SITE DESIGN ENGINEERING, LLC. - Burlington, MA Report10BStreet.pdf · SITE DESIGN ENGINEERING, LLC. 11 Cushman Street, Middleboro, MA 02346 P: 508-967-0673 F: 508-967-0674 INTRODUCTION

SITE DESIGN ENGINEERING, LLC.

11 Cushman Street, Middleboro, MA 02346 P: 508-967-0673 F: 508-967-0674

INTRODUCTION

This drainage report was prepared for the proposed site re-development at 10 B Street in Burlington, Massachusetts.

The project site is approximately 1.05± acres consisting of approximately 70% impervious surfaces and 30% open space. The site contains an existing 9,900± sf building surrounded on all sides with paved parking. The site is accessed from B Street by three existing driveways. Abutting properties to the east, west, and south are fully developed and contain commercial buildings with associated parking. This drainage analysis was performed to determine and analyze the stormwater runoff characteristics resulting from the proposed site changes. There are no existing on-site stormwater systems to accommodate parking lot stormwater runoff. Stormwater from the paved areas of the site runs toward abutting properties to the south, east and west as well as into B Street. There is a small open wooded area on the east side of the building that collects a portion of the runoff from abutting parking areas. The proposed project will reconstruct the majority of parking areas and provide additional site parking and improved site circulation. An underground drainage system will be constructed to capture, treat and infiltrate stormwater runoff. The proposed system will improve treatment of the existing stormwater runoff where none currently exists.

DRAINAGE SYSTEM DESIGN

Drainage System Model

The proposed drainage system is designed to mitigate and treat stormwater runoff occurring from 2, 10, 25 and 100-year 24-hour storm events. The project proposes to expand and redesign the layout of the existing driveway and parking. The proposed driveway and parking redesign will not increase the amount of impervious area on the property. The drainage system is designed according to the recommendations of the Department of Environmental Protection Stormwater Management Policy. The drainage system for this project was designed using the HydroCad Stormwater Modeling System. The HydroCad model consists of subcatchments and ponds. The subcatchments are the drainage areas to each respective structure; the structures are modeled as ponds. The site’s drainage area is divided into subcatchments. In the pre-development analysis the central portion is modeled in HydroCad as subcatchment e1. Presently an isolated vegetated area surrounded by paved driveway and parking exists east of the building. Existing topography indicates a significant quantity of surface runoff generated on site as well as a portion of its easterly abutter flows toward a low point contained within the isolated wooded area modeled as HydroCad pond eL1. Pre-development subcatchment model e2 represents stormwater runoff at the rear of the site which flows from the southeasterly corner to southwesterly corner towards the abutting property. Pre-development subcatchment model e3 represents stormwater surface runoff on site which flows uniformly from south to north towards B Street contributing to the existing municipal drainage system.



The post-development site is divided into two subcatchments, S12 and S3. Subcatchment S12 represents a combination of pre-development subcatchment E1 and E2 which are now combined and flow into the proposed stormwater system. Post-development subcatchment S3 is the equivalent of pre-development E3 which flows towards B Street. The rate and volume of water directed to B Street is reduced in the poste-development condition due to decreases in impervious cover in this area. Stormwater Treatment & Storage System

The proposed stormwater treatment and storage system utilizes stormwater management Best Management Practices (BMP’s). The BMP’s proposed consist of a sediment forebay, oil water separator and underground storage/infiltration system. The majority of the runoff generated from the parking area is captured and treated by the proposed BMP’s. The proposed system will provide treatment and mitigation to stormwater flows where none currently exist. HydroCad was utilized to analyze and design the stormwater storage system. The HydroCad

model simulates the system’s function during a storm in order to evaluate its design. The system is modeled in series starting with the sediment forebay, oil/water separator and underground infiltration system. The sediment forebay and oil/water separator provide a minimum 44% TSS removal rate prior to water entering the underground system. The system is entirely self-contained with no outlets discharging to abutting properties or public ways. Stormwater will first enter the sediment forebay where it will be stored and infiltrated at a slow infiltration rate of 2.41 inches per hour. This slow rate is utilized to allow for sediment buildup and clogging of soil pore space. In large storm events the water level will rise sufficiently to discharge water into the oil/water separator and the underground storage/infiltration system. The oil/water separator does not provide any meaningful storage component. The underground system stores water within the plastic chambers and surrounding stone void space. The stone void ratio is accounted to be 40 percent. A Rawls infiltration rate of 8.27 in/hour class “A” sand is utilized based on available soil boring information. The underground system is constructed with heavy duty H20 plastic chambers model Stormtech SC-310 as manufactured by ADS. The system will store and infiltrate stormwater as stipulated by the stormwater management policy. In HydroCad the underground system is modeled as pond US1. The system is designed utilizing a groundwater elevation of 43.75+/- (5.75 foot depth) based on soil borings completed by GZA. Copies of the soil borings are included in this report, refer to boring GZ-1, 2 and 8. This depth to groundwater provides a minimum separation of 2.0 feet from the bottom of the proposed infiltration system.

RESULTS

Post-development HydroCad Pond P1b is the analytical comparison to pre-development subcatchment e2. In the post-development condition all of the runoff generated from E1 and E2 is infiltrated in the proposed storage system on-site therefore there is no longer a post-development discharge point on the south end of the site. Post-Development subcatchment S3 is the analytical comparison to pre-development subcatchment E3. S3 and E3 are direct runoff contributors to the existing municipal drainage network within B Street. S3 contains less



impervious area than E3 and therefore reduces the rate and volume of water entering B Street. Post-development peak flow rates for applicable subcatchment comparison points do not exceed peak flow rate values of the comparative pre-development HydroCad subcatchment models.

FLOW RATES & VOLUME SUMMARY

Pre-Development

Analysis Pt. e3 Post-Development

Analysis Pt. S3 Storm Event Flow Rate (cfs) Volume (cf) Flow Rate (cfs) Volume (cf)

2 - Year 0.61 2,081 0.43 1,647 10 - Year 0.65 2,580 0.65 2,580 25 - Year 1.06 3,712 0.80 3,152

100 - Year 1.31 4,621 1.04 4,051



ANALYSIS DATA

The following information was used in performing the calculations for the drainage system.

NRCS Soils Information The NRCS Soil Survey lists the site as Urban Land (602) with Hinckley (253B) nearby. Site soil evaluation and monitoring have indicated that the prevalent material has the characteristics of a NRCS drainage class for this soil type is “A”. Please refer to the appendices for copies of the NRCS soil survey map and soil boring logs.

1. Existing & Proposed Ground Covers:

The existing ground cover of the site is predominantly developed, consisting of landscaping and buildings. The Curve Numbers listed below, hydrologic soil type A, were used in all the calculations performed with HydroCad.

RUNOFF CURVE NUMBERS

Cover Description Cover Type Hydrologic condition Curve Number

Dense Grass, Woods Fair 43 Landscaping, Lawns Fair 49

Rooftops, Pavements - 98 Walkways, Sidewalks - 98

2. Rainfall Data (24 Hour Storm Duration*)

Storm Event Rainfall

2 - Year 3.1 inches

10 - Year 4.5 inches



* From U.S. Department of Commerce Weather Bureau T.P. 40, May 1961, see attached.



STORMWATER MANAGEMENT SYSTEM

BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES (BMP) RECOMMENDED MAINTENANCE

10 B STREET BURLINGTON, MA

SEDIMENT FOREBAYS Maintenance:

• Inspections shall be performed monthly. • Accumulated sediment should be removed a minimum of one time per year or

whenever the depth of accumulation exceeds 3 inches. • Grass height should be maintained between 3 to 6 inches. • All sediment, debris, floatables, contaminants shall be disposed of to a landfill or

other permitted facility. OIL/WATER & SEDIMENT SEPARATOR Maintenance:

• Inspections shall be performed two times per year. • Units shall be cleaned at least once a year or more frequently whenever the

depth of sediment is greater than or equal to half the sump depth. • The inlet grate shall not be welded to the frame so that the sump can be easily

inspected and maintained. • Maintenance of structure shall be performed by qualified personnel and in

accordance with OSHA regulations. • All sediment, debris, floatables, contaminants shall be disposed of to a landfill or

other permitted facility. SUBSURFACE INFILTRATION/STORAGE CHAMBERS Maintenance:

• Inspections shall be performed on pretreatment BMP’s per above outline to ensure proper function of chamber system.

• The infiltration system shall be inspected 24 hours after major rainfall events (4

inches or more) for retention of liquid following the first 6 months of full operation. After 6 months of operation the system should be inspected at least two time per year at upon the same schedule used for the oil/water separator. The inspection shall be by means of the inspection manhole and/or inspection ports. If liquid is found, the depth shall be recorded and a check of recent storm events and rainfall totals shall be obtained. A follow up inspection within twenty-four (24) hours shall be conducted and the depth of liquid shall be re-measured. If water is still present after the follow up inspection the owner shall notify the design engineer.

e1

Ex Cond/ Pre Dev Subcatchment - flowing

to exist. low point

e2


to NE rear of site

e3


south to B-Street (municipal)

S12

Post Dev Subcatchment - flowing to proposed

catch basin

S3

Post Dev Subcatchment - flowing south to

B-Street (municipal)

eL1

Exist. low point at westerly of site

P1a

Vegetated Depression - storage volume below

OW/OCB Rim

P1b

Vegetated Depression - storage volume above

OW/OCB Rim

US1

Underground Storage System - StormTech

SC310

Routing Diagram for 10 B STREET HYDROCAD MODEL 12-3-15Prepared by {enter your company name here}, Printed 12/3/2015

HydroCAD® 10.00-11 s/n 05085 © 2014 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLCSubcat Reach Pond Link

10 B StreetType III 24-hr 2-year Rainfall=3.10"10 B STREET HYDROCAD MODEL 12-3-15

Printed 12/3/2015Prepared by {enter your company name here}Page 2HydroCAD® 10.00-11 s/n 05085 © 2014 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC

Summary for Subcatchment e1: Ex Cond/ Pre Dev Subcatchment - flowing to exist. low point

Runoff = 0.35 cfs @ 12.15 hrs, Volume= 1,455 cf, Depth= 1.14"

Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Split Pervious/Imperv., Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.04 hrsType III 24-hr 2-year Rainfall=3.10"

Area (sf) CN Description* 0 98 Buildings - existing* 6,040 98 Driveways, parkings, walkways - existing* 0 98 Other impervious - existing

0 49 50-75% Grass cover, Fair, HSG A9,300 43 Woods/grass comb., Fair, HSG A

15,340 65 Weighted Average9,300 43 60.63% Pervious Area6,040 98 39.37% Impervious Area

Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description(min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs)

9.6 50 0.0120 0.09 Sheet Flow, SEGMENT ABGrass: Dense n= 0.240 P2= 3.50"

1.5 50 0.0120 0.55 Shallow Concentrated Flow, SEGMENT BCWoodland Kv= 5.0 fps

11.1 100 Total

Summary for Subcatchment e2: Ex Cond/ Pre Dev Subcatchment - flowing to NE rear of site








Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description(min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs)10.4 40 0.0175 0.06 Sheet Flow, SEGMENT AB

Woods: Light underbrush n= 0.400 P2= 3.50"1.0 95 0.0060 1.57 Shallow Concentrated Flow, SEGMENT BC

Paved Kv= 20.3 fps11.4 135 Total

Summary for Subcatchment e3: Ex Cond/ Pre Dev Subcatchment - flowing south to B-Street (municipal)




0 49 50-75% Grass cover, Fair, HSG A1,130 43 Woods/grass comb., Fair, HSG A9,830 92 Weighted Average1,130 43 11.50% Pervious Area8,700 98 88.50% Impervious Area




5.0 Direct Entry, SEGMENT AB

Summary for Subcatchment S12: Post Dev Subcatchment - flowing to proposed catch basin



Area (sf) CN Description* 0 98 Buildings - existing* 18,920 98 Driveways, parking, walkways - proposed* 0 98 Other impervious - proposed* 4,300 49 Landscaping - proposed


26,305 84 Weighted Average7,385 46 28.07% Pervious Area

18,920 98 71.93% Impervious Area


6.7 35 0.0400 0.09 Sheet Flow, SEGMENT ABWoods: Light underbrush n= 0.400 P2= 3.50"

Summary for Subcatchment S3: Post Dev Subcatchment - flowing south to B-Street (municipal)






0 49 50-75% Grass cover, Fair, HSG A0 43 Woods/grass comb., Fair, HSG A




Summary for Pond eL1: Exist. low point at westerly of site

Inflow Area = 15,340 sf, 39.37% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 1.14" for 2-year eventInflow = 0.35 cfs @ 12.15 hrs, Volume= 1,455 cfPrimary = 0.35 cfs @ 12.15 hrs, Volume= 1,455 cf, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min

Routing by Dyn-Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.04 hrs

Summary for Pond P1a: Vegetated Depression - storage volume below OW/OCB Rim

Inflow Area = 26,305 sf, 71.93% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 2.08" for 2-year eventInflow = 1.26 cfs @ 12.09 hrs, Volume= 4,554 cfOutflow = 1.22 cfs @ 12.12 hrs, Volume= 4,553 cf, Atten= 3%, Lag= 1.5 minDiscarded = 0.04 cfs @ 12.12 hrs, Volume= 2,210 cfPrimary = 1.18 cfs @ 12.12 hrs, Volume= 2,343 cf




Peak Elev= 48.65' @ 12.12 hrs Surf.Area= 939 sf Storage= 728 cf

Plug-Flow detention time= 126.5 min calculated for 4,549 cf (100% of inflow)Center-of-Mass det. time= 127.3 min ( 887.4 - 760.1 )

Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description#1 47.00' 8,209 cf Custom Stage Data - Vegetated Depression (Prismatic) Listed below (Recalc)

Elevation Surf.Area Inc.Store Cum.Store(feet) (sq-ft) (cubic-feet) (cubic-feet)47.00 150 0 047.50 260 103 10348.00 450 178 28048.50 820 318 59848.80 1,060 282 88049.00 1,220 228 1,10749.33 1,500 449 1,55649.50 5,000 553 2,10950.00 19,400 6,100 8,209

Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices#1 Discarded 47.00' 2.410 in/hr Exfiltration over Surface area from 47.00' - 48.90' Excluded Surface area = 150 sf #2 Primary 48.50' 24.0" Horiz. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600 Limited to weir flow at low heads

Discarded OutFlow Max=0.04 cfs @ 12.12 hrs HW=48.65' (Free Discharge)1=Exfiltration (Exfiltration Controls 0.04 cfs)

Primary OutFlow Max=1.17 cfs @ 12.12 hrs HW=48.65' TW=46.23' (Dynamic Tailwater)2=Orifice/Grate (Weir Controls 1.17 cfs @ 1.26 fps)



Summary for Pond P1b: Vegetated Depression - storage volume above OW/OCB Rim

Inflow Area = 26,305 sf, 71.93% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 0.00" for 2-year eventInflow = 0.00 cfs @ 0.00 hrs, Volume= 0 cfOutflow = 0.00 cfs @ 0.00 hrs, Volume= 0 cf, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 minDiscarded = 0.00 cfs @ 0.00 hrs, Volume= 0 cf

Routing by Dyn-Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.04 hrsPeak Elev= 48.80' @ 0.00 hrs Surf.Area= 1,060 sf Storage= 0 cf

Plug-Flow detention time= (not calculated: initial storage exceeds outflow)Center-of-Mass det. time= (not calculated: no inflow)


Elevation Surf.Area Inc.Store Cum.Store(feet) (sq-ft) (cubic-feet) (cubic-feet)48.80 1,060 0 049.00 1,220 228 22849.33 1,500 449 67749.50 5,000 553 1,22950.00 19,400 6,100 7,329

Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices#1 Discarded 48.80' 2.410 in/hr Exfiltration over Surface area from 48.80' - 48.90' Excluded Surface area = 1,060 sf

Discarded OutFlow Max=0.00 cfs @ 0.00 hrs HW=48.80' (Free Discharge)1=Exfiltration ( Controls 0.00 cfs)



Summary for Pond US1: Underground Storage System - StormTech SC310

Inflow Area = 26,305 sf, 71.93% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 1.07" for 2-year eventInflow = 1.18 cfs @ 12.12 hrs, Volume= 2,343 cfOutflow = 0.35 cfs @ 12.44 hrs, Volume= 2,350 cf, Atten= 70%, Lag= 19.2 minDiscarded = 0.35 cfs @ 12.44 hrs, Volume= 2,350 cfPrimary = 0.00 cfs @ 0.00 hrs, Volume= 0 cf


Plug-Flow detention time= (not calculated: outflow precedes inflow)Center-of-Mass det. time= 14.8 min ( 757.6 - 742.8 )

Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description#1A 45.75' 1,216 cf 38.17'W x 45.16'L x 2.33'H Field A

4,022 cf Overall - 983 cf Embedded = 3,039 cf x 40.0% Voids#2 48.08' 9 cf 2.00'D x 3.00'H Vertical Cone/Cylinder - OW/OCB Riser -Impervious#3A 46.25' 983 cf ADS_StormTech SC-310 x 66 Inside #1

Effective Size= 28.9"W x 16.0"H => 2.07 sf x 7.12'L = 14.7 cfOverall Size= 34.0"W x 16.0"H x 7.56'L with 0.44' OverlapRow Length Adjustment= +0.44' x 2.07 sf x 11 rows

2,208 cf Total Available Storage

Storage Group A created with Chamber Wizard

Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices#1 Discarded 45.75' 8.270 in/hr Exfiltration over Wetted area #2 Primary 48.50' 24.0" Horiz. Orifice/Grate - OW/OCB Rim C= 0.600 Limited to weir flow at low heads


Primary OutFlow Max=0.00 cfs @ 0.00 hrs HW=45.75' TW=48.80' (Dynamic Tailwater)2=Orifice/Grate - OW/OCB Rim ( Controls 0.00 cfs)












11.1 100 Total





































































Routing by Dyn-Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.04 hrsPeak Elev= 47.15' @ 12.54 hrs Surf.Area= 1,724 sf Storage= 1,481 cf





















11.1 100 Total


























































































11.1 100 Total
















































Peak Elev= 48.82' @ 12.44 hrs Surf.Area= 1,077 sf Storage= 902 cf












Plug-Flow detention time= 1,061.3 min calculated for 572 cf (87% of inflow)Center-of-Mass det. time= 1,060.1 min ( 1,804.2 - 744.1 )



















swcheck.doc • 04/01/08 Stormwater Report Checklist • Page 1 of 8

Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection Bureau of Resource Protection - Wetlands Program

Checklist for Stormwater Report

A. Introduction Important: When filling out forms on the computer, use only the tab key to move your cursor - do not use the return key.

A Stormwater Report must be submitted with the Notice of Intent permit application to document compliance with the Stormwater Management Standards. The following checklist is NOT a substitute for the Stormwater Report (which should provide more substantive and detailed information) but is offered here as a tool to help the applicant organize their Stormwater Management documentation for their Report and for the reviewer to assess this information in a consistent format. As noted in the Checklist, the Stormwater Report must contain the engineering computations and supporting information set forth in Volume 3 of the Massachusetts Stormwater Handbook. The Stormwater Report must be prepared and certified by a Registered Professional Engineer (RPE) licensed in the Commonwealth. The Stormwater Report must include:

• The Stormwater Checklist completed and stamped by a Registered Professional Engineer (see page 2) that certifies that the Stormwater Report contains all required submittals.1 This Checklist is to be used as the cover for the completed Stormwater Report.

• Applicant/Project Name • Project Address • Name of Firm and Registered Professional Engineer that prepared the Report • Long-Term Pollution Prevention Plan required by Standards 4-6 • Construction Period Pollution Prevention and Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan required

by Standard 82 • Operation and Maintenance Plan required by Standard 9

In addition to all plans and supporting information, the Stormwater Report must include a brief narrative describing stormwater management practices, including environmentally sensitive site design and LID techniques, along with a diagram depicting runoff through the proposed BMP treatment train. Plans are required to show existing and proposed conditions, identify all wetland resource areas, NRCS soil types, critical areas, Land Uses with Higher Potential Pollutant Loads (LUHPPL), and any areas on the site where infiltration rate is greater than 2.4 inches per hour. The Plans shall identify the drainage areas for both existing and proposed conditions at a scale that enables verification of supporting calculations.

As noted in the Checklist, the Stormwater Management Report shall document compliance with each of the Stormwater Management Standards as provided in the Massachusetts Stormwater Handbook. The soils evaluation and calculations shall be done using the methodologies set forth in Volume 3 of the Massachusetts Stormwater Handbook. To ensure that the Stormwater Report is complete, applicants are required to fill in the Stormwater Report Checklist by checking the box to indicate that the specified information has been included in the Stormwater Report. If any of the information specified in the checklist has not been submitted, the applicant must provide an explanation. The completed Stormwater Report Checklist and Certification must be submitted with the Stormwater Report.

1 The Stormwater Report may also include the Illicit Discharge Compliance Statement required by Standard 10. If not included in the Stormwater Report, the Illicit Discharge Compliance Statement must be submitted prior to the discharge of stormwater runoff to the post-construction best management practices. 2 For some complex projects, it may not be possible to include the Construction Period Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan in the Stormwater Report. In that event, the issuing authority has the discretion to issue an Order of Conditions that approves the project and includes a condition requiring the proponent to submit the Construction Period Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan before commencing any land disturbance activity on the site.

http://www.mass.gov/eea/agencies/massdep/water/regulations/massachusetts-stormwater-handbook.html




Checklist (continued) LID Measures: Stormwater Standards require LID measures to be considered. Document what

environmentally sensitive design and LID Techniques were considered during the planning and design of the project:

No disturbance to any Wetland Resource Areas

Site Design Practices (e.g. clustered development, reduced frontage setbacks)

Reduced Impervious Area (Redevelopment Only)

Minimizing disturbance to existing trees and shrubs

LID Site Design Credit Requested:

Credit 1

Credit 2

Credit 3

Use of “country drainage” versus curb and gutter conveyance and pipe

Bioretention Cells (includes Rain Gardens)

Constructed Stormwater Wetlands (includes Gravel Wetlands designs)

Treebox Filter

Water Quality Swale

Grass Channel

Green Roof

Other (describe):

Standard 1: No New Untreated Discharges

No new untreated discharges Outlets have been designed so there is no erosion or scour to wetlands and waters of the

Commonwealth

Supporting calculations specified in Volume 3 of the Massachusetts Stormwater Handbook included.




Checklist (continued)

Standard 2: Peak Rate Attenuation Standard 2 waiver requested because the project is located in land subject to coastal storm flowage

and stormwater discharge is to a wetland subject to coastal flooding. Evaluation provided to determine whether off-site flooding increases during the 100-year 24-hour

storm.

Calculations provided to show that post-development peak discharge rates do not exceed pre-development rates for the 2-year and 10-year 24-hour storms. If evaluation shows that off-site flooding increases during the 100-year 24-hour storm, calculations are also provided to show that post-development peak discharge rates do not exceed pre-development rates for the 100-year 24-hour storm.

Standard 3: Recharge

Soil Analysis provided.

Required Recharge Volume calculation provided.

Required Recharge volume reduced through use of the LID site Design Credits.

Sizing the infiltration, BMPs is based on the following method: Check the method used.

Static Simple Dynamic Dynamic Field1

Runoff from all impervious areas at the site discharging to the infiltration BMP.

Runoff from all impervious areas at the site is not discharging to the infiltration BMP and calculations

are provided showing that the drainage area contributing runoff to the infiltration BMPs is sufficient to generate the required recharge volume.

Recharge BMPs have been sized to infiltrate the Required Recharge Volume.

Recharge BMPs have been sized to infiltrate the Required Recharge Volume only to the maximum extent practicable for the following reason:

Site is comprised solely of C and D soils and/or bedrock at the land surface

M.G.L. c. 21E sites pursuant to 310 CMR 40.0000

Solid Waste Landfill pursuant to 310 CMR 19.000

Project is otherwise subject to Stormwater Management Standards only to the maximum extent practicable.

Calculations showing that the infiltration BMPs will drain in 72 hours are provided.

Property includes a M.G.L. c. 21E site or a solid waste landfill and a mounding analysis is included.

1 80% TSS removal is required prior to discharge to infiltration BMP if Dynamic Field method is used.





Standard 3: Recharge (continued)

The infiltration BMP is used to attenuate peak flows during storms greater than or equal to the 10-year 24-hour storm and separation to seasonal high groundwater is less than 4 feet and a mounding analysis is provided.

Documentation is provided showing that infiltration BMPs do not adversely impact nearby wetland resource areas.

Standard 4: Water Quality

The Long-Term Pollution Prevention Plan typically includes the following: • Good housekeeping practices; • Provisions for storing materials and waste products inside or under cover; • Vehicle washing controls; • Requirements for routine inspections and maintenance of stormwater BMPs; • Spill prevention and response plans; • Provisions for maintenance of lawns, gardens, and other landscaped areas; • Requirements for storage and use of fertilizers, herbicides, and pesticides; • Pet waste management provisions; • Provisions for operation and management of septic systems; • Provisions for solid waste management; • Snow disposal and plowing plans relative to Wetland Resource Areas; • Winter Road Salt and/or Sand Use and Storage restrictions; • Street sweeping schedules; • Provisions for prevention of illicit discharges to the stormwater management system; • Documentation that Stormwater BMPs are designed to provide for shutdown and containment in the

event of a spill or discharges to or near critical areas or from LUHPPL; • Training for staff or personnel involved with implementing Long-Term Pollution Prevention Plan; • List of Emergency contacts for implementing Long-Term Pollution Prevention Plan.

A Long-Term Pollution Prevention Plan is attached to Stormwater Report and is included as an attachment to the Wetlands Notice of Intent.

Treatment BMPs subject to the 44% TSS removal pretreatment requirement and the one inch rule for calculating the water quality volume are included, and discharge:

is within the Zone II or Interim Wellhead Protection Area

is near or to other critical areas

is within soils with a rapid infiltration rate (greater than 2.4 inches per hour)

involves runoff from land uses with higher potential pollutant loads.

The Required Water Quality Volume is reduced through use of the LID site Design Credits.

Calculations documenting that the treatment train meets the 80% TSS removal requirement and, if applicable, the 44% TSS removal pretreatment requirement, are provided.





Standard 4: Water Quality (continued)

The BMP is sized (and calculations provided) based on:

The ½” or 1” Water Quality Volume or The equivalent flow rate associated with the Water Quality Volume and documentation is

provided showing that the BMP treats the required water quality volume.

The applicant proposes to use proprietary BMPs, and documentation supporting use of proprietary BMP and proposed TSS removal rate is provided. This documentation may be in the form of the propriety BMP checklist found in Volume 2, Chapter 4 of the Massachusetts Stormwater Handbook and submitting copies of the TARP Report, STEP Report, and/or other third party studies verifying performance of the proprietary BMPs.

A TMDL exists that indicates a need to reduce pollutants other than TSS and documentation showing that the BMPs selected are consistent with the TMDL is provided.

Standard 5: Land Uses With Higher Potential Pollutant Loads (LUHPPLs)

The NPDES Multi-Sector General Permit covers the land use and the Stormwater Pollution

Prevention Plan (SWPPP) has been included with the Stormwater Report.

The NPDES Multi-Sector General Permit covers the land use and the SWPPP will be submitted prior to the discharge of stormwater to the post-construction stormwater BMPs.

The NPDES Multi-Sector General Permit does not cover the land use.

LUHPPLs are located at the site and industry specific source control and pollution prevention measures have been proposed to reduce or eliminate the exposure of LUHPPLs to rain, snow, snow melt and runoff, and been included in the long term Pollution Prevention Plan.

All exposure has been eliminated.

All exposure has not been eliminated and all BMPs selected are on MassDEP LUHPPL list.

The LUHPPL has the potential to generate runoff with moderate to higher concentrations of oil and grease (e.g. all parking lots with >1000 vehicle trips per day) and the treatment train includes an oil grit separator, a filtering bioretention area, a sand filter or equivalent.

Standard 6: Critical Areas

The discharge is near or to a critical area and the treatment train includes only BMPs that MassDEP has approved for stormwater discharges to or near that particular class of critical area.

Critical areas and BMPs are identified in the Stormwater Report.





Standard 7: Redevelopments and Other Projects Subject to the Standards only to the maximum extent practicable

The project is subject to the Stormwater Management Standards only to the maximum Extent Practicable as a:

Limited Project

Small Residential Projects: 5-9 single family houses or 5-9 units in a multi-family development provided there is no discharge that may potentially affect a critical area.

Small Residential Projects: 2-4 single family houses or 2-4 units in a multi-family development with a discharge to a critical area

Marina and/or boatyard provided the hull painting, service and maintenance areas are protected from exposure to rain, snow, snow melt and runoff

Bike Path and/or Foot Path

Redevelopment Project

Redevelopment portion of mix of new and redevelopment.

Certain standards are not fully met (Standard No. 1, 8, 9, and 10 must always be fully met) and an explanation of why these standards are not met is contained in the Stormwater Report.

The project involves redevelopment and a description of all measures that have been taken to improve existing conditions is provided in the Stormwater Report. The redevelopment checklist found in Volume 2 Chapter 3 of the Massachusetts Stormwater Handbook may be used to document that the proposed stormwater management system (a) complies with Standards 2, 3 and the pretreatment and structural BMP requirements of Standards 4-6 to the maximum extent practicable and (b) improves existing conditions.

Standard 8: Construction Period Pollution Prevention and Erosion and Sedimentation Control

A Construction Period Pollution Prevention and Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan must include the following information:

• Narrative; • Construction Period Operation and Maintenance Plan; • Names of Persons or Entity Responsible for Plan Compliance; • Construction Period Pollution Prevention Measures; • Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan Drawings; • Detail drawings and specifications for erosion control BMPs, including sizing calculations; • Vegetation Planning; • Site Development Plan; • Construction Sequencing Plan; • Sequencing of Erosion and Sedimentation Controls; • Operation and Maintenance of Erosion and Sedimentation Controls; • Inspection Schedule; • Maintenance Schedule; • Inspection and Maintenance Log Form.

A Construction Period Pollution Prevention and Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan containing the information set forth above has been included in the Stormwater Report.





Standard 8: Construction Period Pollution Prevention and Erosion and Sedimentation Control (continued)

The project is highly complex and information is included in the Stormwater Report that explains why it is not possible to submit the Construction Period Pollution Prevention and Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan with the application. A Construction Period Pollution Prevention and Erosion and Sedimentation Control has not been included in the Stormwater Report but will be submitted before land disturbance begins.

The project is not covered by a NPDES Construction General Permit.

The project is covered by a NPDES Construction General Permit and a copy of the SWPPP is in the Stormwater Report.

The project is covered by a NPDES Construction General Permit but no SWPPP been submitted. The SWPPP will be submitted BEFORE land disturbance begins.

Standard 9: Operation and Maintenance Plan

The Post Construction Operation and Maintenance Plan is included in the Stormwater Report and includes the following information:

Name of the stormwater management system owners;

Party responsible for operation and maintenance;

Schedule for implementation of routine and non-routine maintenance tasks;

Plan showing the location of all stormwater BMPs maintenance access areas;

Description and delineation of public safety features;

Estimated operation and maintenance budget; and

Operation and Maintenance Log Form.

The responsible party is not the owner of the parcel where the BMP is located and the Stormwater Report includes the following submissions:

A copy of the legal instrument (deed, homeowner’s association, utility trust or other legal entity) that establishes the terms of and legal responsibility for the operation and maintenance of the project site stormwater BMPs;

A plan and easement deed that allows site access for the legal entity to operate and maintain BMP functions.

Standard 10: Prohibition of Illicit Discharges

The Long-Term Pollution Prevention Plan includes measures to prevent illicit discharges;

An Illicit Discharge Compliance Statement is attached;

NO Illicit Discharge Compliance Statement is attached but will be submitted prior to the discharge of any stormwater to post-construction BMPs.

SDE Job No.: 15071 Date: 12/3/15Prepared by: RPBT Checked by: DCM

A B C D ETSS Removal Starting TSS Amount Remaining

BMP Rate Load* Removed (BxC) Load (C-D)Sediment Forebay 25.0% 1.000 0.250 0.750Oil/water separator 25.0% 0.750 0.188 0.563

0.563 0.000 0.5630.563 0.000 0.563

Total TSS Removal = 44%

* Equals remaining load from previous BMP (E) which enters the BMP

FOR REMOVAL RATE PRIOR TO ENTERING INFILTRATION SYSTEM

STORMWATER MANAGEMENTTSS REMOVAL CALCULATION WORKSHEET

10 B STREET


Area X in. of runoff1

Impervious Area sf cfTotal Impervious Area Excluding Roof 25,659 2,138

Total Volume = 2,138

Drainage Storage StructurePrimary Secondary Subtotal

Sediment Forebay 1,108 1,108Oil Water Separator 2,000 2,000

0

0

3,108 3,108

Note:

STORMWATER MANAGEMENTWATER QUALITY TREATMENT VOLUME CALCULATION WORKSHEET

10 B STREET

Treatment Storage Capacity( cf )

Total WQv Provided , (cf) =

1. Surface storage primary available water quality volume storage is based on volume below structures' lowest outlet excluding infiltration.


Hydrologic Group A B C D Total ReVTarget Runoff Depth Factor (Inches of Runoff) 0.60 0.35 0.25 0.10

Total Impervious Area, (sf) 25,659 0 0

X inches of runoff, (cf) 1,283 0 0 0 1,283

Total Recharge Volume Required, (cf) = 1,283

Soil Texture Class Loamy SandInfiltration Rate (inches / hour) 8.27

Structure AvailableStructure Recharged Volume, (cf) 6,798 Storage, (cf)

Underground Storage Chambers System 6,798

Total Recharge Volume Provided, (cf) = 0

Note:1. Infiltration rates are derived from the 1982 Rawls rates based on soil texture.2. Recharged volume are calculated utilizing Simple Dynamic Method : Automated3. Calculations are based on 2-Yr , 24-Hr storm event.

10 B STREET

STORMWATER MANAGEMENTSTORMWATER RECHARGE CALCULATION WORKSHEET

SHEET NO.

GZA GeoEnvironmental, Inc.

Engineers and Scientists

PREPARED BY:PREPARED FOR:

www.gza.com

PROJECT NO.DATE: REVISION NO.

DESIGNED BY:

PROJ MGR:

DRAWN BY:

REVIEWED BY: CHECKED BY:

SCALE:

PHASE I AND II ESA

10 B STREET, BURLINGTON, MA

SITE PLAN WITH EXPLORATION LOCATIONS

REMF CORP.

60 WELLS AVENUE, SUITE 100

NEWTON, MA

6/26/2015 18.0172305.00

FIG

2

MLS

MLS

CDC

AJK

FSV

AS SHOWN

GZ-

N

S

EW

0 25 50 100

SCALE IN FEET

APPROXIMATE

PROPERTY BOUNDARY

T

T

GZ-5

GZ-6

GZ-4

GZ-2

GZ-1

GZ-3

APPROXIMATE

LOCATION OF CUT IN

CONCRETE FLOOR

GZ-7

GZ-

APPROXIMATE

REVISED POOL

LOCATION

GZ-8

GZ-

GZ-

GZ-10

GZ-9

48

48

48

Cuttings 0-12'

1" PVC Screen0-10'

1

2

3

4

0-4

4-8

8-12

'

'

0.2'

12'

ND

ND

ND

S-1

S-2

S-3

36

48

48

S-1: S-1: Dry, brown, fine tomedium SAND, little Gravel,trace Silt, trace Asphalt.

S-2: S-2: Wet, grey, fine tomedium SAND, trace Gravel,trace Silt.

S-3: S-3: Wet, brown, fine tomedium SAND, trace Silt.

Bottom of boring at 12 feet.

ASPHALT

SAND

1. Field testing results represent total organic vapor levels, referenced to a benzene standard, measured in the headspace of sealed soilsample jars using a MiniRae 3000 organic vapor meter equipped with a photoionization detector (PID) and 10.6eV lamp. Results in partsper million by volume (ppmv). ND indicates nothing detected (<0.1 ppmv).

2. Soil sample for analysis from 3-4' bgs.3. Saturated soils +/- 5' bgs.4. Well removed, boring backfilled with cuttings to surface and patched to match surroundings.

Other:

Macrocore

Boring Location:

0935 5.75

DPTDrilling Method:

Geoprobe 6620 DT

Type of Rig: Track

Sampler Type:I.D./O.D (in.): 2"/3"Sampler Hmr Wt: 05/11/2015

Stab. TimeTime Water DepthDate+/-1.0 hr.

Groundwater Depth (ft.)

Hammer Fall (in.):

Auger/Casing Type:

Final Boring Depth (ft.):Logged By:

Taylor GrenierForeman:

Sample

Hammer Weight (lb.):

125/11/2015 - 5/11/2015

H. Datum:

I.D./O.D.:

Drilling Co.: Geologic Earth Exploration, Inc.

V. Datum:Matt Steele

Equipment Installed

Macrocore

Ground Surface Elev. (ft.):

Date Start - Finish:

Rig Model:

Sampler Hmr Fall:Other:

See Plan

TEST BORING LOG

REMF Corp.10 B Street

Burlington, MA

Boring No.:GZ-118

.017

2305

.00.

GP

J; S

TA

ND

AR

D B

OR

ING

W/E

W/S

MP

L 2P

G; 6

/5/2

015

Pen.(in)

Depth(ft)

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

CasingBlows/CoreRate

SPTValue R

emar

k

RE

MA

RK

S


Blows(per 6 in.)

Depth(ft.)

BORING NO.: GZ-1SHEET: 1 of 1PROJECT NO: 18.0172305.00REVIEWED BY: Frank Vetere

Ele

v.(f

t)

Dep

th(f

t)

FieldTestData

No. Rec.(in)

GZAGeoEnvironmental, Inc.

Sample DescriptionModified Burmister

StratumDescription

See log key for explanation of sample descriptions and identification procedures. Stratification lines represent approximate boundaries between soil and bedrocktypes. Actual transitions may be gradual. Water level readings have been made at the times and under the conditions stated. Fluctuations of groundwater mayoccur due to other factors than those present at the times the measurements were made.

48

48

48

Cuttings 0-10'

1" PVC Screen0-10'

1

2

3

4

5

0-4

4-8

8-12

'

'

0.2'

12'

ND

ND

ND

S-1

S-2

S-3

32

48

48

S-1: S-1: Dry, brown, fine tomedium SAND, trace Gravel,trace Silt.

S-2: S-2: Wet, light brown, fineto medium SAND, trace Silt.

S-3: S-3: Wet, grey to brown,fine to medium SAND, traceSilt.


ASPHALT

SAND


2. Asphalt pavement at surface.3. Soil sample for analysis from 3-4' bgs.4. Saturated soils +/- 5' bgs.5. Well removed, boring backfilled with cuttings to surface and patched to match surroundings.

Other:

Macrocore

Boring Location:

1035 5.75

Drilling Method:

Geoprobe 6620 DT

Type of Rig: Track




Hammer Fall (in.):

Auger/Casing Type:



Sample


125/11/2015 - 5/11/2015

H. Datum:

I.D./O.D.:



Equipment Installed

Macrocore



Rig Model:


See Plan

TEST BORING LOG


Burlington, MA

Boring No.:GZ-218

.017

2305

.00.

GP

J; S

TA

ND

AR

D B

OR

ING

W/E

W/S

MP

L 2P

G; 6

/5/2

015

Pen.(in)

Depth(ft)

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15


SPTValue R

emar

k

RE

MA

RK

S


Blows(per 6 in.)

Depth(ft.)


Ele

v.(f

t)

Dep

th(f

t)

FieldTestData

No. Rec.(in)



StratumDescription


48

48

48

Cuttings 0-12'

1" PVC Screen0-10'

1

2

3

4

0-4

4-8

8-12

'

'

0.2'

12'

ND

ND

S-1

S-2

S-3

36

48

48

S-1: S-1: Dry, light brown, fineSAND, trace Gravel, trace Silt




ASPHALT

SAND


2. Asphalt at surface.3. Saturated soils +/- 5' bgs.4. Well removed, boring backfilled with cuttings to surface and patched to match surroundings.

Other:

Macrocore

Boring Location:

1148 6.36

Drilling Method:

Geoprobe 6620 DT

Type of Rig: Track




Hammer Fall (in.):

Auger/Casing Type:



Sample


125/11/2015 - 5/11/2015

H. Datum:

I.D./O.D.:



Equipment Installed

Macrocore



Rig Model:


See Plan

TEST BORING LOG


Burlington, MA

Boring No.:GZ-318

.017

2305

.00.

GP

J; S

TA

ND

AR

D B

OR

ING

W/E

W/S

MP

L 2P

G; 6

/5/2

015

Pen.(in)

Depth(ft)

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15


SPTValue R

emar

k

RE

MA

RK

S


Blows(per 6 in.)

Depth(ft.)


Ele

v.(f

t)

Dep

th(f

t)

FieldTestData

No. Rec.(in)



StratumDescription


S-1

1. Field testing results represent total organic vapor levels, referenced to a benzene standard, measured in the headspace of sealed soil sample jars using a MiniRae3000 organic vapor meter equipped with a photoionization detector (PID) and 10.6eV lamp. Results in parts per million by volume (ppmv). ND indicates nothingdetected (<0.1 ppmv).

2. +/-6" concrete at surface.3. Soil sample for analysis from 3-4' bgs.4. Saturated soils +/- 5' bgs.5. Boring backfilled with cuttings to surface and patched to match surroundings.

2-6

'

'

0.5'

6'

6060

1

2

3

4

5

S-1: Dry, brown, fine SAND, trace Silt.


CONCRETE

SAND

Drilling Method:


Type of Rig:

Macrocore

6

Other:

Boring Location:

Logged By:

See PlanH. Datum:

V. Datum:

CasingDate

Sample

Drilling Co.:

Sampler Hmr Wt (lb):

Sampler Hmr Fall (in):

Auger/Casing Type:

I.D/O.D.(in): I.D./O.D. (in.): Stab. TimeSampler Type:

05/11/2015

Time2"/3"

Ground Surface Elev. (ft.):Final Boring Depth (ft.):Date Start - Finish: 5/11/2015 - 5/11/2015

Water Depth

Track

Geoprobe 6620 DT

Macrocore


Hammer Fall (in.):

Other:

Rig Model:

Not Recorded

Geologic Earth Exploration, Inc.

Matt Steele


Depth(ft)

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

18.0

1723

05.0

0.G

PJ;

ST

RA

TU

M O

NLY

; 6/5

/201

5

Blows(per 6 in.)

Boring No.:GZ-4

No.


TEST BORING LOG


Burlington, MA

Depth(ft.)

See Log Key for explanation of sample description and identification procedures. Stratification lines represent approximate boundaries between soil and bedrocktypes. Actual transitions may be gradual. Water level readings have been made at the times and under the conditions stated. Fluctuations of groundwater mayoccur due to other factors than those present at the times the measurements were made.


FieldTestData E

lev.

(ft.)

Dep

th(f

t.)

RE

MA

RK

S


Rec.(in)

Pen.(in) R

emar

k

Sample Description and Identification(Modified Burmister Procedure)SPT

Value


StratumDescription

S-1


2. +/- 6" concrete at surface.3. Saturated soils +/- 5' bgs.4. Boring backfilled with cuttings to surface and patched to match surroundings.

3-6

'

'

0.5'

6'

6060

1

2

3

4

S-1A: 10" Dry, dark brown, fine SAND, trace Silt.S-1B: 50" Dry, brown, fine SAND, trace Silt.


CONCRETE

SAND

Drilling Method:


Type of Rig:

Macrocore

6

Other:

Boring Location:

Logged By:

See PlanH. Datum:

V. Datum:

CasingDate

Sample

Drilling Co.:



Auger/Casing Type:


05/11/2015

Time2"/3"


Water Depth

Track

Geoprobe 6620 DT

Macrocore


Hammer Fall (in.):

Other:

Rig Model:

Not Recorded


Matt Steele


Depth(ft)

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

18.0

1723

05.0

0.G

PJ;

ST

RA

TU

M O

NLY

; 6/5

/201

5

Blows(per 6 in.)

Boring No.:GZ-5

No.


TEST BORING LOG


Burlington, MA

Depth(ft.)



FieldTestData E

lev.

(ft.)

Dep

th(f

t.)

RE

MA

RK

S


Rec.(in)

Pen.(in) R

emar

k


Value


StratumDescription

S-1


2. +/- 6" concrete at surface.3. Soil sample for analysis from +/- 2-3' bgs.4. Saturated soils +/- 5' bgs.5. Boring backfilled with cuttings to surface and patched to match surroundings.

1-6

'

'

0.5'

6'

6060

1

2

3

4

5



CONCRETE

SAND

Drilling Method:


Type of Rig:

Macrocore

6

Other:

Boring Location:

Logged By:

See PlanH. Datum:

V. Datum:

CasingDate

Sample

Drilling Co.:



Auger/Casing Type:


05/11/2015

Time2"/3"


Water Depth

Track

Geoprobe 6620 DT

Macrocore


Hammer Fall (in.):

Other:

Rig Model:

Not Recorded


Matt Steele


Depth(ft)

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

18.0

1723

05.0

0.G

PJ;

ST

RA

TU

M O

NLY

; 6/5

/201

5

Blows(per 6 in.)

Boring No.:GZ-6

No.


TEST BORING LOG


Burlington, MA

Depth(ft.)



FieldTestData E

lev.

(ft.)

Dep

th(f

t.)

RE

MA

RK

S


Rec.(in)

Pen.(in) R

emar

k


Value


StratumDescription

S-1

S-2

S-3


2. Soil sample for analysis from +/- 2-3' bgs.3. Saturated soils +/- 5' bgs.4. Boring backfilled with cuttings to surface and patched to match surroundings.

0-4

4-8

8-12

'

'

1.2'

12'

36

48

48

48

48

48

1

2

3

4

S-1A: 14" Dry, brown, fine to coase SAND, little Gravel,little Silt, trace roots. (topsoil)S-1B: 22" Dry, grey, fine to medium SAND, trace Gravel,trace Silt.

S-2: Wet, grey, fine SAND, trace Silt.

S-3A: 36" Wet, grey, fine SAND, trace Silt.S-3B: 12" Wet, gray, fine to coarse SAND, trace Silt.


TOPSOIL

SAND

Drilling Method:


Type of Rig:

Macrocore

12

Other:

Boring Location:

Logged By:

See PlanH. Datum:

V. Datum:

CasingDate

Sample

Drilling Co.:



Auger/Casing Type:


05/11/2015

Time2"/3"


Water Depth

Track

Geoprobe 6620 DT

Macrocore


Hammer Fall (in.):

Other:

Rig Model:

Not Recorded


Matt Steele


Depth(ft)

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

18.0

1723

05.0

0.G

PJ;

ST

RA

TU

M O

NLY

; 6/5

/201

5

Blows(per 6 in.)

Boring No.:GZ-7

No.


TEST BORING LOG


Burlington, MA

Depth(ft.)



FieldTestData E

lev.

(ft.)

Dep

th(f

t.)

RE

MA

RK

S


Rec.(in)

Pen.(in) R

emar

k


Value


StratumDescription

0.2'

12'

48

48

48

S-1

S-2

S-3

36

48

48

1

2

3

4

S-1: Dry, brown, fine to medium

SAND, little Gravel, trace Silt.

S-2: Wet, brown, fine to medium

SAND, trace Silt.

S-3: Wet, brown, fine to medium

SAND, trace Silt.


ND

ND

ND

ND

Cuttings 0-12'

1" PVC Screen0-10'

'

'

TOPSOIL

SAND

0-4

4-8

8-12

1. Field testing results represent total organic vapor levels, referenced to a benzene standard, measured in the headspace of sealed soil sample jars using a MiniRae 3000 organic vapor meterequipped with a photoionization detector (PID) and 10.6eV lamp. Results in parts per million by volume (ppmv). ND indicates nothing detected (<0.1 ppmv).

2. Soil sample for analysis from 2-5 feet bgs.3. Saturated soils observed approximately 5 feet bgs.4. Well material removed, boring backfilled with cuttings.

2"/3"

Hmr Fall (in.):

Macrocore


Casing

Type of Rig:

V. Datum:

Hmr Weight (lb.):

Matt SteeleLogged By:

08/05/2015 5.6 out

Sample

Boring Location:Ground Surface Elev. (ft.):Final Boring Depth (ft.): 12Date Start - Finish: 8/5/2015 - 8/5/2015

out

Water Depth

5.6

Time

08/05/2015

Date

H. Datum:

Sampler Type:

I.D./O.D.:

Drilling Co.:

Equipment Installed

I.D./O.D (in.):Sampler Hmr Wt:

See Plan

Sampler Hmr Fall:

Other:


Rig Model:

Drilling Method:Damian Jacobs

Macrocore

Other:

Stab. Time

completion

Geoprobe 6620 DT

Track

Auger/Casing Type:

Foreman:

09301000 30 min.

Boring No.:GZ-8

Dep

th(f

t)


Pen.(in)No. Rec.

(in)

Depth(ft)

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

TEST BORING LOG

CasingBlows/CoreRate R

emar

k


FieldTestData

RE

MA

RK

S

Blows(per 6 in.)


18.0

1723

05.0

0.G

PJ;

ST

AN

DA

RD

BO

RIN

G W

/E W

/O S

MP

2P

G2;

8/1

4/20

15


Ele

v.(f

t)SPTValue

StratumDescription


Depth(ft.)


Burlington, MA

0.5'

5'

42S-1 30

1

2

3

45



ND

ND

'

'

CONCRETE

SAND

2-5


2. Approximate 6-inch concrete at surface.3. Hand hammer refusal approximate 4-feet bgs; boring advanced with hand auger.4. Hand auger refusal at 5-feet bgs.5. Boring backfilled with cuttings.

2"/3"

Hmr Fall (in.):

Macrocore


Casing

Type of Rig:

V. Datum:

Hmr Weight (lb.):


Sample


Water Depth

Encountered

Time

08/05/2015

Date

H. Datum:

Sampler Type:

I.D./O.D.:

Drilling Co.:

Equipment Installed


See Plan

Sampler Hmr Fall:

Other:


Rig Model:


Macrocore

Other:

Stab. Time

Geoprobe 6620 DT

Track

Auger/Casing Type:

Foreman:

Not

Boring No.:GZ-9

Dep

th(f

t)


Pen.(in)No. Rec.

(in)

Depth(ft)

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

TEST BORING LOG


emar

k


No Equipment Installed

FieldTestData

RE

MA

RK

S

Blows(per 6 in.)


18.0

1723

05.0

0.G

PJ;

ST

AN

DA

RD

BO

RIN

G W

/E W

/O S

MP

2P

G2;

8/1

4/20

15


Ele

v.(f

t)SPTValue

StratumDescription


Depth(ft.)


Burlington, MA

0.5'

6'

42S-1 28

1

2

3

45



ND

ND

'

'

CONCRETE

SAND

2-6


2. Approximate 6-inch concrete at surface.3. Hand hammer refusal approximate 4-feet bgs; boring advanced with hand auger.4. Hand auger completed at approximately 6-feet bgs.5. Boring backfilled with cuttings.

2"/3"

Hmr Fall (in.):

Macrocore


Casing

Type of Rig:

V. Datum:

Hmr Weight (lb.):


Sample


Water Depth

Encountered

Time

08/05/2015

Date

H. Datum:

Sampler Type:

I.D./O.D.:

Drilling Co.:

Equipment Installed


See Plan

Sampler Hmr Fall:

Other:


Rig Model:


Macrocore

Other:

Stab. Time

Geoprobe 6620 DT

Track

Auger/Casing Type:

Foreman:

Not

Boring No.:GZ-10

Dep

th(f

t)


Pen.(in)No. Rec.

(in)

Depth(ft)

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

TEST BORING LOG


emar

k


No Equipment Installed

FieldTestData

RE

MA

RK

S

Blows(per 6 in.)


18.0

1723

05.0

0.G

PJ;

ST

AN

DA

RD

BO

RIN

G W

/E W

/O S

MP

2P

G2;

8/1

4/20

15


Ele

v.(f

t)SPTValue

StratumDescription


Depth(ft.)


Burlington, MA

PROPOSED SYSTEMINSPECTION PORT (TYP)

PROPOSEDNYLOPLASTCLEANOUT DMH

Documents

SITE DESIGN ENGINEERING, LLC. - Burlington, MA Report10BStreet.pdf · SITE DESIGN ENGINEERING, LLC. 11 Cushman Street, Middleboro, MA 02346 P: 508-967-0673 F: 508-967-0674 INTRODUCTION