in O.D.
Drilling Contractor/Driller: New Hampshire Boring, Inc. / Steve Buldoc
Drilling Method/Casing/Core Barrel Size: Drive and Wash / 4"/
S-8
12
24
Wet, medium dense, gray, fine to coarse
SAND, trace silt, trace fine gravel
Wet, medium dense, gray, fine to coarse
SAND, trace silt, trace fine gravel
Wet, medium dense, gray, fine to coarse
SAND, trace silt
Wet, medium dense, gray, fine to coarse
SAND, little silt
Wet, stiff, gray, SILT & CLAY
16
Sandy Silt or Clay5
5
8
9
Sand12
8
SS S-9
S-10
S-11
S-12
1624
24
SS
24
24
SS
SS
SS
24
CAMP DRESSER & McKEE
RemarksMaterial Description
Elev.
Depth
(ft)SampleTypeSampleNumberBlows per6 inchesSampleRecovery (in)Graphic LogStrataSampleLength (in)PID/OVM(ppm)Client: Town of Yarmouth
Project Location:
-4.0
-9.0
-14.0
-19.0
-24.0
-29.0
20
25
30
35
40
45
BL YARMOUTH BORING LOGS.GPJ - 4/14/11Project Name: Phase I - Preliminary Design - WWTP
Project Number: 1125-77883
Sheet 2 of 4Boring Number:
B-225
Boring Number: B-225
6
16
6
6
13
16
12
8
6
8
8
10
15
16
6
Wet, very dense, gray, fine to medium
SAND, some silt
Wet, stiff, gray, SILT & CLAY
31
Wet, very dense, light brown, fine to coarse
SAND, some silt, trace fine gravel
0
15
16
14
12
20S-13
7
SandSandy Silt or ClayWet, very dense, gray, fine to medium
SAND, some silt
Wet, very dense, light brown, fine to medium
SAND, some silt
No Recovery
SS
S-18
S-17
S-16
S-15
S-14 24
38
24
24
24
24
SS
SS
SS
SS
SS
24SampleType PID/OVM(ppm)SampleLength (in)StrataGraphic LogSampleRecovery (in)21SampleNumberElev.
Depth
(ft)Material Description Remarks
Blows per6 inchesProject Name: Phase I - Preliminary Design - WWTP
Project Number: 1125-77883
-34.0
-39.0
-44.0
-49.0
-54.0
50
55
60
65
70
BL YARMOUTH BORING LOGS.GPJ - 4/14/11Boring Number: B-225
Client: Town of Yarmouth
Project Location:
Sheet 3 of 4Boring Number:
B-225
CAMP DRESSER & McKEE
35
82
41
34
100/5
46
49
33
59
6
7
61
59
6
100/3
S-18
Wet, dense, gray, fine to medium SAND,
some silt, trace fine gravel
Wet, dense, light brown, fine to medium
SAND, some silt
Wet, very dense, gray, fine to medium
SAND, some silt, trace fine gravel
Wet, very dense, gray, fine to medium
SAND, some silt, trace fine gravel17
12
19
14
14
0
14
17
19
16
Wet, dense, gray, fine to medium SAND,
some silt, trace fine gravel
END OF BORING = 100'SandSS
S-23
S-22
S-21
S-20
S-19
24
24
24
24
24
SS
SS
SS
SS
SS
24SampleType PID/OVM(ppm)SampleLength (in)StrataGraphic LogSampleRecovery (in)SampleNumberElev.
Depth
(ft)Material Description Remarks
21Blows per6 inchesProject Name: Phase I - Preliminary Design - WWTP
Project Number: 1125-77883
-59.0
-64.0
-69.0
-74.0
-79.0
-84.0
75
80
85
90
95
100
BL YARMOUTH BORING LOGS.GPJ - 4/14/11Boring Number: B-225
Client: Town of Yarmouth
Project Location:
Sheet 4 of 4Boring Number:
B-225
CAMP DRESSER & McKEE
21
31
19
23
19
37
27
22
17
18
29
33
37
41
33
20
22
Wet, dense, red brown, fine to coarse SAND,
little silt, trace fine gravel
Wet, dense, gray, fine to coarse SAND,
some fine gravel, trace silt
Wet, medium dense, brown, fine to coarse
SAND, little silt, trace fine gravel
Dry, dense, light brown, fine to medium
SAND, trace silt, trace fine gravel
Dry, very dense, light brown, fine to medium
SAND, trace silt, trace fine gravel
Dry, medium dense, dark gray, fine to
medium SAND, little silt
6" of Topsoil
S-1
Wet, dense, gray, fine to medium SAND,
little silt, trace fine gravel
17
15
25
25
8
13
15
10
20
27
17
2
Sand Topsoil
SS
SS
SS
SS
S-7
S-6
S-5
S-4
S-3
S-2
7
7
14
19
18
20
SS
2024
24
24
24
24
24
24
SS
SS
8Blows per6 inchesSampleNumberSampleTypeElev.
Depth
(ft)Material Description Remarks
AS - Auger/Grab Sample
CS - California Sampler
BQ - 1.5" Rock Core
NQ - 2" Rock Core Graphic LogStrataHP - Hydro Punch
SS - Split Spoon
ST - Shelby Tube
WS - Wash Sample
GP - Geoprobe
and 35-50%
some 20-35%
little 10-20%
trace <10%
moisture, density, color
Stiff: 8-15
V. Stiff: 15-30
Hard: >30
V. Soft: <2
Soft: 2-4
M. Stiff: 4-8
V. Loose: 0-4
Loose: 4-10
M. Dense: 10-30
Dense: 30-50
V. Dense: >50
Fine Grained (Clay):Granular (Sand):
Project Name: Phase I - Preliminary Design - WWTP
Project Number: 1125-77883
16.6
11.6
6.6
1.6
-3.4
0
5
10
15
BL YARMOUTH BORING LOGS.GPJ - 4/14/11Boring Number: B-228Date:SampleRecovery (in)Client: Town of Yarmouth
Project Location:
Burmister Classification
Sheet 1 of 2Boring Number:
B-228
CAMP DRESSER & McKEE
PID/OVM(ppm)SampleLength (in)Reviewed by:
25
Consistency vs Blowcount/Foot
Depth to Initial Water Level (ft):
TimeDateDepth
22
6
16
Drilling Method/Casing/Core Barrel Size: Drive and Wash / 4'/
35
27
22
12
15
21
28
19
11
20
1/4/2011
Sample Types
Abandonment Method: Fill with cuttingsN: 2703699 E: 1004476
Bore Hole Location:
Logged By: M. Cronin
Total Depth (ft.): 26
Surface Elevation (ft.): 16.6
Drilling Date: Start: 1/4/2011 End: 1/4/2011
Hammer Weight/Drop Height/ Spoon Size: 140 lb / 30 in /2 in O.D.
Drilling Contractor/Driller: New Hampshire Boring, Inc. / Roger Burns
7
12
17
19
21
S-7 10
S-8
SS
SS Sand24
13
14
Wet, dense, gray, fine to coarse SAND,
some fine gravel, little silt
END OF BORING = 26'
24
Client: Town of Yarmouth
Project Location:
CAMP DRESSER & McKEE Boring Number:
B-228
Sheet 2 of 2
Project Name: Phase I - Preliminary Design - WWTP
Project Number: 1125-77883
PID/OVM(ppm)Boring Number: B-228
BL YARMOUTH BORING LOGS.GPJ - 4/14/1120
25
30
35
40
45
-3.4
-8.4
-13.4
-18.4
-23.4
-28.4
Elev.
Depth
(ft)RemarksMaterial Description
SampleTypeSampleNumberBlows per6 inchesSampleRecovery (in)Graphic LogStrataSampleLength (in)
Wet, very dense, brown, fine to coarse
SAND, little silt
Wet, dense, brown, fine to coarse SAND,
trace silt
Wet, very dense, dark brown, fine to coarse
SAND, trace silt (organic odor)
Moist, dense, brown, fine to coarse SAND,
trace silt
Dry, dense, brown, fine to coarse SAND,
trace silt
Dry, medium dense, light brown, fine to
medium SAND, trace silt
6" of Topsoil
42
Wet, dense, brown, fine to coarse SAND,
trace silt
12
S-1
22
22
10
13
12
25
20
27
14
3
Sand Topsoil
SS
SS
SS
SS
S-7
S-6
S-5
S-4
S-3
S-2
18
16
14
18
15
16
SS
14
24
24
24
24
24
24
24
SS
SS
Consistency vs Blowcount/FootBlows per6 inchesSampleNumberSampleTypeElev.
Depth
(ft)Material Description Remarks
AS - Auger/Grab Sample
CS - California Sampler
BQ - 1.5" Rock Core
NQ - 2" Rock Core Graphic LogStrataHP - Hydro Punch
SS - Split Spoon
ST - Shelby Tube
WS - Wash Sample
GP - Geoprobe
and 35-50%
some 20-35%
little 10-20%
trace <10%
moisture, density, color
Stiff: 8-15
V. Stiff: 15-30
Hard: >30
V. Soft: <2
Soft: 2-4
M. Stiff: 4-8
V. Loose: 0-4
Loose: 4-10
M. Dense: 10-30
Dense: 30-50
V. Dense: >50
Fine Grained (Clay):
21
Project Name: Phase I - Preliminary Design - WWTP
Project Number: 1125-77883
15.9
10.9
5.9
0.9
-4.1
0
5
10
15
BL YARMOUTH BORING LOGS.GPJ - 4/14/11Boring Number: B-229Date:SampleRecovery (in)Client: Town of Yarmouth
Project Location:
Sample Types
Sheet 1 of 2Boring Number:
B-229
CAMP DRESSER & McKEE
PID/OVM(ppm)SampleLength (in)Reviewed by:
23
NOT RECORDED
Granular (Sand):
TimeDateDepth
23
44
Drilling Method/Casing/Core Barrel Size: Drive and Wash / 4'/
25
16
21
41
32
21
23
14
16
32
Burmister Classification
Depth to Initial Water Level (ft):
Drilling Contractor/Driller: New Hampshire Boring, Inc. / Roger Burns
Abandonment Method: Fill with cuttingsN: 2703746 E: 1004649
Bore Hole Location:
Logged By: M. Cronin
Total Depth (ft.): 21
Surface Elevation (ft.): 15.9
Drilling Date: Start: 1/5/2011 End: 1/5/2011
Hammer Weight/Drop Height/ Spoon Size: 140 lb / 30 in /2 in O.D.
S-7
RemarksMaterial Description
31
21
SandEND OF BORING = 21'
1324SS
CAMP DRESSER & McKEE
-4.1
-9.1
-14.1
-19.1
-24.1
-29.1
20
25
30
35
40
45
BL YARMOUTH BORING LOGS.GPJ - 4/14/11Boring Number: B-229
Client: Town of Yarmouth
Project Location:
Project Name: Phase I - Preliminary Design - WWTP
Project Number: 1125-77883
Sheet 2 of 2Boring Number:
B-229
PID/OVM(ppm)SampleLength (in)StrataGraphic LogSampleRecovery (in)Blows per6 inchesSampleNumberSampleTypeElev.
Depth
(ft)
Wet, very dense, brown, fine to medium
SAND, trace silt, trace fine gravel
Wet, very dense, brown, fine to coarse
SAND and fine to coarse GRAVEL
Wet, very dense, brown and gray, fine to
medium SAND, little silt
Wet, very dense, brown, fine to medium
SAND, trace silt, trace fine gravel
Dry, very dense, brown, fine to medium
SAND, little silt
Dry, very dense, light brown, fine to medium
SAND, little silt
6" of Topsoil
S-1
Wet, very dense, brown, fine to medium
SAND, little fine gravel, little silt
25
30
37
28
29
3
21
17
33
30
19
19
Sand Topsoil
SS
SS
SS
SS
S-7
S-6
S-5
S-4
S-3
S-2
6
12
16
20
15
15
SS
2724
24
24
24
24
24
24
SS
SS
29Blows per6 inchesSampleNumberSampleTypeElev.
Depth
(ft)Material Description Remarks
AS - Auger/Grab Sample
CS - California Sampler
BQ - 1.5" Rock Core
NQ - 2" Rock Core Graphic LogStrataHP - Hydro Punch
SS - Split Spoon
ST - Shelby Tube
WS - Wash Sample
GP - Geoprobe
and 35-50%
some 20-35%
little 10-20%
trace <10%
moisture, density, color
Stiff: 8-15
V. Stiff: 15-30
Hard: >30
V. Soft: <2
Soft: 2-4
M. Stiff: 4-8
V. Loose: 0-4
Loose: 4-10
M. Dense: 10-30
Dense: 30-50
V. Dense: >50
Fine Grained (Clay):Granular (Sand):
Project Name: Phase I - Preliminary Design - WWTP
Project Number: 1125-77883
14.0
9.0
4.0
-1.0
-6.0
0
5
10
15
BL YARMOUTH BORING LOGS.GPJ - 4/14/11Boring Number: B-231Date:SampleRecovery (in)Client: Town of Yarmouth
Project Location:
Burmister Classification
Sheet 1 of 3Boring Number:
B-231
CAMP DRESSER & McKEE
PID/OVM(ppm)SampleLength (in)Reviewed by:
38
Consistency vs Blowcount/Foot
Depth to Initial Water Level (ft):
TimeDateDepth
21
6.1
35
Drilling Method/Casing/Core Barrel Size: Drive and Wash / 4'/
35
28
33
35
32
44
36
22
33
31
1/6/2011
Sample Types
Abandonment Method: Monitoring WellN: 2703527 E: 1004800
Bore Hole Location:
Logged By: M. Cronin
Total Depth (ft.): 56
Surface Elevation (ft.): 14.0
Drilling Date: Start: 1/3/2011 End: 1/4/2011
Hammer Weight/Drop Height/ Spoon Size: 140 lb / 30 in /2 in O.D.
Drilling Contractor/Driller: New Hampshire Boring, Inc. / Roger Burns
B: Wet, medium dense, gray, fine to medium
SAND, little silt
A: Wet, very stiff, gray, SILT & CLAY,
occasional fine sand
Wet, stiff, gray, SILT & CLAY, occasional
fine sand
Wet, medium dense, red brown, fine to
coarse SAND, little silt, trace fine gravel
Wet, very dense, gray, fine to medium
SAND, little silt, little fine gravel
5
15
12
18
Wet, dense, brown, fine to coarse SAND,
little silt, little fine gravel
A: (0"-10")
S-7
20
Sand Sandy Silt or Clay
B: (10"-15")
3
Sand6
SS
SS
S-12
S-11
S-10
S-9
S-8
24
5
24
20
24
24
24
SS
SS
SS
SS
24
Material Description
SampleLength (in)StrataGraphic LogSampleRecovery (in)Blows per6 inchesSampleNumber15
Elev.
Depth
(ft)Remarks
SampleTypeProject Name: Phase I - Preliminary Design - WWTP
Project Number: 1125-77883
-6.0
-11.0
-16.0
-21.0
-26.0
-31.0
20
25
30
35
40
45
BL YARMOUTH BORING LOGS.GPJ - 4/14/11Boring Number: B-231PID/OVM(ppm)Client: Town of Yarmouth
Project Location:
Sheet 2 of 3Boring Number:
B-231
CAMP DRESSER & McKEE
37
13
35
19
26
11
9
7
21
20
10
5
6
9
7
21
34
15
43 Sand15
16
26
END OF BORING = 56'
37
45
35
44
S-13
S-14
SS
SS 24
12
6
Wet, very dense, brown, fine to coarse
SAND, little silt
Wet, very dense, gray, fine to medium
SAND, trace silt
24
Project Name: Phase I - Preliminary Design - WWTP
Project Number: 1125-77883
CAMP DRESSER & McKEE Boring Number:
B-231
SampleLength (in)StrataClient: Town of Yarmouth
Project Location:
Boring Number: B-231
BL YARMOUTH BORING LOGS.GPJ - 4/14/1150
55
60
65
70
-36.0
-41.0
-46.0
-51.0
-56.0
Sheet 3 of 3
PID/OVM(ppm)RemarksMaterial Description
Elev.
Depth
(ft)SampleTypeSampleNumberBlows per6 inchesSampleRecovery (in)Graphic Log
Topsoil6
9
7
4
Sand8
S-1
6
9
3
6
END OF BORING = 17'
6
5
6
8
6
9
2
24
24
SS
SS
SS
SS
S-4
S-3
S-2
Depth
Wet, medium dense, brown, fine to coarse
SAND, trace silt, trace fine gravel
Wet, medium dense, brown, fine to coarse
SAND, little silt
Wet, medium dense, brown, fine to coarse
SAND, little silt
Dry, medium dense, brown, fine to coarse
SAND, trace silt
6" of Topsoil
24
24 10
8
14
5
Material Description
PID/OVM(ppm)SampleLength (in)StrataGraphic LogSampleRecovery (in)Blows per6 inchesSampleNumberElev.
Depth
(ft)Remarks
AS - Auger/Grab Sample
CS - California Sampler
BQ - 1.5" Rock Core
NQ - 2" Rock Core
HP - Hydro Punch
SS - Split Spoon
ST - Shelby Tube
WS - Wash Sample
GP - GeoprobeSampleType
Reviewed by:
13.0
8.0
3.0
-2.0
-7.0
0
5
10
15
BL YARMOUTH BORING LOGS.GPJ - 4/14/11Boring Number: B-237
Client: Town of Yarmouth
Project Location:
Project Name: Phase I - Preliminary Design - WWTP
Project Number: 1125-77883
Sheet 1 of 1Boring Number:
B-237
CAMP DRESSER & McKEE
Stiff: 8-15
V. Stiff: 15-30
Hard: >30
Date:
Drilling Date: Start: 1/14/2011 End: 1/14/2011
and 35-50%
some 20-35%
little 10-20%
trace <10%
moisture, density, color
Abandonment Method: Fill with cuttingsN: 2703256 E: 1003629
Bore Hole Location:
Logged By: M. Cronin
Date
Surface Elevation (ft.): 13.0
Hammer Weight/Drop Height/ Spoon Size: 140 lb / 30 in /2 in O.D.
Drilling Contractor/Driller: New Hampshire Boring, Inc. / Chris Knight
Drilling Method/Casing/Core Barrel Size: Drive and Wash / 4"/
7 1/14/2011
Depth to Initial Water Level (ft):
Time
Total Depth (ft.): 17
Sample Types
V. Soft: <2
Soft: 2-4
M. Stiff: 4-8
V. Loose: 0-4
Loose: 4-10
M. Dense: 10-30
Dense: 30-50
V. Dense: >50
Fine Grained (Clay):
Consistency vs Blowcount/Foot Burmister Classification
Granular (Sand):
Waste Water Treatment Plant Soil Lab Testing Results 2011
41 pages
Tested By: MR Checked By: AT
CDM
Cambridge, Massachusetts
1/13/2011
(no specification provided)
PL=LL=PI=
D90=D85=D60=D50=D30=D15=D10=Cu=Cc=
USCS=AASHTO=
*
poorly graded sand
3
3/4
#4
#10
#20
#40
#100
#200
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
99.6
89.6
8.7
1.8
0.4326 0.3916 0.2852
0.2556 0.2044 0.1676
0.1539 1.85 0.95
SP
As received moisture content = 25.8%
Soil classification and description based on
Visual Manual Procedure ASTM D2488
Town of Yarmouth
Phase I-Preliminary Design-Wastewater Treatment Plant
1125-77883
Material Description
Atterberg Limits
Coefficients
Classification
Remarks
Source of Sample: B-201 Depth: 5-7
Sample Number: S-2 Date:
Client:
Project:
Project No:Figure
SIEVE PERCENT SPEC.*PASS?
SIZE FINER PERCENT (X=NO)PERCENT FINER0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
GRAIN SIZE - mm.
0.0010.010.1110100
% +3"Coarse
% Gravel
Fine Coarse Medium
% Sand
Fine Silt
% Fines
Clay
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 10.4 87.8 1.86 in.3 in.2 in.1½ in.1 in.¾ in.½ in.3/8 in.#4#10#20#30#40#60#100#140#200Particle Size Distribution Report
Tested By: MR Checked By: AT
CDM
Cambridge, Massachusetts
1/13/2011
(no specification provided)
PL=LL=PI=
D90=D85=D60=D50=D30=D15=D10=Cu=Cc=
USCS=AASHTO=
*
poorly graded sand
3
3/4
#4
#10
#20
#40
#100
#200
100.0
100.0
99.7
99.5
99.2
95.0
14.8
1.5
0.3850 0.3560 0.2626
0.2353 0.1871 0.1505
0.1354 1.94 0.98
SP
As received moisture content = 28.8%
Soil classification and description based on
Visual Manual Procedure ASTM D2488
Town of Yarmouth
Phase I-Preliminary Design-Wastewater Treatment Plant
1125-77883
Material Description
Atterberg Limits
Coefficients
Classification
Remarks
Source of Sample: B-202 Depth: 10-12
Sample Number: S-3 Date:
Client:
Project:
Project No:Figure
SIEVE PERCENT SPEC.*PASS?
SIZE FINER PERCENT (X=NO)PERCENT FINER0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
GRAIN SIZE - mm.
0.0010.010.1110100
% +3"Coarse
% Gravel
Fine Coarse Medium
% Sand
Fine Silt
% Fines
Clay
0.0 0.0 0.3 0.2 4.5 93.5 1.56 in.3 in.2 in.1½ in.1 in.¾ in.½ in.3/8 in.#4#10#20#30#40#60#100#140#200Particle Size Distribution Report
Tested By: MR Checked By: AT
CDM
Cambridge, Massachusetts
1/13/2011
(no specification provided)
PL=LL=PI=
D90=D85=D60=D50=D30=D15=D10=Cu=Cc=
USCS=AASHTO=
*
sandy lean clay/sandy silt
3
3/4
#4
#10
#20
#40
#100
#200
100.0
100.0
99.2
98.3
94.4
83.4
69.6
59.4
0.6305 0.4705 0.0803
0.0166 0.0060
CL/ML
As received moisture content = 27.1%
Soil classification and description based on
Visual Manual Procedure ASTM D2488
Town of Yarmouth
Phase I-Preliminary Design-Wastewater Treatment Plant
1125-77883
Material Description
Atterberg Limits
Coefficients
Classification
Remarks
Source of Sample: B-202 Depth: 15-17
Sample Number: S-4 Date:
Client:
Project:
Project No:Figure
SIEVE PERCENT SPEC.*PASS?
SIZE FINER PERCENT (X=NO)PERCENT FINER0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
GRAIN SIZE - mm.
0.0010.010.1110100
% +3"Coarse
% Gravel
Fine Coarse Medium
% Sand
Fine Silt
% Fines
Clay
0.0 0.0 0.8 0.9 14.9 24.0 34.3 25.16 in.3 in.2 in.1½ in.1 in.¾ in.½ in.3/8 in.#4#10#20#30#40#60#100#140#200Particle Size Distribution Report
Tested By: MR Checked By: AT
CDM
Cambridge, Massachusetts
1/13/2011
(no specification provided)
PL=LL=PI=
D90=D85=D60=D50=D30=D15=D10=Cu=Cc=
USCS=AASHTO=
*
poorly graded sand with gravel
3
3/4
#4
#10
#20
#40
#100
#200
100.0
100.0
70.7
61.8
43.7
25.1
6.6
3.4
11.4441 9.3079 1.7706
1.0881 0.5142 0.2702
0.2005 8.83 0.74
SP
As received moisture content = 12.5%
Soil classification and description based on
Visual Manual Procedure ASTM D2488
Town of Yarmouth
Phase I-Preliminary Design-Wastewater Treatment Plant
1125-77883
Material Description
Atterberg Limits
Coefficients
Classification
Remarks
Source of Sample: B-202 Depth: 45-47
Sample Number: S-10 Date:
Client:
Project:
Project No:Figure
SIEVE PERCENT SPEC.*PASS?
SIZE FINER PERCENT (X=NO)PERCENT FINER0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
GRAIN SIZE - mm.
0.0010.010.1110100
% +3"Coarse
% Gravel
Fine Coarse Medium
% Sand
Fine Silt
% Fines
Clay
0.0 0.0 29.3 8.9 36.7 21.7 3.46 in.3 in.2 in.1½ in.1 in.¾ in.½ in.3/8 in.#4#10#20#30#40#60#100#140#200Particle Size Distribution Report
Tested By: MR Checked By: AT
CDM
Cambridge, Massachusetts
1/13/2011
(no specification provided)
PL=LL=PI=
D90=D85=D60=D50=D30=D15=D10=Cu=Cc=
USCS=AASHTO=
*
poorly graded sand
3
3/4
#4
#10
#20
#40
#100
#200
100.0
100.0
100.0
99.8
93.8
66.1
5.0
1.7
0.7321 0.6302 0.3845
0.3302 0.2454 0.1905
0.1716 2.24 0.91
SP
As received moisture content = 20.7%
Soil classification and description based on
Visual Manual Procedure ASTM D2488
Town of Yarmouth
Phase I-Preliminary Design-Wastewater Treatment Plant
1125-77883
Material Description
Atterberg Limits
Coefficients
Classification
Remarks
Source of Sample: B-203 Depth: 5-7
Sample Number: S-2 Date:
Client:
Project:
Project No:Figure
SIEVE PERCENT SPEC.*PASS?
SIZE FINER PERCENT (X=NO)PERCENT FINER0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
GRAIN SIZE - mm.
0.0010.010.1110100
% +3"Coarse
% Gravel
Fine Coarse Medium
% Sand
Fine Silt
% Fines
Clay
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 33.7 64.4 1.76 in.3 in.2 in.1½ in.1 in.¾ in.½ in.3/8 in.#4#10#20#30#40#60#100#140#200Particle Size Distribution Report
Tested By: MR Checked By: AT
CDM
Cambridge, Massachusetts
1/13/2011
(no specification provided)
PL=LL=PI=
D90=D85=D60=D50=D30=D15=D10=Cu=Cc=
USCS=AASHTO=
*
poorly graded sand
3
3/4
#4
#10
#20
#40
#100
#200
100.0
100.0
90.9
87.6
75.7
45.7
6.4
2.2
3.9157 1.3646 0.5723
0.4641 0.3041 0.2078
0.1758 3.25 0.92
SP
As received moisture content = 16.3%
Soil classification and description based on
Visual Manual Procedure ASTM D2488
Town of Yarmouth
Phase I-Preliminary Design-Wastewater Treatment Plant
1125-77883
Material Description
Atterberg Limits
Coefficients
Classification
Remarks
Source of Sample: B-203 Depth: 25-27
Sample Number: S-6 Date:
Client:
Project:
Project No:Figure
SIEVE PERCENT SPEC.*PASS?
SIZE FINER PERCENT (X=NO)PERCENT FINER0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
GRAIN SIZE - mm.
0.0010.010.1110100
% +3"Coarse
% Gravel
Fine Coarse Medium
% Sand
Fine Silt
% Fines
Clay
0.0 0.0 9.1 3.3 41.9 43.5 2.26 in.3 in.2 in.1½ in.1 in.¾ in.½ in.3/8 in.#4#10#20#30#40#60#100#140#200Particle Size Distribution Report
Tested By: MR Checked By: AT
CDM
Cambridge, Massachusetts
1/13/2011
(no specification provided)
PL=LL=PI=
D90=D85=D60=D50=D30=D15=D10=Cu=Cc=
USCS=AASHTO=
*
poorly graded sand
3
3/4
#4
#10
#20
#40
#100
#200
100.0
100.0
100.0
99.9
98.4
83.1
16.5
3.0
0.5071 0.4434 0.2924
0.2547 0.1915 0.1449
0.1249 2.34 1.00
SP
As received moisture content = 22.3 %
Soil classification and description based on
Visual Manual Procedure ASTM D2488
Town of Yarmouth
Phase I-Preliminary Design-Wastewater Treatment Plant
1125-77883
Material Description
Atterberg Limits
Coefficients
Classification
Remarks
Source of Sample: B-204 Depth: 3-5
Sample Number: S-2 Date:
Client:
Project:
Project No:Figure
SIEVE PERCENT SPEC.*PASS?
SIZE FINER PERCENT (X=NO)PERCENT FINER0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
GRAIN SIZE - mm.
0.0010.010.1110100
% +3"Coarse
% Gravel
Fine Coarse Medium
% Sand
Fine Silt
% Fines
Clay
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 16.8 80.1 3.06 in.3 in.2 in.1½ in.1 in.¾ in.½ in.3/8 in.#4#10#20#30#40#60#100#140#200Particle Size Distribution Report
Tested By: MR Checked By: AT
CDM
Cambridge, Massachusetts
1/13/2011
(no specification provided)
PL=LL=PI=
D90=D85=D60=D50=D30=D15=D10=Cu=Cc=
USCS=AASHTO=
*
poorly graded sand with gravel
3
3/4
#4
#10
#20
#40
#100
#200
100.0
100.0
80.1
75.0
53.1
26.5
1.9
0.7
9.6892 7.1383 1.0387
0.7807 0.4676 0.2981
0.2458 4.23 0.86
SP
As received moisture content = 17.9%
Soil classification and description based on
Visual Manual Procedure ASTM D2488
Town of Yarmouth
Phase I-Preliminary Design-Wastewater Treatment Plant
1125-77883
Material Description
Atterberg Limits
Coefficients
Classification
Remarks
Source of Sample: B-204 Depth: 13-15
Sample Number: S-4 Date:
Client:
Project:
Project No:Figure
SIEVE PERCENT SPEC.*PASS?
SIZE FINER PERCENT (X=NO)PERCENT FINER0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
GRAIN SIZE - mm.
0.0010.010.1110100
% +3"Coarse
% Gravel
Fine Coarse Medium
% Sand
Fine Silt
% Fines
Clay
0.0 0.0 19.9 5.1 48.5 25.8 0.76 in.3 in.2 in.1½ in.1 in.¾ in.½ in.3/8 in.#4#10#20#30#40#60#100#140#200Particle Size Distribution Report
Tested By: MR Checked By: AT
CDM
Cambridge, Massachusetts
1/10/2011
(no specification provided)
PL=LL=PI=
D90=D85=D60=D50=D30=D15=D10=Cu=Cc=
USCS=AASHTO=
*
poorly graded sand
3
3/4
#4
#10
#20
#40
#100
#200
100.0
100.0
99.7
99.3
95.0
78.5
1.3
0.7
0.5750 0.4885 0.3270
0.2905 0.2308 0.1909
0.1773 1.84 0.92
SP
As received moisture content = 4.5%
Soil classification and description based on
Visual Manual Procedure ASTM D2488
Town of Yarmouth
Phase I-Preliminary Design-Wastewater Treatment Plant
1125-77883
Material Description
Atterberg Limits
Coefficients
Classification
Remarks
Source of Sample: B-205 Depth: 3-5
Sample Number: S-2 Date:
Client:
Project:
Project No:Figure
SIEVE PERCENT SPEC.*PASS?
SIZE FINER PERCENT (X=NO)PERCENT FINER0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
GRAIN SIZE - mm.
0.0010.010.1110100
% +3"Coarse
% Gravel
Fine Coarse Medium
% Sand
Fine Silt
% Fines
Clay
0.0 0.0 0.3 0.4 20.8 77.8 0.76 in.3 in.2 in.1½ in.1 in.¾ in.½ in.3/8 in.#4#10#20#30#40#60#100#140#200Particle Size Distribution Report
Tested By: MR Checked By: AT
CDM
Cambridge, Massachusetts
1/10/2011
(no specification provided)
PL=LL=PI=
D90=D85=D60=D50=D30=D15=D10=Cu=Cc=
USCS=AASHTO=
*
poorly graded sand
3
3/4
#4
#10
#20
#40
#100
#200
100.0
100.0
96.2
94.4
84.7
52.6
2.7
1.7
1.0681 0.8577 0.4848
0.4061 0.2875 0.2146
0.1905 2.54 0.89
SP
As received moisture content = 23.7%
Soil classification and description based on
Visual Manual Procedure ASTM D2488
Town of Yarmouth
Phase I-Preliminary Design-Wastewater Treatment Plant
1125-77883
Material Description
Atterberg Limits
Coefficients
Classification
Remarks
Source of Sample: B-205 Depth: 8-10
Sample Number: S-3 Date:
Client:
Project:
Project No:Figure
SIEVE PERCENT SPEC.*PASS?
SIZE FINER PERCENT (X=NO)PERCENT FINER0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
GRAIN SIZE - mm.
0.0010.010.1110100
% +3"Coarse
% Gravel
Fine Coarse Medium
% Sand
Fine Silt
% Fines
Clay
0.0 0.0 3.8 1.8 41.8 50.9 1.76 in.3 in.2 in.1½ in.1 in.¾ in.½ in.3/8 in.#4#10#20#30#40#60#100#140#200Particle Size Distribution Report
Tested By: MR Checked By: AT
CDM
Cambridge, Massachusetts
1/10/2011
(no specification provided)
PL=LL=PI=
D90=D85=D60=D50=D30=D15=D10=Cu=Cc=
USCS=AASHTO=
*
clyey sand/ silty sand
3
3/4
#4
#10
#20
#40
#100
#200
100.0
100.0
100.0
99.8
94.6
79.7
50.2
32.8
0.6565 0.5254 0.2094
0.1492 0.0577 0.0033
SC/SM
As received moisture content = 9.1%
Soil classification and description based on
Visual Manual Procedure ASTM D2488
Town of Yarmouth
Phase I-Preliminary Design-Wastewater Treatment Plant
1125-77883
Material Description
Atterberg Limits
Coefficients
Classification
Remarks
Source of Sample: B-205 Depth: 38-40
Sample Number: S-9 Date:
Client:
Project:
Project No:Figure
SIEVE PERCENT SPEC.*PASS?
SIZE FINER PERCENT (X=NO)PERCENT FINER0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
GRAIN SIZE - mm.
0.0010.010.1110100
% +3"Coarse
% Gravel
Fine Coarse Medium
% Sand
Fine Silt
% Fines
Clay
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 20.1 46.9 15.4 17.46 in.3 in.2 in.1½ in.1 in.¾ in.½ in.3/8 in.#4#10#20#30#40#60#100#140#200Particle Size Distribution Report
Tested By: MR Checked By: AT
CDM
Cambridge, Massachusetts
1/10/2011
(no specification provided)
PL=LL=PI=
D90=D85=D60=D50=D30=D15=D10=Cu=Cc=
USCS=AASHTO=
*
lean clay with sand
3
3/4
#4
#10
#20
#40
#100
#200
100.0
100.0
99.8
99.7
98.3
94.9
88.0
84.1
20 38 18
0.2045 0.0870 0.0068
0.0042 0.0017
CL A-6(15)
As received moisture content = 25.7%
Town of Yarmouth
Phase I-Preliminary Design-Wastewater Treatment Plant
1125-77883
Material Description
Atterberg Limits
Coefficients
Classification
Remarks
Source of Sample: B-205 Depth: 43-44.5
Sample Number: S-10A Date:
Client:
Project:
Project No:Figure
SIEVE PERCENT SPEC.*PASS?
SIZE FINER PERCENT (X=NO)PERCENT FINER0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
GRAIN SIZE - mm.
0.0010.010.1110100
% +3"Coarse
% Gravel
Fine Coarse Medium
% Sand
Fine Silt
% Fines
Clay
0.0 0.0 0.2 0.1 4.8 10.8 30.4 53.76 in.3 in.2 in.1½ in.1 in.¾ in.½ in.3/8 in.#4#10#20#30#40#60#100#140#200Particle Size Distribution Report
Tested By: MR Checked By: AT
lean clay with sand 38 20 18 94.9 84.1 CL
1125-77883 Town of Yarmouth
MATERIAL DESCRIPTION LL PL PI %<#40 %<#200 USCS
Project No.Client:Remarks:
Project:
CDM
Cambridge, Massachusetts Figure
Source of Sample: B-205 Depth: 43-44.5 Sample Number: S-10APLASTICITY INDEX0
10
20
30
40
50
60
LIQUID LIMIT
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110
CL-ML
CL or
OL
CH or
O
H
ML or OL MH or OH
Dashed line indicates the approximate
upper limit boundary for natural soils
4
7
LIQUID AND PLASTIC LIMITS TEST REPORT
As Received moisture content =
25.7%
Phase I-Preliminary Design-Wastewater Treatment Plant
Tested By: MR Checked By: AT
CDM
Cambridge, Massachusetts
1/11/2011
(no specification provided)
PL=LL=PI=
D90=D85=D60=D50=D30=D15=D10=Cu=Cc=
USCS=AASHTO=
*
poorly graded sand/poorly graded sand with silt
3
3/4
#4
#10
#20
#40
#100
#200
100.0
100.0
90.7
89.3
81.0
49.8
10.2
5.6
3.0695 1.1813 0.5192
0.4267 0.2794 0.1839
0.1481 3.51 1.02
SP/SP-SM
As received moisture content = 5.5%
Soil classification and description based on
Visual Manual Procedure ASTM D2488
Town of Yarmouth
Phase I-Preliminary Design-Wastewater Treatment Plant
1125-77883
Material Description
Atterberg Limits
Coefficients
Classification
Remarks
Source of Sample: B-206 Depth: 0.5-2
Sample Number: S-1 Date:
Client:
Project:
Project No:Figure
SIEVE PERCENT SPEC.*PASS?
SIZE FINER PERCENT (X=NO)PERCENT FINER0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
GRAIN SIZE - mm.
0.0010.010.1110100
% +3"Coarse
% Gravel
Fine Coarse Medium
% Sand
Fine Silt
% Fines
Clay
0.0 0.0 9.3 1.4 39.5 44.2 5.66 in.3 in.2 in.1½ in.1 in.¾ in.½ in.3/8 in.#4#10#20#30#40#60#100#140#200Particle Size Distribution Report
Tested By: MR Checked By: AT
CDM
Cambridge, Massachusetts
1/11/2011
(no specification provided)
PL=LL=PI=
D90=D85=D60=D50=D30=D15=D10=Cu=Cc=
USCS=AASHTO=
*
poorly graded sand
3
3/4
#4
#10
#20
#40
#100
#200
100.0
100.0
90.6
83.6
51.6
15.1
2.4
1.2
4.0846 2.1612 1.0031
0.8254 0.5793 0.4236
0.3633 2.76 0.92
SP
As received moisture content = 17.5%
Soil classification and description based on
Visual Manual Procedure ASTM D2488
Town of Yarmouth
Phase I-Preliminary Design-Wastewater Treatment Plant
1125-77883
Material Description
Atterberg Limits
Coefficients
Classification
Remarks
Source of Sample: B-206 Depth: 15-17
Sample Number: S-4 Date:
Client:
Project:
Project No:Figure
SIEVE PERCENT SPEC.*PASS?
SIZE FINER PERCENT (X=NO)PERCENT FINER0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
GRAIN SIZE - mm.
0.0010.010.1110100
% +3"Coarse
% Gravel
Fine Coarse Medium
% Sand
Fine Silt
% Fines
Clay
0.0 0.0 9.4 7.0 68.5 13.9 1.26 in.3 in.2 in.1½ in.1 in.¾ in.½ in.3/8 in.#4#10#20#30#40#60#100#140#200Particle Size Distribution Report
Tested By: MR Checked By: AT
CDM
Cambridge, Massachusetts
1/11/2011
(no specification provided)
PL=LL=PI=
D90=D85=D60=D50=D30=D15=D10=Cu=Cc=
USCS=AASHTO=
*
poorly graded sand with gravel
3
3/4
#4
#10
#20
#40
#100
#200
100.0
100.0
63.5
52.2
37.0
18.6
7.3
4.7
12.3364 10.3763 3.8884
1.6801 0.6573 0.3524
0.2346 16.58 0.47
SP
As received moisture content = 8.9%
Soil classification and description based on
Visual Manual Procedure ASTM D2488
Town of Yarmouth
Phase I-Preliminary Design-Wastewater Treatment Plant
1125-77883
Material Description
Atterberg Limits
Coefficients
Classification
Remarks
Source of Sample: B-206 Depth: 30-32
Sample Number: S-7 Date:
Client:
Project:
Project No:Figure
SIEVE PERCENT SPEC.*PASS?
SIZE FINER PERCENT (X=NO)PERCENT FINER0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
GRAIN SIZE - mm.
0.0010.010.1110100
% +3"Coarse
% Gravel
Fine Coarse Medium
% Sand
Fine Silt
% Fines
Clay
0.0 0.0 36.5 11.3 33.6 13.9 4.76 in.3 in.2 in.1½ in.1 in.¾ in.½ in.3/8 in.#4#10#20#30#40#60#100#140#200Particle Size Distribution Report
Tested By: MR Checked By: AT
CDM
Cambridge, Massachusetts
1/6/2011
(no specification provided)
PL=LL=PI=
D90=D85=D60=D50=D30=D15=D10=Cu=Cc=
USCS=AASHTO=
*
poorly graded sand
3
3/4
#4
#10
#20
#40
#100
#200
100.0
100.0
99.4
96.9
76.1
28.2
5.7
1.4
1.2010 1.0267 0.6668
0.5833 0.4380 0.3115
0.2494 2.67 1.15
SP
As received moisture content = 23.9%
Soil classification and description based on
Visual Manual Procedure ASTM D2488
Town of Yarmouth
Phase I-Preliminary Design-Wastewater Treatment Plant
1125-77883
Material Description
Atterberg Limits
Coefficients
Classification
Remarks
Source of Sample: B-207 Depth: 14-16
Sample Number: S-4 Date:
Client:
Project:
Project No:Figure
SIEVE PERCENT SPEC.*PASS?
SIZE FINER PERCENT (X=NO)PERCENT FINER0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
GRAIN SIZE - mm.
0.0010.010.1110100
% +3"Coarse
% Gravel
Fine Coarse Medium
% Sand
Fine Silt
% Fines
Clay
0.0 0.0 0.6 2.5 68.7 26.8 1.46 in.3 in.2 in.1½ in.1 in.¾ in.½ in.3/8 in.#4#10#20#30#40#60#100#140#200Particle Size Distribution Report
Tested By: MR Checked By: AT
CDM
Cambridge, Massachusetts
1/6/2011
(no specification provided)
PL=LL=PI=
D90=D85=D60=D50=D30=D15=D10=Cu=Cc=
USCS=AASHTO=
*
poorly graded sand
3
3/4
#4
#10
#20
#40
#100
#200
100.0
100.0
89.4
81.3
54.3
22.0
3.0
1.1
5.1929 2.6065 0.9706
0.7755 0.5134 0.3439
0.2786 3.48 0.97
SP
As received moisture content = 16.6%
Soil classification and description based on
Visual Manual Procedure ASTM D2488
Town of Yarmouth
Phase I-Preliminary Design-Wastewater Treatment Plant
1125-77883
Material Description
Atterberg Limits
Coefficients
Classification
Remarks
Source of Sample: B-207 Depth: 34-36
Sample Number: S-8 Date:
Client:
Project:
Project No:Figure
SIEVE PERCENT SPEC.*PASS?
SIZE FINER PERCENT (X=NO)PERCENT FINER0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
GRAIN SIZE - mm.
0.0010.010.1110100
% +3"Coarse
% Gravel
Fine Coarse Medium
% Sand
Fine Silt
% Fines
Clay
0.0 0.0 10.6 8.1 59.3 20.9 1.16 in.3 in.2 in.1½ in.1 in.¾ in.½ in.3/8 in.#4#10#20#30#40#60#100#140#200Particle Size Distribution Report
Tested By: MR Checked By: AT
CDM
Cambridge, Massachusetts
12/21/2011
(no specification provided)
PL=LL=PI=
D90=D85=D60=D50=D30=D15=D10=Cu=Cc=
USCS=AASHTO=
*
poorly graded sand
3
3/4
#4
#10
#20
#40
#100
#200
100.0
100.0
100.0
99.9
99.6
98.9
19.1
2.6
0.3585 0.3334 0.2477
0.2220 0.1757 0.1390
0.1232 2.01 1.01
SP
As received moisture content = 25.5%
Soil classification and description based on
Visual Manual Procedure ASTM D2488
Town of Yarmouth
Phase I-Preliminary Design-Wastewater Treatment Plant
1125-77883
Material Description
Atterberg Limits
Coefficients
Classification
Remarks
Source of Sample: B-208 Depth: 14-16
Sample Number: S-4 Date:
Client:
Project:
Project No:Figure
SIEVE PERCENT SPEC.*PASS?
SIZE FINER PERCENT (X=NO)PERCENT FINER0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
GRAIN SIZE - mm.
0.0010.010.1110100
% +3"Coarse
% Gravel
Fine Coarse Medium
% Sand
Fine Silt
% Fines
Clay
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 1.0 96.3 1.5 1.16 in.3 in.2 in.1½ in.1 in.¾ in.½ in.3/8 in.#4#10#20#30#40#60#100#140#200Particle Size Distribution Report
Tested By: MR Checked By: AT
CDM
Cambridge, Massachusetts
12/21/2011
(no specification provided)
PL=LL=PI=
D90=D85=D60=D50=D30=D15=D10=Cu=Cc=
USCS=AASHTO=
*
sandy silt
3
3/4
#4
#10
#20
#40
#100
#200
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
97.7
96.4
94.1
67.0
NP NV NP
0.1303 0.1138 0.0631
0.0492 0.0319 0.0213
0.0156 4.04 1.03
ML A-4(0)
As received moisture content = 31.5%
Town of Yarmouth
Phase I-Preliminary Design-Wastewater Treatment Plant
1125-77883
Material Description
Atterberg Limits
Coefficients
Classification
Remarks
Source of Sample: B-208 Depth: 39-41
Sample Number: S-9 Date:
Client:
Project:
Project No:Figure
SIEVE PERCENT SPEC.*PASS?
SIZE FINER PERCENT (X=NO)PERCENT FINER0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
GRAIN SIZE - mm.
0.0010.010.1110100
% +3"Coarse
% Gravel
Fine Coarse Medium
% Sand
Fine Silt
% Fines
Clay
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.6 29.4 61.6 5.46 in.3 in.2 in.1½ in.1 in.¾ in.½ in.3/8 in.#4#10#20#30#40#60#100#140#200Particle Size Distribution Report
Tested By: MR Checked By: AT
sandy silt NV NP NP 96.4 67.0 ML
1125-77883 Town of Yarmouth
MATERIAL DESCRIPTION LL PL PI %<#40 %<#200 USCS
Project No.Client:Remarks:
Project:
CDM
Cambridge, Massachusetts Figure
Source of Sample: B-208 Depth: 39-41 Sample Number: S-9PLASTICITY INDEX0
10
20
30
40
50
60
LIQUID LIMIT
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110
CL-ML
CL or
OL
CH or
O
H
ML or OL MH or OH
Dashed line indicates the approximate
upper limit boundary for natural soils
4
7
LIQUID AND PLASTIC LIMITS TEST REPORT
As received moisture content =
31.5%
Phase I-Preliminary Design-Wastewater Treatment Plant
Tested By: MR Checked By: AT
CDM
Cambridge, Massachusetts
1/6/2011
(no specification provided)
PL=LL=PI=
D90=D85=D60=D50=D30=D15=D10=Cu=Cc=
USCS=AASHTO=
*
poorly graded sand
3
3/4
#4
#10
#20
#40
#100
#200
100.0
100.0
97.7
95.5
76.6
40.6
15.5
4.3
1.3099 1.0706 0.6152
0.5131 0.3190 0.1453
0.1059 5.81 1.56
SP
As received moisture content = 9.3 %
Soil classification and description based on
Visual Manual Procedure ASTM D2488
Town of Yarmouth
Phase I-Preliminary Design-Wastewater Treatment Plant
1125-77883
Material Description
Atterberg Limits
Coefficients
Classification
Remarks
Source of Sample: B-209 Depth: 4-6
Sample Number: S-2 Date:
Client:
Project:
Project No:Figure
SIEVE PERCENT SPEC.*PASS?
SIZE FINER PERCENT (X=NO)PERCENT FINER0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
GRAIN SIZE - mm.
0.0010.010.1110100
% +3"Coarse
% Gravel
Fine Coarse Medium
% Sand
Fine Silt
% Fines
Clay
0.0 0.0 2.3 2.2 54.9 36.3 4.36 in.3 in.2 in.1½ in.1 in.¾ in.½ in.3/8 in.#4#10#20#30#40#60#100#140#200Particle Size Distribution Report
Tested By: MR Checked By: AT
CDM
Cambridge, Massachusetts
1/6/2011
(no specification provided)
PL=LL=PI=
D90=D85=D60=D50=D30=D15=D10=Cu=Cc=
USCS=AASHTO=
*
poorly graded sand
3
3/4
#4
#10
#20
#40
#100
#200
100.0
100.0
97.7
91.8
67.8
27.0
3.0
0.9
1.7581 1.3630 0.7383
0.6270 0.4501 0.3159
0.2617 2.82 1.05
SP
As received moisture content = 15.7%
Soil classification and description based on
Visual Manual Procedure ASTM D2488
Town of Yarmouth
Phase I-Preliminary Design-Wastewater Treatment Plant
1125-77883
Material Description
Atterberg Limits
Coefficients
Classification
Remarks
Source of Sample: B-209 Depth: 24-26
Sample Number: S-6 Date:
Client:
Project:
Project No:Figure
SIEVE PERCENT SPEC.*PASS?
SIZE FINER PERCENT (X=NO)PERCENT FINER0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
GRAIN SIZE - mm.
0.0010.010.1110100
% +3"Coarse
% Gravel
Fine Coarse Medium
% Sand
Fine Silt
% Fines
Clay
0.0 0.0 2.3 5.9 64.8 26.1 0.96 in.3 in.2 in.1½ in.1 in.¾ in.½ in.3/8 in.#4#10#20#30#40#60#100#140#200Particle Size Distribution Report
Tested By: MR Checked By: AT
CDM
Cambridge, Massachusetts
1/11/2011
(no specification provided)
PL=LL=PI=
D90=D85=D60=D50=D30=D15=D10=Cu=Cc=
USCS=AASHTO=
*
poorly graded sand with gravel
3
3/4
#4
#10
#20
#40
#100
#200
100.0
84.4
77.7
76.3
74.1
63.9
5.3
1.8
33.6470 20.5078 0.3888
0.3244 0.2384 0.1864
0.1687 2.31 0.87
SP
As received moisture content = 18.6%
Soil classification and description based on
Visual Manual Procedure ASTM D2488
Town of Yarmouth
Phase I-Preliminary Design-Wastewater Treatment Plant
1125-77883
Material Description
Atterberg Limits
Coefficients
Classification
Remarks
Source of Sample: B-210 Depth: 5-7
Sample Number: S-2 Date:
Client:
Project:
Project No:Figure
SIEVE PERCENT SPEC.*PASS?
SIZE FINER PERCENT (X=NO)PERCENT FINER0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
GRAIN SIZE - mm.
0.0010.010.1110100
% +3"Coarse
% Gravel
Fine Coarse Medium
% Sand
Fine Silt
% Fines
Clay
0.0 15.6 6.7 1.4 12.4 62.1 1.86 in.3 in.2 in.1½ in.1 in.¾ in.½ in.3/8 in.#4#10#20#30#40#60#100#140#200Particle Size Distribution Report
Tested By: MR Checked By: AT
CDM
Cambridge, Massachusetts
1/10/2011
(no specification provided)
PL=LL=PI=
D90=D85=D60=D50=D30=D15=D10=Cu=Cc=
USCS=AASHTO=
*
poorly graded sand
3
3/4
#4
#10
#20
#40
#100
#200
100.0
100.0
96.9
90.4
64.8
37.5
8.2
3.0
1.9535 1.5653 0.7519
0.5851 0.3462 0.2106
0.1669 4.50 0.95
SP
As received moisture content = 5.2%
Soil classification and description based on
Visual Manual Procedure ASTM D2488
Town of Yarmouth
Phase I-Preliminary Design-Wastewater Treatment Plant
1125-77883
Material Description
Atterberg Limits
Coefficients
Classification
Remarks
Source of Sample: B-211 Depth: 0.5-2
Sample Number: S-1 Date:
Client:
Project:
Project No:Figure
SIEVE PERCENT SPEC.*PASS?
SIZE FINER PERCENT (X=NO)PERCENT FINER0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
GRAIN SIZE - mm.
0.0010.010.1110100
% +3"Coarse
% Gravel
Fine Coarse Medium
% Sand
Fine Silt
% Fines
Clay
0.0 0.0 3.1 6.5 52.9 34.5 3.06 in.3 in.2 in.1½ in.1 in.¾ in.½ in.3/8 in.#4#10#20#30#40#60#100#140#200Particle Size Distribution Report
Tested By: MR Checked By: AT
CDM
Cambridge, Massachusetts
1/10/2011
(no specification provided)
PL=LL=PI=
D90=D85=D60=D50=D30=D15=D10=Cu=Cc=
USCS=AASHTO=
*
poorly graded sand with gravel
3
3/4
#4
#10
#20
#40
#100
#200
100.0
83.1
53.1
46.2
36.7
22.5
4.6
2.5
28.8943 21.1182 6.9717
3.5788 0.6005 0.2985
0.2279 30.59 0.23
SP
As received moisture content = 10.59%
Soil classification and description based on
Visual Manual Procedure ASTM D2488
Town of Yarmouth
Phase I-Preliminary Design-Wastewater Treatment Plant
1125-77883
Material Description
Atterberg Limits
Coefficients
Classification
Remarks
Source of Sample: B-211 Depth: 29-31
Sample Number: S-7 Date:
Client:
Project:
Project No:Figure
SIEVE PERCENT SPEC.*PASS?
SIZE FINER PERCENT (X=NO)PERCENT FINER0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
GRAIN SIZE - mm.
0.0010.010.1110100
% +3"Coarse
% Gravel
Fine Coarse Medium
% Sand
Fine Silt
% Fines
Clay
0.0 16.9 30.0 6.9 23.7 20.0 2.56 in.3 in.2 in.1½ in.1 in.¾ in.½ in.3/8 in.#4#10#20#30#40#60#100#140#200Particle Size Distribution Report
Tested By: MR Checked By: AT
CDM
Cambridge, Massachusetts
1/10/2011
(no specification provided)
PL=LL=PI=
D90=D85=D60=D50=D30=D15=D10=Cu=Cc=
USCS=AASHTO=
*
poorly graded sand
3
3/4
#4
#10
#20
#40
#100
#200
100.0
100.0
100.0
98.6
82.0
65.7
3.3
1.1
1.2547 0.9964 0.3797
0.3228 0.2420 0.1923
0.1756 2.16 0.88
SP
As received moisture content = 18.6%
Soil classification and description based on
Visual Manual Procedure ASTM D2488
Town of Yarmouth
Phase I-Preliminary Design-Wastewater Treatment Plant
1125-77883
Material Description
Atterberg Limits
Coefficients
Classification
Remarks
Source of Sample: B-212 Depth: 4-6
Sample Number: S-2 Date:
Client:
Project:
Project No:Figure
SIEVE PERCENT SPEC.*PASS?
SIZE FINER PERCENT (X=NO)PERCENT FINER0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
GRAIN SIZE - mm.
0.0010.010.1110100
% +3"Coarse
% Gravel
Fine Coarse Medium
% Sand
Fine Silt
% Fines
Clay
0.0 0.0 0.0 1.4 32.9 64.6 1.16 in.3 in.2 in.1½ in.1 in.¾ in.½ in.3/8 in.#4#10#20#30#40#60#100#140#200Particle Size Distribution Report
Tested By: MR Checked By: AT
CDM
Cambridge, Massachusetts
1/10/2011
(no specification provided)
PL=LL=PI=
D90=D85=D60=D50=D30=D15=D10=Cu=Cc=
USCS=AASHTO=
*
poorly graded sand
3
3/4
#4
#10
#20
#40
#100
#200
100.0
100.0
98.7
89.4
60.7
22.1
5.0
1.9
2.0711 1.6346 0.8388
0.7031 0.4994 0.3499
0.2821 2.97 1.05
SP
As received moisture content = 14.0 9%
Soil classification and description based on
Visual Manual Procedure ASTM D2488
Town of Yarmouth
Phase I-Preliminary Design-Wastewater Treatment Plant
1125-77883
Material Description
Atterberg Limits
Coefficients
Classification
Remarks
Source of Sample: B-212 Depth: 19-21
Sample Number: S-5 Date:
Client:
Project:
Project No:Figure
SIEVE PERCENT SPEC.*PASS?
SIZE FINER PERCENT (X=NO)PERCENT FINER0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
GRAIN SIZE - mm.
0.0010.010.1110100
% +3"Coarse
% Gravel
Fine Coarse Medium
% Sand
Fine Silt
% Fines
Clay
0.0 0.0 1.3 9.3 67.3 20.2 1.96 in.3 in.2 in.1½ in.1 in.¾ in.½ in.3/8 in.#4#10#20#30#40#60#100#140#200Particle Size Distribution Report
Tested By: MR Checked By: AT
CDM
Cambridge, Massachusetts
1/7/2011
(no specification provided)
PL=LL=PI=
D90=D85=D60=D50=D30=D15=D10=Cu=Cc=
USCS=AASHTO=
*
poorly graded sand
3
3/4
#4
#10
#20
#40
#100
#200
100.0
100.0
99.5
96.5
80.8
51.1
5.8
1.4
1.2197 0.9805 0.5089
0.4155 0.2812 0.2015
0.1750 2.91 0.89
SP
As received moisture content = 18.3%
Soil classification and description based on
Visual Manual Procedure ASTM D2488
Town of Yarmouth
Phase I-Preliminary Design-Wastewater Treatment Plant
1125-77883
Material Description
Atterberg Limits
Coefficients
Classification
Remarks
Source of Sample: B-213 Depth: 9-11
Sample Number: S-3 Date:
Client:
Project:
Project No:Figure
SIEVE PERCENT SPEC.*PASS?
SIZE FINER PERCENT (X=NO)PERCENT FINER0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
GRAIN SIZE - mm.
0.0010.010.1110100
% +3"Coarse
% Gravel
Fine Coarse Medium
% Sand
Fine Silt
% Fines
Clay
0.0 0.0 0.5 3.0 45.4 49.7 1.46 in.3 in.2 in.1½ in.1 in.¾ in.½ in.3/8 in.#4#10#20#30#40#60#100#140#200Particle Size Distribution Report
Tested By: MR Checked By: AT
CDM
Cambridge, Massachusetts
1/7/2011
(no specification provided)
PL=LL=PI=
D90=D85=D60=D50=D30=D15=D10=Cu=Cc=
USCS=AASHTO=
*
poorly graded gravel with sand
3
3/4
#4
#10
#20
#40
#100
#200
100.0
80.1
49.5
42.5
33.2
13.2
4.7
2.8
33.7426 24.6575 8.1234
4.9073 0.7509 0.4560
0.3612 22.49 0.19
GP
As received moisture content = 12.9%
Soil classification and description based on
Visual Manual Procedure ASTM D2488
Town of Yarmouth
Phase I-Preliminary Design-Wastewater Treatment Plant
1125-77883
Material Description
Atterberg Limits
Coefficients
Classification
Remarks
Source of Sample: B-213 Depth: 14-16
Sample Number: S-4 Date:
Client:
Project:
Project No:Figure
SIEVE PERCENT SPEC.*PASS?
SIZE FINER PERCENT (X=NO)PERCENT FINER0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
GRAIN SIZE - mm.
0.0010.010.1110100
% +3"Coarse
% Gravel
Fine Coarse Medium
% Sand
Fine Silt
% Fines
Clay
0.0 19.9 30.6 7.0 29.3 10.4 2.86 in.3 in.2 in.1½ in.1 in.¾ in.½ in.3/8 in.#4#10#20#30#40#60#100#140#200Particle Size Distribution Report
Tested By: MR Checked By: AT
CDM
Cambridge, Massachusetts
1/7/2011
(no specification provided)
PL=LL=PI=
D90=D85=D60=D50=D30=D15=D10=Cu=Cc=
USCS=AASHTO=
*
poorly graded sand with silt
3
3/4
#4
#10
#20
#40
#100
#200
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
99.5
96.1
35.3
10.7
0.3620 0.3275 0.2206
0.1902 0.1356 0.0910
0.0717 3.08 1.16
SP-SM
As received moisture content = 17.3%
Soil classification and description based on
Visual Manual Procedure ASTM D2488
Town of Yarmouth
Phase I-Preliminary Design-Wastewater Treatment Plant
1125-77883
Material Description
Atterberg Limits
Coefficients
Classification
Remarks
Source of Sample: B-214 Depth: 4-6
Sample Number: S-2 Date:
Client:
Project:
Project No:Figure
SIEVE PERCENT SPEC.*PASS?
SIZE FINER PERCENT (X=NO)PERCENT FINER0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
GRAIN SIZE - mm.
0.0010.010.1110100
% +3"Coarse
% Gravel
Fine Coarse Medium
% Sand
Fine Silt
% Fines
Clay
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.9 85.4 7.7 3.06 in.3 in.2 in.1½ in.1 in.¾ in.½ in.3/8 in.#4#10#20#30#40#60#100#140#200Particle Size Distribution Report
Tested By: MR Checked By: AT
CDM
Cambridge, Massachusetts
1/7/2011
(no specification provided)
PL=LL=PI=
D90=D85=D60=D50=D30=D15=D10=Cu=Cc=
USCS=AASHTO=
*
poorly graded sand
3
3/4
#4
#10
#20
#40
#100
#200
100.0
100.0
89.9
85.1
67.1
45.1
7.8
4.6
4.8400 1.9914 0.6627
0.4861 0.2934 0.1978
0.1662 3.99 0.78
SP
As received moisture content = 16.6%
Soil classification and description based on
Visual Manual Procedure ASTM D2488
Town of Yarmouth
Phase I-Preliminary Design-Wastewater Treatment Plant
1125-77883
Material Description
Atterberg Limits
Coefficients
Classification
Remarks
Source of Sample: B-214 Depth: 14-16
Sample Number: S-4 Date:
Client:
Project:
Project No:Figure
SIEVE PERCENT SPEC.*PASS?
SIZE FINER PERCENT (X=NO)PERCENT FINER0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
GRAIN SIZE - mm.
0.0010.010.1110100
% +3"Coarse
% Gravel
Fine Coarse Medium
% Sand
Fine Silt
% Fines
Clay
0.0 0.0 10.1 4.8 40.0 40.5 4.66 in.3 in.2 in.1½ in.1 in.¾ in.½ in.3/8 in.#4#10#20#30#40#60#100#140#200Particle Size Distribution Report
Tested By: MR Checked By: AT
CDM
Cambridge, Massachusetts
1/10/2011
(no specification provided)
PL=LL=PI=
D90=D85=D60=D50=D30=D15=D10=Cu=Cc=
USCS=AASHTO=
*
silty sand
3
3/4
#4
#10
#20
#40
#100
#200
100.0
100.0
100.0
99.8
99.4
97.6
53.1
17.4
0.3223 0.2835 0.1708
0.1416 0.0962
SM
As received moisture content = 9.0%
Soil classification and description based on
Visual Manual Procedure ASTM D2488
Town of Yarmouth
Phase I-Preliminary Design-Wastewater Treatment Plant
1125-77883
Material Description
Atterberg Limits
Coefficients
Classification
Remarks
Source of Sample: B-216 Depth: 0.5-2
Sample Number: S-1 Date:
Client:
Project:
Project No:Figure
SIEVE PERCENT SPEC.*PASS?
SIZE FINER PERCENT (X=NO)PERCENT FINER0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
GRAIN SIZE - mm.
0.0010.010.1110100
% +3"Coarse
% Gravel
Fine Coarse Medium
% Sand
Fine Silt
% Fines
Clay
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 2.2 80.2 17.46 in.3 in.2 in.1½ in.1 in.¾ in.½ in.3/8 in.#4#10#20#30#40#60#100#140#200Particle Size Distribution Report
Tested By: MR Checked By: AT
CDM
Cambridge, Massachusetts
1/14/2011
(no specification provided)
PL=LL=PI=
D90=D85=D60=D50=D30=D15=D10=Cu=Cc=
USCS=AASHTO=
*
well graded sand
3
3/4
#4
#10
#20
#40
#100
#200
100.0
100.0
97.3
93.8
80.5
53.2
11.8
5.8
1.3536 1.0163 0.4936
0.3967 0.2565 0.1701
0.1362 3.62 0.98
SW
As received moisture content = 47.9%
Soil classification and description based on
Visual Manual Procedure ASTM D2488
Town of Yarmouth
Phase I-Preliminary Design-Wastewater Treatment Plant
1125-77883
Material Description
Atterberg Limits
Coefficients
Classification
Remarks
Source of Sample: B-217 Depth: 0.5-2
Sample Number: S-1 Date:
Client:
Project:
Project No:Figure
SIEVE PERCENT SPEC.*PASS?
SIZE FINER PERCENT (X=NO)PERCENT FINER0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
GRAIN SIZE - mm.
0.0010.010.1110100
% +3"Coarse
% Gravel
Fine Coarse Medium
% Sand
Fine Silt
% Fines
Clay
0.0 0.0 2.7 3.5 40.6 47.4 5.86 in.3 in.2 in.1½ in.1 in.¾ in.½ in.3/8 in.#4#10#20#30#40#60#100#140#200Particle Size Distribution Report
Tested By: MR Checked By: AT
CDM
Cambridge, Massachusetts
12/22/2010
(no specification provided)
PL=LL=PI=
D90=D85=D60=D50=D30=D15=D10=Cu=Cc=
USCS=AASHTO=
*
poorly graded sand
3
3/4
#4
#10
#20
#40
#100
#200
100.0
100.0
95.6
91.9
86.7
79.1
19.4
4.0
1.5271 0.5557 0.2924
0.2507 0.1837 0.1340
0.1119 2.61 1.03
SP
As received moisture content = 20.4%
Soil classification and description based on
Visual Manual Procedure ASTM D2488
Town of Yarmouth
Phase I-Preliminary Design-Wastewater Treatment Plant
1125-77883
Material Description
Atterberg Limits
Coefficients
Classification
Remarks
Source of Sample: B-218 Depth: 8-10
Sample Number: S-5 Date:
Client:
Project:
Project No:Figure
SIEVE PERCENT SPEC.*PASS?
SIZE FINER PERCENT (X=NO)PERCENT FINER0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
GRAIN SIZE - mm.
0.0010.010.1110100
% +3"Coarse
% Gravel
Fine Coarse Medium
% Sand
Fine Silt
% Fines
Clay
0.0 0.0 4.4 3.7 12.8 75.1 4.06 in.3 in.2 in.1½ in.1 in.¾ in.½ in.3/8 in.#4#10#20#30#40#60#100#140#200Particle Size Distribution Report
Tested By: MR Checked By: AT
CDM
Cambridge, Massachusetts
1/05/2011
(no specification provided)
PL=LL=PI=
D90=D85=D60=D50=D30=D15=D10=Cu=Cc=
USCS=AASHTO=
*
poorly graded sand
3
3/4
#4
#10
#20
#40
#100
#200
100.0
100.0
99.8
99.7
98.8
92.3
24.6
3.9
0.4021 0.3637 0.2511
0.2199 0.1650 0.1201
0.1012 2.48 1.07
SP
As received moisture content = 7.1%
Soil classification and description based on
Visual Manual Procedure ASTM D2488
Town of Yarmouth
Phase I-Preliminary Design-Wastewater Treatment Plant
1125-77883
Material Description
Atterberg Limits
Coefficients
Classification
Remarks
Source of Sample: B-222 Depth: 4-6
Sample Number: S-3 Date:
Client:
Project:
Project No:Figure
SIEVE PERCENT SPEC.*PASS?
SIZE FINER PERCENT (X=NO)PERCENT FINER0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
GRAIN SIZE - mm.
0.0010.010.1110100
% +3"Coarse
% Gravel
Fine Coarse Medium
% Sand
Fine Silt
% Fines
Clay
0.0 0.0 0.2 0.1 7.4 88.4 3.96 in.3 in.2 in.1½ in.1 in.¾ in.½ in.3/8 in.#4#10#20#30#40#60#100#140#200Particle Size Distribution Report
Tested By: MR Checked By: AT
CDM
Cambridge, Massachusetts
1/05/2011
(no specification provided)
PL=LL=PI=
D90=D85=D60=D50=D30=D15=D10=Cu=Cc=
USCS=AASHTO=
*
poorly graded sand
3
3/4
#4
#10
#20
#40
#100
#200
100.0
100.0
98.2
96.6
79.7
24.6
2.6
0.7
1.0653 0.9387 0.6549
0.5836 0.4586 0.3563
0.3120 2.10 1.03
SP
As received moisture content = 18.9%
Soil classification and description based on
Visual Manual Procedure ASTM D2488
Town of Yarmouth
Phase I-Preliminary Design-Wastewater Treatment Plant
1125-77883
Material Description
Atterberg Limits
Coefficients
Classification
Remarks
Source of Sample: B-222 Depth: 14-16
Sample Number: S-6 Date:
Client:
Project:
Project No:Figure
SIEVE PERCENT SPEC.*PASS?
SIZE FINER PERCENT (X=NO)PERCENT FINER0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
GRAIN SIZE - mm.
0.0010.010.1110100
% +3"Coarse
% Gravel
Fine Coarse Medium
% Sand
Fine Silt
% Fines
Clay
0.0 0.0 1.8 1.6 72.0 23.9 0.76 in.3 in.2 in.1½ in.1 in.¾ in.½ in.3/8 in.#4#10#20#30#40#60#100#140#200Particle Size Distribution Report
Tested By: MR Checked By: AT
CDM
Cambridge, Massachusetts
1/06/2011
(no specification provided)
PL=LL=PI=
D90=D85=D60=D50=D30=D15=D10=Cu=Cc=
USCS=AASHTO=
*
poorly graded sand
3
3/4
#4
#10
#20
#40
#100
#200
100.0
100.0
95.1
94.2
87.6
31.2
5.3
1.6
1.0817 0.8138 0.5960
0.5338 0.4177 0.3108
0.2587 2.30 1.13
SP
As received moisture content = 15.6%
Soil classification and description based on
Visual Manual Procedure ASTM D2488
Town of Yarmouth
Phase I-Preliminary Design-Wastewater Treatment Plant
1125-77883
Material Description
Atterberg Limits
Coefficients
Classification
Remarks
Source of Sample: B-225 Depth: 6-8
Sample Number: S-4 Date:
Client:
Project:
Project No:Figure
SIEVE PERCENT SPEC.*PASS?
SIZE FINER PERCENT (X=NO)PERCENT FINER0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
GRAIN SIZE - mm.
0.0010.010.1110100
% +3"Coarse
% Gravel
Fine Coarse Medium
% Sand
Fine Silt
% Fines
Clay
0.0 0.0 4.9 0.9 63.0 29.6 1.66 in.3 in.2 in.1½ in.1 in.¾ in.½ in.3/8 in.#4#10#20#30#40#60#100#140#200Particle Size Distribution Report
Tested By: MR Checked By: AT
CDM
Cambridge, Massachusetts
1/04/2011
(no specification provided)
PL=LL=PI=
D90=D85=D60=D50=D30=D15=D10=Cu=Cc=
USCS=AASHTO=
*
poorly graded sand with silt
3
3/4
#4
#10
#20
#40
#100
#200
100.0
100.0
100.0
99.6
95.9
76.4
25.4
12.1
0.6313 0.5327 0.3056
0.2540 0.1693 0.0946
SP-SM
As received moisture content = 11.4%
Soil classification and description based on
Visual Manual Procedure ASTM D2488
Town of Yarmouth
Phase I-Preliminary Design-Wastewater Treatment Plant
1125-77883
Material Description
Atterberg Limits
Coefficients
Classification
Remarks
Source of Sample: B-228 Depth: 0-2
Sample Number: S-1 Date:
Client:
Project:
Project No:Figure
SIEVE PERCENT SPEC.*PASS?
SIZE FINER PERCENT (X=NO)PERCENT FINER0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
GRAIN SIZE - mm.
0.0010.010.1110100
% +3"Coarse
% Gravel
Fine Coarse Medium
% Sand
Fine Silt
% Fines
Clay
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.4 23.2 64.3 12.16 in.3 in.2 in.1½ in.1 in.¾ in.½ in.3/8 in.#4#10#20#30#40#60#100#140#200Particle Size Distribution Report
Tested By: MR Checked By: AT
CDM
Cambridge, Massachusetts
1/04/2011
(no specification provided)
PL=LL=PI=
D90=D85=D60=D50=D30=D15=D10=Cu=Cc=
USCS=AASHTO=
*
poorly graded sand with silt
3
3/4
#4
#10
#20
#40
#100
#200
100.0
100.0
99.8
99.6
97.0
74.2
27.9
7.3
0.6421 0.5550 0.3116
0.2518 0.1588 0.1000
0.0830 3.75 0.97
SP-SM
As received moisture content = 5.6%
Soil classification and description based on
Visual Manual Procedure ASTM D2488
Town of Yarmouth
Phase I-Preliminary Design-Wastewater Treatment Plant
1125-77883
Material Description
Atterberg Limits
Coefficients
Classification
Remarks
Source of Sample: B-228 Depth: 2-4
Sample Number: S-2 Date:
Client:
Project:
Project No:Figure
SIEVE PERCENT SPEC.*PASS?
SIZE FINER PERCENT (X=NO)PERCENT FINER0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
GRAIN SIZE - mm.
0.0010.010.1110100
% +3"Coarse
% Gravel
Fine Coarse Medium
% Sand
Fine Silt
% Fines
Clay
0.0 0.0 0.2 0.2 25.4 66.9 7.36 in.3 in.2 in.1½ in.1 in.¾ in.½ in.3/8 in.#4#10#20#30#40#60#100#140#200Particle Size Distribution Report
Tested By: MR Checked By: AT
CDM
Cambridge, Massachusetts
1/03/2011
(no specification provided)
PL=LL=PI=
D90=D85=D60=D50=D30=D15=D10=Cu=Cc=
USCS=AASHTO=
*
poorly graded sand with silt
3
3/4
#4
#10
#20
#40
#100
#200
100.0
100.0
99.1
98.6
96.6
89.7
31.5
9.6
0.4292 0.3763 0.2421
0.2071 0.1453 0.0939
0.0763 3.17 1.14
SP-SM
As received moisture content = 15.9%
Soil classification and description based on
Visual Manual Procedure ASTM D2488
Town of Yarmouth
Phase I-Preliminary Design-Wastewater Treatment Plant
1125-77883
Material Description
Atterberg Limits
Coefficients
Classification
Remarks
Source of Sample: B-231 Depth: 3-7
Sample Number: S-3 Date:
Client:
Project:
Project No:Figure
SIEVE PERCENT SPEC.*PASS?
SIZE FINER PERCENT (X=NO)PERCENT FINER0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
GRAIN SIZE - mm.
0.0010.010.1110100
% +3"Coarse
% Gravel
Fine Coarse Medium
% Sand
Fine Silt
% Fines
Clay
0.0 0.0 0.9 0.5 8.9 80.1 9.66 in.3 in.2 in.1½ in.1 in.¾ in.½ in.3/8 in.#4#10#20#30#40#60#100#140#200Particle Size Distribution Report
Appendix C
Workplan for Hydrogeologic Services
December 10, 2010
Appendix D
Environmental Monitor Notice of Workplan
Published in MEPA Environmental Monitor
Volume 75, Issue 4
December 22, 2010
PUBLIC NOTICE OF HYDROGEOLOGIC EVALUATION SCOPE OF WORK PURSUANT
TO 314 CMR 5.09(1)(b)
Pursuant to 314 CMR 5.09(1)(b), public notice is hereby given that a Scope of Work for a
Hydrogeologic Evaluation has been prepared and submitted to the Massachusetts
Department of Environmental Protection, Southeast Region Cape Cod Office at 3195 Main
St, Barnstable, Massachusetts. The Scope of Work was prepared on behalf of the Town of
Yarmouth’s proposed wastewater treatment facilities and groundwater discharge locations
from the Town’s Comprehensive Wastewater Management Plan (CWMP), EEA No. 14659.
Additional information regarding this Scope of Work may be obtained by contacting David F.
Young at Camp Dresser & McKee Inc., 50 Hampshire Street, Cambridge, MA 02139 or 617-
452-6000.
Appendix E
MassDEP Approval of Workplan
May 16, 2011
This information is available in alternate format. Call Michelle Waters-Ekanem, Diversity Director, at 617-292-5751. TDD# 1-866-539-7622 or 1-617-574-6868
MassDEP Website: www.mass.gov/dep
Printed on Recycled Paper
May 16, 2011
Mr. David Young
CDM
One Cambridge Place
50 Hampshire Street
Cambridge, Massachusetts 02139
RE: YARMOUTH-- Hydrogeologic Scope of
Work/Approval – Buck Island Road Recharge
Site
Dear Mr. Young:
The Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection (MassDEP) has completed
its review of the hydrogeologic scope of work prepared and submitted by CDM to assess the
potential for discharging treated sanitary effluent at the Buck Island Road Recharge Site in
Yarmouth, Massachusetts. The document is dated December 10, 2010 and outlines how CDM
will characterize the soil and groundwater conditions at the proposed discharge location and
evaluate the hydraulic capacity of the site. The information gathered during this investigation
will be used to determine the suitability of the site for a discharge of up to 318,000 gallons per
day of treated sanitary effluent.
A public notice announcing the preparation of the scope of work and its submission to
MassDEP was published in the Environmental Monitor on December 22, 2010. As of this date,
MassDEP has not received any public comments regarding the submitted scope of work.
Additionally, a pre-application/scoping meeting to discuss the proposed project and scope of
work was conducted at the CDM office in Yarmouth on November 30, 2010.
MassDEP has determined that the CDM submission is complete and hereby approves its
scope of work subject to the following conditions:
Upon the completion of the activities outlined in the approved scope of work CDM shall
prepare and submit a hydrogeologic evaluation report to MassDEP. A MassDEP
Transmittal Form and a complete BRPWP 83 application shall accompany the report.
The report shall comply with the requirements outlined in the Hydrogeologic Evaluation
Report Guidance that accompanies the BRPWP 83 application packet. CDM shall
contact MassDEP to discuss any hydrogeologic report requirements that may not be
applicable to this project.
2
CDM’s hydrogeological evaluation report documenting the results of the proposed
investigation shall include the following:
o A surveyed site plan prepared and stamped by a professional engineer. At a
minimum, the surveyed site plan will identify and document;
The locations/footprints of the primary and reserve disposal areas;
The locations of all test pits and percolation tests conducted as part of the
hydrogeological investigation;
The locations and top-of-casing/top-of-PVC elevations of all
borings/monitoring wells installed as part of the investigation and of all
existing, on-site monitoring wells used in the investigation; and,
The proposed locations of monitoring wells to be installed as part of the
approved groundwater monitoring plan.
This surveyed site plan, along with an approved maximum daily discharge
volume, will be referenced in MassDEP’s Site Approval Letter. Any soil
absorption system installed at the site shall be constructed within the footprint
indicated on the plan and the discharge volume limited to that contained within
the Site Approval Letter.
o A groundwater monitoring well plan capable of identifying and assessing any
impacts to groundwater flow and quality resulting from a discharge of effluent at
the approved location. Monitoring wells installed as part of the site investigation
may be utilized provided they are appropriately located and constructed in
accordance with MassDEP’s Standard References for Monitoring Wells. The
monitoring wells shall be installed by a well driller registered in Massachusetts.
Additional well locations shall be proposed if needed to monitor impacts to
nearby sensitive receptors.
3
If you have questions regarding the comments and conditions of this approval, please
contact me at (508)946-2814.
Very truly yours,
Brian A. Dudley
cc: Mr. George Allaire, Director
Department of Public Works
1146 Route 28
South Yarmouth, MA 02664
ecc: DEP/Boston
Attn: Alan Slater
Steven Hallem
A
Technical Memorandum 3-3
To: Yarmouth Integrated Water Resources Planning Committee
From: Rob Musci, Alan D. Roscoe, P.E.
Date: June 13, 2005
Subject: Town of Yarmouth, Massachusetts – Infiltration Testing Results:
Field Assessment of Site Potential
Purpose
For Phase II of the Town of Yarmouth Comprehensive Wastewater Management Plan
(CWMP), CDM conducted infiltration testing and soil evaluations for two priority sites (R1
and R3) identified for effluent disposal in TM 3-1. Infiltration testing and soil evaluations
were not conducted at this time on site R2 (Bass River Hills Golf Course) because gaining
access to this site would have been difficult and may have caused disruptions to daily
operations. For planning purposes, CDM assumed that the results obtained at sites R1 and R3
would be indicative of expected conditions on site R2.
The purpose of this technical memorandum is to present the data from this evaluation and
summarize the sites potential.
Infiltration Testing and Soil Evaluations were performed on May 23, 2005. Infiltration testing
was performed using a Double-Ring Infiltrometer (DRI) consisting of two concentric rings
(12-inch and 24-inch diameter aluminum cylinders) and following ASTM D-3385 “Standard
Test Method for Infiltration Rate of Soils in the Field Using Double-Ring Infiltrometer”.
Installation and Test Procedures are described in an attached document labeled “Exhibit A”.
Sites evaluated on this date are as follows:
Yarmouth Water Department at #99 Buck Island Road. (Site R1)
Yarmouth Highway Department Yard at #507 Buck Island Road. (Site R3)
Soil evaluation forms and a sketch plan of the locations tested are attached to this
memorandum.
Technical Memorandum 3-3
Technical Memorandum 3-3
June 13, 2005
Page 2
Summary of Yarmouth Testing Activities
CDM representatives arrived at the Yarmouth Water
Department yard at approximately 9:00 am. The
excavator prepared two deep test hole excavations to
characterize soil and groundwater conditions in the
vicinity, and two shallow excavations suitable for
performing the infiltration testing. All excavations were
made in the designated test areas. The Town of
Yarmouth supplied a landscaping/maintenance vehicle
equipped with a 100-gallon water tank to be used as the
water supply for testing. Yarmouth Water Department yard
The rear of the Yarmouth Water Department yard is described as a nearly level grassed area
enclosed within a chain link fence. This is the existing effluent disposal site for the Dennis-
Yarmouth Septage Treatment Plant. This area was chosen for testing due to its desirable
location and lack of known wetlands or waterbodies. Testing locations are indicated on a
sketch plan attached to this memorandum.
Summary of Soil Observations
The first site tested was at the rear of the Yarmouth
Water Department yard. Two infiltration tests were
performed at this location. Subsurface soils encountered
at Test Pit #1 consist of coarse loose sands with
approximately 10-25% gravels. Groundwater was
encountered at a depth of 8.5-ft below ground surface
(bgs). Observations at a deeper elevation were not
practical as the sidewalls of the excavation continuously
caved in during excavation. The peak infiltration rate
obtained from the DRI test at TP #1 is approximately 0.35 gpm
(642.0 gpd/sf).
Test Pit #1
Test Pit #2 revealed fill soils and areas where the surficial soils
were worked or turned over during construction of the site.
These fill soils extend from the ground surface to approximately
48-inches bgs. Medium to coarse sands lie in stratified layers
beneath the fill layers to the limit of excavation at approximately
10.5 ft bgs. Groundwater seepage was observed at a depth of 98-
inches (8-ft. 2-in.) and by the end of testing standing water was
observed at this depth. The peak infiltration rate obtained from
the DRI test at TP #2 is approximately 0.25 gpm (458.6 gpd/sf).
Technical Memorandum 3-3
Test Pit #2
Technical Memorandum 3-3
June 13, 2005
Page 3
A second site was tested behind the Yarmouth Highway
Department yard. One infiltration test was performed at
this location. The initial excavation revealed the presence
of an underground concrete structure and fill materials
down to approximately 8-ft. bgs, so the excavation was
moved to a new location approximately 20-ft. to the west.
Surficial soils at this new location were revealed to have
also been worked previously, but sufficient natural soils
were present 15-inches bgs to conduct the testing. The
peak infiltration rate obtained from the DRI test at this
location is approximately 0.4 gpm (733.7 gpd/sf).
Yarmouth Highway Department yard
Table 1
Yarmouth Infiltrometer Testing Results Summary
EPA Process Design Manual – Land Treatment of Municipal Wastewater: Design Infiltration Rate 2-4% of Double
Ring Infiltrometer Test Rates. (Oct. 1981)
Design Loading Rate
based on Infiltration
Rate (gpd/sf)
Test Location Test
Number
Peak Infiltration
Velocity - Inner
Ring
(gpm)
Peak Infiltration
Rate – Inner Ring
(gpd/sf)
2% 4%
Water Treatment
Facility
TP #1 0.35 642.0 12.8 25.7
Water Treatment
Facility
TP #2 0.25 458.6 9.2 18.3
Highway
Department
Yard
TP #1 0.4 733.7 14.7 29.4
Infiltration and Loading Rates are rounded to nearest one-tenth.
Results
All locations tested on this date meet criteria to be considered suitable for treated effluent
disposal under the Massachusetts Groundwater Discharge Program. Disposal systems at
these sites may use a design loading rate of up to 5 gpd/sf for Open Sand Bed disposal
systems , (or 4 gpd/sf using Subsurface Leaching Chambers) using DEP’s “Guidelines for
Design, Construction, Operation and Maintenance of Small Wastewater Treatment Facilities with
Land Disposal”. Soil and groundwater conditions are similar at both sites and should be
considered as potential treated effluent disposal sites as part of Yarmouth’s long-term
wastewater planning.
cc: Robert Schreiber
Technical Memorandum 3-3
Exhibit A
Double Ring Infiltrometer Installation & Testing Procedures (Yarmouth)
An excavation (approx. 5-feet square) should be prepared by the excavation
contractor at the desired elevation within the soils to be tested. The ground
surface at the test location can be roughened with a hand shovel for leveling
purposes and to eliminate surface compaction/smearing from the excavator
bucket during excavation operations.
The 24-inch diameter outer ring is set on the prepared and roughened surface
and is then gently pushed into the soil by hand until penetration is too difficult,
and then using a small block of wood and a sledgehammer, the ring is driven
into the soils to a depth of 6-inches. Care is taken not to disturb the soil adjacent
to ring walls. The ring is then checked visually for level.
The 12-inch diameter inner ring is then set concentrically within the outer ring
and pushed and/or driven into the soil using methods described in the above
paragraph to set the inner ring into the soil to a depth of 4-inches. The inner ring
is then checked visually for level and location within the outer ring.
Both rings have been pre-marked on the inner walls every ½-inch of depth to
facilitate monitoring of the water depth during the infiltration testing. Water is
poured from water jugs into both rings using a small stone as a splash guard to
reduce scouring of the soil surface during the testing. The inner ring and
annular space is then simultaneously filled with water to a depth between 1 and
6 inches (4-inches was used in this case). This initial volume of water is not
recorded. Water is added during the testing to maintain the 4-inch depth and
volume that is added during specific intervals is recorded in this case to the
nearest ½-gallon (visual accuracy). This water volume represents the volume
infiltrated into the soils, and is converted to an infiltration velocity.
Guidance documents suggest a testing period of up to 6 hours or until a
maximum rate is obtained. Due to the excessive permeability of the soils
expected at the Yarmouth locations and limited supply of water (approx. 100
gallons) to conduct the testing, experience dictates that the tests should be run
for approximately 1-hour, or to the limit of the available water supply. For the
purpose of this feasibility testing, the recording intervals were set at every 10
minutes until a maximum steady-state, or average incremental infiltration rate is
obtained, then every 5 minutes to verify that the desired infiltration rate has
been obtained.
The deeper penetration of the outer ring sidewall combined with the saturation
of the annular space, is intended to mimic saturated soil conditions and promote
measurement of the downward flow of water applied to the inner ring to obtain
a design loading rate. This procedure is intended to create conditions
resembling those encountered during actual operation and determine a long-
term acceptance rate for the soil surface to where the wastewater will be
applied.
"M
"M
"M
!I
!I
!I
!I
!I
!I
!I
"M
"M
"M
"M
"M
"M
"M
"M
"M
!I
!I
"M
"M
"M
"M
"M
kj
kj
kj
WestYarmout
hRoadWillow StreetForest
RoadStation Avenue
U
nion
Street
Setucket R oad
NorthMainStreetLong P o n d D riveNorthDennisRoadWinslowGrayRoad
OldMainStreetW oodRoadOld Town House Road
GreatWesternRoad
Town Brook RdH ig h b a n k R o a d
W h i t e s P a t h
Buck Island RoadHigginsCrowe
llRoadCamp Street£¤6
£¤6
£¤6
!(6A
!(28
!(28
!(6A
!(28
W Great Western Rd
Dennis
0 0.5Miles
Yarmouth Recommended PlanFebruary 2022Figure 8-1 Conservation
N
Sewered Parcels
Wastewater Pump S tation
Vacuum S ewer
Pressure Sewer
Force Sewer
Gravity Sewer
Effluent Recharge S ites
"M
Vacuum Station!I
Effluent Pum p Station"M
Effluent RechargeSite at Bass RiverGolf Course
Yarmouth Water ResourceReclamation Facility &Effluent Recharge Site
Barnstable
Yarmouth
Effluent Pipeline
kj
NHESP CertifiedVernal PoolNHESP Priority Habitatsof Rare SpeciesNHESP Estimated Habitatsof Rare W ildlife
Article 97 L and
Protected and RecreationOpen Space
MADEP Wetlands
$+$+$+
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(!(!(!(
!(!(
!(
!(
!(
!(!(!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(!(
!(!(
!(
$+
$+
")
")
")
")")")
")")")
")")
")
")
")")
")")
")
")
")
")
")
")
")
")
")
")")412204200414
412412200 2044142042042 0 42044124124142042
0
4
2042 0 4204 2004122 0 0
414
Source: Esri, Maxar, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/AirbusDS, USDA, USGS, AeroGRID, IGN, and the GIS User Community
Legend
Well Type
!(Boring
$+Irrigation
")Monitoring
North-South Cross-Section
Surface Water Features
Proposed Bed Layout
Parcel Boundary
.
0 320 640 960 1,280160Feet
B-214 B-216 B-222 B-228B-104 B-207 B-209 MW-7B-208
0 400 800 1200 1600 2000
-110
-100
-90
-80
-70
-60
-50
-40
-30
-20
-10
0
10
20
30
North South
Infiltration Basin Simulated Water Table
Average Annual WT
WT w/1.2 MGD recharge
Lithology
CLAY/SILT
CLAYEY SAND
GRAVEL
SAND
SAND/GRAVEL
SILT
SILT/SAND
SILTY SAND
TOPSOIL
Vertical exaggeration: 10x
0ft 500ft
B-228 B-229BW-225
MW-2
MW-5
MW-7
0 400 800 1200 1600
-110
-100
-90
-80
-70
-60
-50
-40
-30
-20
-10
0
10
20
30
West East
Infiltration Basin Simulated Water Table
Average Annual WT
WT w/1.2 MGD recharge
Lithology
CLAY/SILT
CLAYEY SAND
GRAVEL
SAND
SAND/GRAVEL
SILT
SILT/SAND
SILTY SAND
TOPSOIL
Vertical exaggeration: 10x
0ft 500ft
Cranberry
Bog Plashes
Brook
10_GW_Monitoring Plan
Memorandum
To: Jeffrey Colby
From: Karilyn Heisen, PE, D.WRE
Date: July 22, 2022
Subject: Buck Island Groundwater Monitoring Plan
Recharge capacity at the Buck Island site is dependent on annual and seasonal changes in water
level and the ability of the adjacent surface water bodies to transport flow which discharges
through the groundwater. Model simulations indicate that average annual recharge capacity at the
site is 1.2 MGD with monthly ranges from 0.99 to 1.5 MGD.
Pressure transducers should be installed in the 9 groundwater wells in Table 1 to measure water
levels during the initial 3 months of system operations. Monthly groundwater levels should be
taken following system start-up. Well screens are assumed to be in the shallow subsurface
bracketing or just below the water table. Well depths will be verified as part of initial groundwater
monitoring.
Water level measurements should be taken at the six locations listed in Table 1 and shown on
Figure 1. Stage-discharge curves should be developed for all 7 locations. Continuous water level
data should be collected at SW-10A, SW-12 and SW-2 during the initial 3 months of system
operations. Weekly water levels should be collected at the other three locations during the initial 3
months. Monthly groundwater levels should be taken following system start-up.
Prior to system start-up the stream channels and road crossing should be surveyed and evaluated
to assess the capacity of culvert and water level control structures to maintain water levels and
transport the increased surface water flows.
Water quality samples will be collected and analyzed quarterly at wells BW-218 (upgradient), BW-
225 (down-gradient), BW-231 (down-gradient), and surface water locations SW-3 (Plashes Brook
upstream), SW-2 (Plashes Brook downstream), SW-9A (Big Sandy Bog upstream), SW-10A (Big
Sandy Bog), and SW-12 (cranberry bog downstream). Water quality samples will be analyzed as
shown in Table 2.
Buck Island Groundwater Monitoring Plan
July 22, 2022
Page 2
10_GW_Monitoring Plan
Table 1 – Groundwater and Surface Water Monitoring Points
Well Location Water Level
Monitoring
Water Quality
Sampling
BW-218 Upgradient Yes Yes
MW-17 Upgradient (near Plashes Brook) Yes
MW-22A Upgradient Yes
BW-225 Downgradient (west towards
cranberry bog)
Yes Yes
MW-8 Cross-gradient (across cranberry
bog)
Yes
BW-231 Downgradient (east towards
Plashes Brook
Yes Yes
MW-23A Cross-gradient (across Plashes
Brook)
Yes
MW-24 Downgradient (south) Yes
MW-25 Downgradient (south) Yes
SW-9A Big Sandy Bog Upstream of Inlet Yes Yes
SW-10A Big Sandy Bog Upstream of
Control
Yes Yes
SW-10B Big Sandy Bog Downstream of
Control
Yes
SW-12 Outlet Brook of Bogs Yes Yes
SW-3 Plashes Brook Upstream Yes Yes
SW-13 Plashes Brook Yes
SW-2 Plashes Brook Upstream of Sluice Yes Yes
Table 2 Water Quality Monitoring Plan Parameters and Frequency
Parameter Frequency of Analysis
Specific Conductance Quarterly
pH Quarterly
Nitrate-Nitrogen (NO3) Quarterly
Total Nitrogen (NO3+NO2+TKN) Quarterly
Total Phosphorus Quarterly
Volatile Organic Compounds Annually (groundwater samples only)
Buck Island Groundwater Monitoring Plan
July 22, 2022
Page 3
10_GW_Monitoring Plan
Figure 1 – Groundwater and Surface Water Monitoring Points
TOWN OF YARMOUTH, MASSACHUSETTSDEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKSWATER RESOURCE RECOVERY FACILITY75 State Street, Suite 701Boston, MA 02109Tel: (617) 452-6000NPRELIMINARY SITE SURVEY PLAN AND INFILTRATION BED LAYOUTPRELIMINARY LAYOUT ONLYNOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONLOCATION OF WATER RESOURCE RECOVERY FACILITY -CURRENTLY IN PRELIMINARY DESIGN STAGE