139 Letters 1998-2005'._B. Hatch n liana Enai m.
Munn Road,Monson,Massachusetts 01057 (4132673596)
February 23, 1998
Mr. Karl Kuehner
Southampton Sanitary Engineering Corp.
168 County Road
Southampton,MA 01073
Re: 139 Westhampton Road
Northampton, MA
Dear Mr. Kuehner:
As requested, this is our letter report regarding the brief investigation we conducted
today at the referenced site. The subject of this report is the high groundwater at the lift
pump chamber which is located between the septic tank and soil absorption system for the
home located at the referenced site.
Our observations of the site conditions and current situation include:
1. The soil absorption system was reconstructed about six years ago,which included
leaving the septic tank in the front of the house, installing a lift pump chamber in
front of the house westerly of the septic tank.
2. The new absorption system was necessary because the absorption system was
located in the front yard of the house near the septic tank and that absorption
system was found to fail by means of discharge to the ground surface and
collection at the culvert crossing Westhampton Road.
3. Last week the level of the groundwater in the vicinity of the pump pit and septic
tank was so high that the tank and/or pump pit that water began flowing over the
top of the units, filling the units.
4. Water was found to be ponding in the back yard of the house last week as well
To remedy this situation,ideally a new septic tank and relocation of the pump chafnber
would be proposed for construction in fill,above the existing high groundwater. This option
would also require changing the plumbing inside the house. This option is considered to be
likely more costly than the homeowner is willing to bear.
We are therefore proposing that the soil around the pump pit removed,filter fabric be
placed against the excavation sidewall then placement of 1!/z" washed stone. The stone
collection should be constructed as low as possible, running with a collection pipe from the
pump pit area to the culvert crossing Westhampton Road.
.P. B. Hatch
We also propose that the existing 900 gallon septic tank be removed and replaced with
a 1500 gallon tank meeting current 310 CMR 15.000 criteria. A new tank is necessary to be
sure there is no leakage from the tank to the stone installed around the pump pit. If there is
any leakage from the septic tank or pipe connecting the tank to the pit or the pump pit itself,
then an unacceptable discharge to the culvert of septage can be expected.
If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to call.
Very truly yours,
Paul B. Hatch, PE
00025801
DARD OF HEALTH
MEMBERS
OHN T.JOYCE,Chairman
ANNE BURES,M.D.
4THIA DOURMASHHIN,R.N.
R J.McERLAIN,Health Agent
(413)587-1214
FAX(413)587-1204
[EMO
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
CITY OF NORTHAMPT • N
MASSACHUSETTS 01060
OFf ICE OF THE
BOARD OF HEALTH
Paulette Kuzdeba,Northampton Co •` tion Co
Peter McErlain,Health Agent
February 25, 1998
Emergency Septic System Repair 139 Westhampto
„ 1
This memo will confirm that a sewage disposal emergency exists
Labbee at 139 Westhampton Rd. In order to complete repairs to a
&pump chamber at that address, it will be necessary to divert gro
part of the septic.system. The septic tank will be replaced and the
sealed to prevent the infiltration of the ground water,which was c
operation/failure. This work must be completed as soon as possibl
total failure of the leaching system. Ground water will be diverted from around the septic
tank and pump chamber and piped to a nearby culvert on the city adway lay out.
ssion
Road
210 MAIN STREET
NORTHAMPTON,MA 01080
n the property of Michael
oodeddeaking septic tank
d water away from that
ump chamber will then be
using excessive pump
to prevent flooding and
Southampton Sanitary Engineering will do the repair work.
Please feel free to contact me with any questions about this matte
Thank you.
cc: Southampton Sanitary Engineering
1.
COMMONWEALTH O OF MASsACRUSETTS
DEPARTMENT OF PROTECTION
NT
WETLANDS PROTECTION ACT
M.G.L. C.131 $40
310 CHIT 10.00
CERTIFICATION OF EMERGENCY
CATION OF MORE: street:
60 es' / ■«
city/town:
. The applicant hereby requests the Issuing Authority (Conservation
:oa owingn or the Department of Environmental(ld scribetwork to be allowed,n
rttach su project
nt as an emergency project:
attach supplemental information if more space is aeeded� � !' ..
n
�. .
T i Cyr,/i2 '
2. The necessary tec fi cth° h°'1� aOd °II for the
the citizens of thecoamoealth becauseI -
1 ti
d Arov, % a. r J7iSC he.- To
To-sc
)
In✓a .at has ar//Tdyr-."`.
3. The project to (or subdivision foreis thereof) of the Commonwealth that has o�ered
the project to be performed is:
e-, /r4
4, No work shall be allowed beyond that necessary to }mate the emergency.
The date work shall be com aetof by: '" "
__/ ,> , qG7 Not to exceed 30
days without written ap al of the Commissioner of the Department of
Environme al yj.tact' • (• 1 •
J
, r"/ %i add/
(si ature of applicant)
on the basis of the above information s, a ansitte inspection,provided)nd after a the
described above (and in any supplemental
determined to be a certified emergency pursuant to 310 CMA 10.06.
ISSUING AUTHORITY:
>1
(date)
RE:
(Conservation Commission or DEP)
❑ (If box is checked, see attached conditions)
Date Issued:
(Effective 8/14/92)
James A. Gracia, PE
99 Gladale Strut
Easthampton,MA 01027
(4131527-5290
May 5, 2005
Emest Mathieu,Health Agent
Northampton Board of Health
City Hall
Northampton, MA 01060
Re: Septic System Upgrade
139 Westhampton Road
Dear Mr. Mathieu:
Attached are copies of a plan entitled Septic System Upgrade,dated 5-05-05,prepared for Eric
and Tracy Indyk of 139 Westhampton Road,Northampton. As you are aware, during the soil
evaluation at this property, a percolation test was not able to be performed due to saturated soils
in the area to be used for the new leaching system. For this reason, we have chosen to utilize the
DEP policy which allows for an alternative method to be used to determine the percolation rate
(Policy#BRP/DWM/PeP-P00-4). This letter report will document how we have satisfied the
various requirements of this policy.
On April 8, 2005, Soil Evaluator Dennis Lacourse performed soil evaluations at the subject
property. Percolation tests were attempted,but were rendered ineffective due to the wet
conditions. Mr. Lacourse proceeded to take soil samples from each of the two test pits. The
samples were taken at different depths within the"C"Layer. The soil samples were later taken to
the University of Massachusetts Soil &Plant Nutrient Testing Lab for a sieve analysis. The
results of the particle size analysis are included in the addendum to this letter report. At the time
of the soil evaluation, Soil Evaluator Lacourse made the determination that the soils were un-
compacted. His letter stating that determination is also included in the addendum. If you agree
that the soils were un-compacted, a letter from you stating your agreement will be required as
part of the documentation to be submitted to DEP for approval of this process.
Based on the lab analysis, the soil type was found to be silt loam. A copy of the USDA Soil
Textural Triangle is included which shows the particle size fractions for each sample,both of
which fall within the Silt Loam category. Based on the soil type, the soil class has been
determined to be Type III soil.
139 Westhampton Road
May 5, 2005
Page 2 of 2
The plan submitted has been designed in accordance with all of the criteria set forth in the DEP
policy as follows:
1. Effluent loading rate used for design purposes is 0.15 gals/day per sq. ft., equivalent to a
percolation rate of 60 minutes per inch.
2. A pressure distribution system has been designed for this property.
3. A four foot vertical separation above the high groundwater elevation has been provided.
The soil test resulted in less than 85% sand particles,therefore, a five foot separation is
not required.
4. A minimum of four feet of naturally occurring pervious soil exists on this site, as shown
on the soil logs prepared by Soil Evaluator Lacourse.
5. A fully sized SAS has been designed, baed on the 0.15 GPD/SF loading rate.
6. There are no requests for reductions of separation above groundwater, or thickness of
naturally occurring pervious soil, or of the required SAS size, therefore, a modified septic
tank is not be required
7. Upon approval of this variance and system design by DEP, a notice shall be recorded
with the deed which prohibits any future increase in design flow and references DEP's
approval letter.
Included in the addendum of this letter are calculations illustrating the dosing system and
leaching system sizing, laboratory soil analysis results,the soil evaluation report, the letter from
Soil Evaluator Dennis Lacourse indicating that the soil was un-compacted, and a completed
variance application form (BRPWP 59b). Proof of approval of this variance by the City of
Northampton is required prior to approval by DEP.
If you have any questions concerning the system design or any portion of the variance process,
please call me at your earliest convenience. The sale of this property is currently on hold
pending the outcome of this variance procedure and subsequent upgrade of the system, therefore,
we respectfully request that the approval process be moved along as quickly as possible to avoid
any further complications with the sale of the property. Your cooperation will be greatly
appreciated.
Yours truly,
Jaynes A. Gracia,PE
Enc.
Eric&Tracy Indyk
ames A. Gracia,PE
9 GlenialeSz>394 Earl znptoz MA 01027
r 25 05 02: OOp Easthampton Board OF Heal 413
Opr 18 05 06: 32a Umess Soil Testing ' 41354515
31
Soil cad Pint Nutrient T tirzgLab
Roe!Expoime*SFAon
University ofMsatarle ttas
Amber,MA 01003
413.5442611
inamOvemmumass.cduipbeililsoilial
Customer Name
In:FDPAL A ALYSSS RESDLTS
AAA Environmantal
233 Park St
Eaathaupto^• PIA 0102':
Sample ZD: 61314-1
Curtner Designation
CSDA SIZE PRACTICES
sct ?it 1
04/'14%05
PMRCTITT CP COI= SAMPL6 4ASSTES
Hain Fr-ctions Size 2mm) Percent
Si-. rm,i Sie,,e
Sand 0.05-2.0 32.0
Silt 0.002-3.05 61.4
Clay c 0.002 e.5
Tonal a 2.3 1oC.0
Sand Frec)icrE Size Men) Per-en- 2.00 410
2.00 59.6
Very Coarse 1.0-2.0 C.SJ *35 9e.4
Coarse 1.4 54.6
0.5-1.0 3.5 0.25 460
Medium 5-0.5 5.1 29.5
Fine 0.10-0.25 8.>'
Very Fine 0.05-0.10 11.1
0.20 ^'s-40 80.9
30.0 0.05 4270 53.2
0.02 20 um 45.'
Slat Prac]ions Size inm:J Percent
0.0D5 5 um 14.4
0.002 gum
e.6
Medium .005-0.05 24.2
Finen 0.005-0.02 31.4
Fine 0.002-0.005 5.9
61.4
USO?s Textural Class = sii- 1c--
Gravel Content = 0.22
CONR•^._RFS:
p. 1
P. 3
9pr 18 05 O6: 32a
tasthampton Board Of Heal 413
Umass Sail Testing
Soil and Plant Nebient Taming Lab
west Repairers Stalks
UaivesryorMaaadmekk
1 26A 01003
413-545.2311
2311
htSmasansursass.Hriplsoasteallkst
Cratemer sane:
TEXTUPAL ANALYSIS 3ESLZTS
PAa 3triron2ectal
23B ?ark St
Easthampton, MA 31027
Sample ID: 61314-2
Customer Designation: Test 22r 2
USDA SIZE FEACI'OPS
Main Fractions Size (mm) ?eroeC-
sard c.05-2.0 27.2
Silt 0.002-0.05 6_c,
5
Clay
c 0.002 6.5
Total c 2.0 200.0
Sat Fractiots Size (mm) Percent
Very Coarse 1.0-2.0 2.4
Coarse 0.5-1.0 3.0
Helium 0.25-0.5 3.3
Fine 0.10-0.25 6.5
Very F ne 0.05-0.10 11.2
27.2
Silt Fractions Sire ism) Percent
Coarse 0.02-0.05 31.8
`tedium 0.005-0.02 29.7
F±ne C.202-..005 4.6
66.2
4135451931 . p. 2
04/:4305
?EP ENT CF PROLE SAMPLE t.Ec_NC
Size (nm)
Sieve 8 S
2.00
1.O0 0 95.4
#35 93.1
0.50
#35 90.2
0.25 460
26.5
0._0 #140
80.2
0.05 #270
69.5
0.02
0.005 20 um 39.
0.002 5 tun 16.2 7
2 ssr. 6.2
USDA Textural Class = silt loam
Gravel Content = 4.61
CDnmis.
p. 2
a.6
L,6
310 CMR-DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
15.243: Tvoes of Soil Textural Classes
0
(1) The following soil textural classes apply to soil types which they are composed:
CLASS I Sands,Loamy Sands
CLASS II Sandy Loam,L.oams
CLASS ID Silty Loam
CLASS IV Clays,Silty Clay Loam
(2) Textural Classifications are made based on the relative proportion of sand, silt and clay in
the soils and in accordance with the following textural triangle:
ti
0
SOIL TEXTURAL TRIANGLE
80
� S
. aw,a
. A
Saniannagree
ran. a 21 aIrSA �af®e�
4
66.2
20
cro
percent sand
csr,97--0`2
7237 /97-*/
S4IU yx s0>- kv.94 Y 51s
4-- i41lo�
12/1/95 (Effective 11/3/95)-corrected
310 CMR-526
Easthampton Board Of Heal 413
p. 1
AAA ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTING
238 Park Street
Easthampton MA. 01027
Tel. 413 527-7861/Fax 413 527-7862
April 8,2005
Northampton Board of Health
Main Street
Northampton MA. 01060
RE: 139 Westhampton Road, Northampton MA. 01060
Dear Board,
We were unable to obtain a pert test at the above mentioned location due to
infiltrating water into the pert testing holes. The soils were uncompacted and dug very
easily. These soils were extremely saturated with water. This was witnessed by the
Health Agent at the time of the attempted pere testing. Should you have any other
quesdens please feel free to contact me.
Respectfully,
is R'Lacourse`"t2
ortant
:n filling out
s on The
outer.use
the tab key
we your
-do not
le return
ID
Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection
Bureau of Resource Protection —Title 5 Permitting
BRP WP 59b
DEP Approval of Variance
Granted by Board of Health
W063792
Transmittal#
Facility ID Of known)
Please read the Instructions and Supporting Materials before filling out this form.
This permit application is necessary for all variances granted by Board of Health,
except variances for increased flow to existing systems.
A. General Information
1. Applicant:
Eric 8 Tracy Indyk
Name
139 Westham.ton Road
Street Address
Northam on
City/Town
413-585-9442
Telephone
MA
State
2. Facility/Proposed System Address (if different from Applicant):
Same
Address
01060
Zip Code
City/Town
State
p Code
3. System Designer Information (Registered Sanitarian (RS)or Professional Engineer(PE)for systems
under 2,000 gallons per day, PE for systems 2,000 gallons or more per day):
James A. Gracia, PE
Name
99 Glendale Street Name of Company
Address
Eastham.ton MA
City/Town 01027
State Zip Code
413-527-5290
Telephone
4. Registration:
Civil
Massachusetts Registered P.E.
Massachusetts Registered Sanitarian
29701
Registration Number
oc•rev.7/01
Wp59c•Page 1 of 4
Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection
i Bureau of Resource Protection—Title 5 Permitting
BRP WP 59b
DEP Approval of Variance
Granted by Board of Health
A. General Information (coot.)
5. Is the proposed system part of a project requiring a filing under 301 CMR 11.00, the Massachusetts
Environmental Policy Act? ❑Yes
® No
If yes, has a filing been made? ❑Yes
❑No
W063792
Transmittal#
Facility ID(if known)
If yes.EOEA File#
6. The legal entity that owns or will own this facility is:
Z Individual
❑ Federal
❑ Other
❑ Municipality
❑State/Country
❑ Private Partnership
❑Corporation
Specify
Name
Address
Telephone
7. Two complete sets of plans and specifications, (four for submittals to the Springfield Office), including
a locus map, properly stamped and signed by a Massachusetts Registered Professional Engineer or
Massachusetts Registered Sanitarian, must accompany the application.
Are plans and specifications attached? ®Yes
❑ No
6. Z Variance(s)from the following Title 5 provision(s)is/are being sought:
Alternative to Percolation Testing -DEP Policy#BRP/DWM/PeP-P00-4
9. A letter of approval for the variance, issued by the Board of Health having jurisdiction over the
system, must be attached.
Is the approval letter attached?
doc•rev. 7/01
® Yes ❑ No
Wp59c-Page 2 of 4
Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection
Bureau of Resource Protection—Title 5 Permitting
BRP WP 59b
DEP Approval of Variance
Granted by Board of Health
W063792
Transmittal#
Facility ID(if known)
A. General Information (cont.)
10. If applying for approval of a variance that requires notification of abutters under 310 CMR 15.411, a
copy of the notification sent to the abutters and proof of notice must accompany this application.
Is a copy and proof of the notification attached? ❑Yes ® No
11. In accordance with 310 CMR 15.410, the applicant must establish that the strict enforcement
of the provision of the Code for which the variance is being sought would be manifestly unjust
and that a level of environmental protection that is at least equivalent to that provided under
the Code can be achieved without strict application of the particular provision.
Is documentation in support of meeting these requirements attached?
® Yes ❑ No
You must complete the following:
iap_dog•rev. 7/01
a) I have established that enforcement of the provision from which a variance is sought
would be manifestly unjust,considering all of the relevant facts and circumstance of this
case, as follows(attach additional sheets if necessary):
Since a percolation test could not be performed due to saturated soils in the area to be used for a
new SAS, an upgraded system could not be designed. Without an upgraded septic system, the
subject dwelling could not be sold. The pending agreement to purchase the property will be void if an
approved system is not provided within 30 days, therefore,the owners, Eric and Tracy Indyk,will
suffer financial harm due to denial of this variance.
b) I have established that a level of environmental protection that is at least equivalent to
that provided under 310 CMR 15.000 can be achieved without strict application of the
provision(s)from which I am seeking a variance, as follows (attach additional sheets if
necessary):
A level of environmental protection, above that provided under 310 CMR 15.000, will be provided due
to the more stringent requirements set forth in the DEP policy as it applies to this situation. If an
actual percolation rate could have been obtained, it is likely that the system design would be less
involved than is currently proposed. A local upgrade approval for reduction of 4'separation above
groundwater would be requested,which would result in a smaller volume of Title 5 sand be needed.
As a result, this variance will create a higher level of environmental protection.
Wp59c•Page 3 of 4
1 .Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection
P Bureau of Resource Protection-Title 5 Permitting
1 BRPWP59b
DEP Approval of Variance
Granted by Board of Health
W063792
Transmittal 51
Facility ID Of kno
A. General Information (cont.)
12. is the variance requested for new construction as"new construction" is defined in 310 CMR
15.002?
❑ Yes ® No
If yes, you must complete the following:
I have established that enforcement of the provision from which a variance is sought would
deprive me of substantially all beneficial use of the subject property as follows (attach additional
13. Is a copy of the complete application that was submitted to the Board of Health attached?
ZYes ❑ No
B. Certification
"I certify under penalty of law that this document
and all attachments,to the best of my
knowledge and belief, are true, accurate, and
complete. I am aware that there are significant
penalties for submitting false information,
including the possibility of fine and imprisonment
for knowing violations."
kap.doc•rev.7/01
C
Applicant's signature
Eric Indy<
Print Name
James A. Gracia, PE
Name of Preparer
5-05-05
Date
Wp59c•Page 4 of 4
BOARD OF HEALTH OFFICE OF THE
MEMBERS
OSEMARIE KARPARIS,R.N.,MPH
INTHI SCRIMGEDUR,MHEd,CHES
JAY FLEITMAN,M.D.
STAFF
test J.Mathieu,R.S.,M.S.,C.H.O.
Director of Public Health
rd Meczywor,R.S.,Sanitary Inspector
icia Abbott,R.N.,Public Health Nurse
Madeline Heon,Clerk
May 6, 2005
BOARD OF HEALTH
CITY OF NORTHAMPTON
MASSACHUSETTS 01060
Paul Nietupski, Title 5 Program
Department of Environmental Protection
Western Regional Office
436 Dwight Street
Springfield, MA 01103
212 MAIN STREET
NORTHAMPTON,MA 01060
(413)587-1214
FAX(413)587-1221
Re: Title 5 Variance Request—Alternative Percolation Test - 139 Westhampton Road, Northampton
Dear Mr. Nietupski:
The Northampton Board of Health has received a request, submitted on behalf of Mr. Eric Indyk of 139
Westhampton Road, Northampton, MA, by James Gracia, P.E., for a variance to allow the use of the Title 5
Alternative to Percolation test for repair of a failed septic system at 139 Westhampton Road,Northampton,
per Policy# BRP/DWM/Pep-P00-4. The request included reports from the University of Massachusetts
Soil and Plant Tissue Testing Laboratory and septic system design plans from James Gracia, P.E..
The Board of Health hereby grants a variance and accepts the alternative percolation tests results,which
would allow the repair of the septic system at this location based on the laboratory test data and disposal
system design submitted by Mr. Gracia. I concur that the soil (C-Horizon) is un-compacted and that the
loading rate for this soil class is 0.15 Gals./Day/S.F.
Per Policy# BRP/DWM/Pep-P00-4 this variance is subject to DEP review and approval. hi review of the
proposed plan it appears the meet all of the requirements of Title 5. Therefore, the Board of Health hereby
grants the variance and approves of the plan and will issue the Disposal Works Construction Permit to the
owner subject to the approval of the D.E.P.
Please feel free to contact me at the Northampton Board of Health at 587-1214 with any questions
concerning this matter. Thank you.
Ernest J. Mathieu, R.S., M.S., C.H.O.
Director of Public Health
cc: Mr. Eric Indyk, 139 Westhampton Road,Northampton
James Gracia, P.E.
Pressure Dosing System Design: Total Daily Flow= 330 Gals
Network: 11/4 ' Dia. Distribution Laterals spaced at 5' on center
Laterals to be 37.5' long on either side of a center manifold
Total Lateral length = 75'
Orifices to be " diameter, spaced at 5' on center
Lateral Discharge Rate: For " diameter orifice at 2.5' in line pressure, Q= 0.29 GPM =.
16 Orifices per lateral x 0.29 GPM=4.64 GPM per lateral
Total Lateral Discharge Rate: 4.64 GPM/lateral x 6 laterals = 27.84 Gals/Min.
Manifold Size: 3" Diameter Manifold required, use 3" PVC for Center Manifold ..
Dosing volume: 6 laterals, 75 long x 11/4" diameter
4 78 gallons per lateral x 6 laterals= 28.7 gallons in laterals
28.7 x 5 = 143 gallons 28 7 gals x 10 = 287 gallons
Dose at 150 gallons per dose
Drain-back volume: Manifold, 25' long x 3" diameter = 9 gallons in manifold
Force Main, 160 LF x 2" diameter=26 gallons in force main
Drain-back volume =35 Gallons
Added to Dosing Volume for Pump Cycle Volume = 185 Gallons
Minimum Discharge Rate =4 64 GPM/Lateral x 6 Laterals = 27.8 GPM
Total Friction Loss: Force Main, 160 LF x 2" diameter PVC = 1.6 feet
Manifold, 25' long x 3" diameter PVC = 0.4 feet
Network Losses = 1.31 x 2.5' = 3.3 feet
Total Friction Loss = 5.3 feet
1
Total Head Loss: Static Head = 16'
Total Friction Loss = 5.3 feet Total Head Loss =21.3' (Use 22')
**Based on Tables in "Title 5 Pressure Distribution Design Guidance"
Pump Selection: Pump should pump 28 GPM @ 22' TDH
Recommended Pump: Meyers Submersible Effluent Pump
Model WHRE5, 9= HP
Leaching System Design:
3 Bedroom Dwelling (no Garbage Disposal): 110 GPD/Bdrm= 330 GPD Daily Flow Rate
Minimum Design Capacity Required: 330 GPD
Leach Field Area: 30' wide x 80' long = 2400 SF
Leach Field Design Capacity: 2400 SF x 0.15 GPD/SF = 360 Gals/Day
Design Capacity Provided: 360 Gals/Day
7
310 CMR-DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
15,243: T es of Soil Textural Classes
(1) The following soil textural classes apply to soil types which they are composed:
CLASS I Sands,Loamy Sands
CLASS II Sandy Loams,Loams
CLASS III Silty Loams
CLASS IV Clays,Silty Clay Loams
(2) Textural Classifications are made based on the relative proportion of sand, silt and clay in
the soils and in accordance with the following textural triangle:
SOIL TEXTURAL TRIANGLE
8.6
50
60
80
100
91•
70 AS
Al.a.
AIMS a
A^
\ n
c5
40
0
3
-aVi
sa, le TAW ATAW4-
'
6b,2
20
0
ArolL TiS FAIVA rt:►.arm
percent sand
--ii-sr Ar- a
-12-3 /87-4/
34/P y . 5o n-1- 41/.94 /.s/s
461106
12/1/95 (Effective 11/3/95)-corrected
310 CMR-526
?5 05 02: OOp Easthampton Board Of Heal 413
r41B 05 06:32a
Umass Soil Testing 4135451931
Soil and Plan:NuMent Testing Lab
Was!Experiment Station
I nivcnilyofMessadtuxta
AnheA,MA 01003
413.545.2311
mt p://wm•.umass.cdu/ptsui1dsaiIIat
Customer Name
TEXTURAL ANALYSIS RESULTS
AAA Environmental
233 Part St.
Easthampton, MA 0102'
Sample ID: 61314-1
Customer Designation.: Test it 1
04/1.4/D5
p. 1
USDA SI2_ FRACTIONS PERCENT CF 'COLE SAMPLE PASSING
Main Fractions Size (mm) Percent Sire (mmi Sieve #
Sand 0.05-2.0 30.0
Silt 0.002-3.05 61.4
Clay c 0.032 8.5
Total < 2.3 100.0
2.00 RZ0 99.8
Sand ?racticas Size (1w) Percent 1_00 #18 99.4
0.50 435 54.9
Very Coarse 1.0-2.0 1.4 n 25 #60 d9.5
Coarse 0.5-1.0 3.'a
Medium 0.25-0.5 5.1
Fine 0.10-0.25 8.5 0.10 8140 80.9
Very Fine 0.05-0.10 11.1
0.05 #270 59.2
30.D
0.02 20 um 45.7
0.005 5 um 14.4
Silt Fractions Size ism) Percent 0.002 2 um 8.5
Coarse
Medium
Fine
0.02-0.05
0.005-0.02
0.002-0.005
24.2
31.4
5.9
61.4
US:N Textural Class = silt loam
Gravel Content = 0.2% CUMeEMTS:
p. 3
?5 05 02: 00p Easthampton Board Of Heal 413
r 18 05 06: 32a Unties Soil Testirs 4135451931
Sod and Plant Metrit&Testing Jab
West Expen:ra4 St¢tinn
Uaivesity of Masaaelmseda
Amhast,MA 0t003
413.54523❑
htp&Mvw.an¢5.alo'plwiia/wilteat
TEXTUAL ANA1YSIS RESULTS
C::atoner Same: FAA. Environmental
230 ?ark St
3 aethampton, MP. 31027
Sample ID: 61314-2
easterner Designation: Test Pct 2
04/14%05
p. 2
USDA SIZE FRACT_CNS PERCENT OF W}(OLE SAMPLE ?ASS iNG
Main Fraction= Size (mm) Percent Size (mm) Sieve 0 5
Sand
Silt
Clay
Total
C.05-2.0
0.002-0.05
s 0.002
27.2
66.2
6.6
2.0 100.0
2.0.0 410
Sand Fractions Size (mm) Percent 1.0.0 4415
0.50 835
Very Coarse 2.0-2.0 2.4
Coarse 0.5-1,C 3.0 0.25 A6:
Medium 0.25-D.5 3.9
Fine 0.:0-0.25 6.6 0.10 0140
Very Fine 0.05-0.10 11.2
0.05 0270
27.2
0.02 20 um
0.00E 5 um
SLlt Pr etlone Size (mm) Percent - 0.002 2 um
Coarse C.02-0.05 31.6
Xedlum 0.005-0.02 29.7
Fine 0.002-0.005 4.6
66.2
USDA Textural Class - silt loam
Gravel Content = 4.6% COMMTT6:
95.4
93.1
90.2
26.5
80.2
69.5
39.1
10.9
6.2
p. 2
Depth of Naturally Occurring Pervious Material
>at least four feet of naturally occurring pervious material exist in all areas observed throughout the area proposed
he sal absorption system?X Yes ❑ No
t,what is the depth of naturally occurring pervious material?
On Site Review
Date:4/8/05
Hole Number,#ONE
tion(identify on site plan):
•
LAWN
Time:1:00 P.M. Weather.CLEAR
Landfomr GROUND MORAINE
Sboe(%):1 Surface Stones(%):0
ince from:
Open Water Body:
400+
Feet
Drainage Way:
50
Feet
Possible Wet Area:
400+
Feet
Property Line:
50'
Feet
Drinking Water Well:
CITY
Feet
Other
10YR 3/2
10YR 4/6
2.5Y 512
Feet
Deep Observation Hole Log One
)epth From
dace(Inches)
Soil
Horizon
Soil Texture
(USDA)
Soil Color
(Monet)
Soil Mottling
Other(structure,stones,boulders,
consistency,%gravel)
0 TO 5
6 TO 12
12 TO 110
A
Bw
C
S/L
S/L
SILT/LOAM
10YR 312
10YR 4/6
2.5Y 5/2
5%AT
12'
2.5Y 5th
2.5Y 414
FIRM,ROOTS GRANULAR
LOOSE,ROOTS,GRANULAR
FIRM,BLOCKY,FINE SILT LOAM,
LESS 5%GRAVEL
Deep Observation Hole Log Two
0 TO 10
10 TO 14
12 TO 120
A
Bw
C
S/L
SIL
SILT/LOA
M
10YR 3/2
10YR 4/6
2.5Y 512
5%AT
12'
2.5Y 511
2.5Y 414
FIRM,ROOTS,GRANULAR
LOOSE,ROOTS,GRANULAR
FIRM,BLOCKY,FINE SILT LOAM,
LESS 5%GRAVEL
"ent Material(geologic):
pth to Groundwater Standing Water in the Hole:90"/110"
Depth to Bedrock: 110"1 120"
Estimated Seasonal High Ground Water. 12"/12" Weeping from Ph Face. 16 120
rtiflcation
:rtify that on //�rs (date) I have passed the sod evaluator examination approved by the Massachusetts
mrtment of Enviranr: da)Protection and that the above analysis was performed by me consistent with the required training,
ertise and exile sNce describe in 310 CMR 15.017r
'nature: /7 -- = f ': " _ Date C, e,-7-'Jrs
AAA ENVIKUNMtN 1 At.t.vnauu mta
238 Park Street
Easthampton. MA 01027
Te1.414-527-7861(Fax 413527-7862
Site Suitability for On-site Sewage Disposal
Health Inspector: Ernest Mathieu Date:4/8/05
Owner Name and Address
Tracy 8 Erik Inoyk
139 Westhampton Road,Northampton MA.01060
Performed by:Dennis R.Lacourse
Sit_e _td_ress
139 Westhampton Road,Northampton MA.01060
New Construction
X Repair
Published Soil Survey Available:
Year Published: Publication Scale:
1981 1:15,840
Office Review
❑No ❑Yes
Soil Map Unit: Drainage Class:
Soil Limitations:
MAP 17 EsA Poor High Water Table
Surficial Geological Report Available: ❑No ❑Yes
Year Published:
Publication Scale:
Geological Material(Map Unity
Landform'l
yr flood ❑Within 500 yr flood ❑Within 100 yr flood
Flood Insurance Rate Map X boundary y boundary boundary
Wetland Area: National Welland Inventory Map(Map Unit): Wetlands Conservancy Program Map(Map Unit):
Current Water Resource Month: ❑Range:Above Normal ❑Range:Normal ❑Range:Below Normal
Conditions(USGS):
Other References Reviewed:
Begin Saturator
End Saturation
Time
1:45
Percolation Test Results
Measurement
2:00
12"Depth Measurement
9"Depth Measurement
6'Depth Measurement
Elapsed time 9"to 6°
2:00
2:30
'me
Begin Saturation
1:55
No Drop Due To
Infiltrating Water
End Saturation
12"Depth Measurement
9"Depth Measurement
6"Depth Measurement
Elapsed time 9"to 6"
2:10
2:10
2:40 Drop 1"
Infiltrating Water
Measurement
Percolation Rate:
Percolation Rale'.
Bottom of Percolation Test Hole:44"
Bottom of Percolation Test Hole:42"
Determination for Seasonal High Water Table
Method Used
❑Depth observed standing on observation hole inches
X Depth to soil mottles 12"812' inches
Index Well Number Reading Date:
Adjustment Factor:
❑Depth weeping from side of observation hale inches
❑Ground water adjustment _ feet
Index well level:
Adjusted Ground Water Level:
5 05 02: 37p
Easthampton Board Of Heal 413 p. 1
AAA ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTING
238 Park Street
Easthampton MA. 01027
Tel. 413 527-7861/Fax 413 527-7862
April8,2005
Northampton Board of Health
Main Street
Northampton MA. 01060
RE: 139 Westhampton Road,Northampton MA. 01060
Dear Board,
We were unable to obtain a pert test at the above mentioned location due to
infiltrating water into the pere testing holes. The soils were uncompactcd and dug very
easily. These soils were extremely saturated with water. This was witnessed by the
Health Agent at the time of the attempted pert testing. Should you have any other
questions please feel free to contact me.
Respectfully,
gins R acour§t
ROMNEY
nor
91(HEALEY
enant Governor
COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS
EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
436 Dwight Street•Springfield,Massachusetts 01103• (413)7891100
Mr.Eric Indyk
139 Westhampton Road
Northampton,MA 01060
ELLEN ROY HERZFELDER
Secretary
ROBERT W.GOLLEDGE,Jr.
Commissioner
AN 8 8 2005
Re: Northampton-W WM
139 Westhampton Road
Approval of Title 5 Variance-existing construction
214-107
BRP WP 59B
Transmittal#W063792
Dear Mr.Indyk:
Pursuant to Title 5 of the State Environmental Code,310 CMR 15.412,the Western Regional Office
of the Department of Environmental Protection has completed its review of the above referenced
application,submitted May 2005,for approval of a variance granted by the Northampton Board of
Health.
The application contains a copy of the Board of Health's May 6,2005 approval letter for a grant of a
variance from the following provision of Title 5,310 CMR 15.000:
• 310 CMR 15.104 Percolation Testing
The Department received written statements that the soil was un-compacted from the Soil
Evaluator(May 6,2005) and Board of Health Director(May 6,2005)
As part of the application,the Department received plans consisting of 1 sheet submitted on your
behalf by James A.Gracia,BE.,titled as follows:
Septic System Upgrade
Eric and Tracy Indyk
139 Westhampton Road,Northampton MA
Dated May 5,2005
The application requests a variance from 310 CMR 15.104 by using the DEP Alternative
Percolation Policy.The DEP Alternative Percolation Policy states that,in cases of soils with
extremely low permeability,the use of this policy may not be appropriate and the soils may not
This information is available in alternate format Cell Aprel McCabe,ADA Coordinator at I-617-556-1171a TDD Service-1-800.298-220t
DEP on the World Wide Web'. Mlp:llwww.mass.9ovldep
CJ Printed on Recycled Paper
139 Westhampton Road,Northampton
be able to support an on-site system, and a tight tank may be the only option. Analysis of the
on-site soil designated it as a silt loam,a Class III soil,which has relatively low permeability
and therefore requires a relatively large area for the soil absorption system. As stated in the
Department's Alternative Percolation Policy,a septic system designed for Class III soils without
the benefit of a percolation test is a high risk option, and does not guarantee that sewage
breakout or backup will not occur.If the proposed septic system fails in the future, any future
system upgrade would have to meet all the pertinent requirements,or a tight tank may be the
only remaining option at that time.
Based upon its review of the application,and in accordance with 310 CMR 15.410,the Department
has determined both of the following:
a) The applicant has established that enforcement of 310 CMR 15.104 would be manifestly unjust,
considering all of the relevant facts and circumstances of this case,due to high groundwater
conditions in April 2005 preventing performance of a percolation test at those times.
b) The applicant has established that a level of environmental protection that is at least equivalent
to that provided under 310 CMR 15.000 can be achieved without strict application of 310 CMR
15.104. The applicant has established equivalent environmental protection as follows:
• A particle-size soil analysis in conformance with the Alternative Percolation Testing
Policy was performed and,along with an evaluation of soil compaction,was used to
determine soil classification,the effluent loading rate,and the design of the system.
The system is designed in accordance with that policy.
• A pressure distribution system will be installed in the Soil Absorption System.
The Department,therefore,approves the Board of Health's grant of a variance from 310 CMR
15.104.
Additionally,the Department imposes the following conditions as part of this approval:
1)The applicant shall obtain a Disposal System Construction Permit(DSCP)from the Board of
Health prior to commencement of construction of the system.
2)The system is not designed to accommodate a garbage disposal. As such,one shall not be
used or installed at this facility.
3)There shall be no increase in design flow to the upgraded subsurface sewage disposal system.
The design flow for the facility is 330 gallons per day. The facility consists of a 3 bedroom house.
4)At the time of construction,if groundwater has receded to a point where percolation testing is
feasible in the opinion of the local approving authority,then confirmatory percolation testing must
be conducted and,if necessary,the system design revised based on the actual percolation rate.
5) A copy of the as-built plans must be submitted to the Department within 30 days of the date of
issuance of the Certificate of Compliance from the Northampton Board of Health.
6)Should this upgraded system fail,the owner shall immediately notify the local Board of Health
and the Department in writing,and proceed with an appropriate upgrade.,
7)The applicant shall record in the appropriate Registry of Deeds or Land Registration Office,
prior to the issuance of the Certificate of Compliance,a copy of this approval letter in the chain of
title to the property to be served by the system.
This variance determination is an action of the Department. If the applicant is aggrieved by this
determination, she/he may request an Adjudicatonj Hearing in accordance with 310 CMR 1.00 and M.G.L.
C.30A. A request for an Adjudicatonf Hearing must be made in writing and postmarked within 21 days of
the date of issuance of this determination. Pursuant to 310 CMR 1.01(6), the request must state clearly and
concisely the facts that are grounds for the request and the relief sought.
The hearing request,along with a valid check payable to Commonwealth of Massachusetts in the
amount of one hundred dollars ($100.00), must be mailed to:Commonwealth of Massachusetts Department
of Environmental Protection P.O. Box 4062Boston,MA 02211 The hearing request will be dismissed if the
filing fee is not paid, unless the appellant is exempt or granted a waiver,as described below. The filing fee is
not required if the appellant is a city or town (or municipal agennj),county,or district of the Commonwealth
of Massachusetts,or a municipal housing authority. The Department may waive the adjudicatory hearing
filing fee for a person who shows that paying the fee will create an undue financial hardship. A person
seeking a waiver must file, together with the hearing request as provided above,an affidavit setting forth the
facts in support of the claim of undue financial hardship.
Should you have any questions regarding this matter,please contact Kurt Boisjolie at telephone#
413-755-2284.
Mark A. Schleeweis
Program Section Chief
Wastewater Management
Bureau of Resource Protection
Enclosure: Copy of Design Plans with Variance Approval Stamp
cc:With Enclosure:
Northampton Board of Health,212 Main Street,Northampton MA 01060
James A.Gracia,P.E., 99 Glendale Street,Easthampton MA 01027
Without Enclosure:
DEP Watershed Permitting Program Policy Section,Boston
W/brp/wpc/wpcdoc/T5variances/KNhmp139W hmpRdAltPrkOK6.05
James A. Gracia, PE
99 Glendale Street
Easthampton, MA 01027
(413) 527-5290
August 13, 2005
Department of Environmental Protection
Western Regional Office
436 Dwight Street
Springfield, MA 01103
Attention: Mark Schleeweis
Re: Septic System Upgrade wNariance
139 Westhampton Road,Northampton
Transmittal #W 063792
DWPC #214-107
Dear Sir:
The above listed septic system upgrade has been completed in accordance with the plan
approved by the Department in your letter of June 8, 2005. Upon excavation of the site in
preparation for the new pressure dosed leaching system,the existing"C" layer of soil was found
to be dry enough to perform percolation tests. However, the soils in much of the area were found
to be better than that exhibited in the original soil evaluations. The soils at the rear of the parcel
were closer to that found in the original evaluations(silt loam), however, much of the underlying
soil strata consisted of sandy loam or loamy sand. Percolation tests done in the sandy loams
resulted in rates ranging from 8 to 14 minutes per inch. Excavations into the sandy loam areas
indicated depths of pervious material greater than 24". In the areas where the silt loams were
present,the contractor excavated an additional 2' in depth to remove this less permeable soil. He
then backfilled the site with Title 5 sand and constructed the pressure dosing system at the design
elevation. The contractor also excavated and filled,both horizontally and vertically, additional
area toward the house, over and above that required by Title 5. The resulting layer of new Title 5
sand created a finished depth of permeable material greater than 48" under the entire leaching
system. It was felt that although some silt loam did exist under portions of the system, the extent
of the existing sandy loam would create a composite percolation rate of less than the 60 minutes
per inch by which the leaching system was sized. With the additional Title 5 sand added, the
capacity of this leaching system should be more than sufficient for this dwelling.
The outside of the existing pump chamber was excavated and all the joints in the concrete
chamber were sealed with hydraulic cement. An accumulation of slime and sludge was cleaned
from the interior of the pump chamber prior to the new pump being installed. This pump
chamber(1000 gallon pre-cast concrete tank) was originally installed in 1992. In 1997, a 4"
perforated drain was installed from the pump chamber to an existing culvert under the road. The
drain was designed to reduce the level of groundwater around the chamber, thereby
counteracting the buoyancy of the tank. This drain was found during excavation of the tank. It
was cleaned out and tested with flow from a hose. The drain was repaired, extended along the
length of the tank, and encased in clean, crushed stone. Renovation of this drain shall counteract
Indyk Septic Upgrade
August 13, 2005
Page 2 of 2
any buoyancy during high water table conditions by maintaining the groundwater level below the
mid-point of the tank. A concrete tank of this size and weight will be buoyant only when the
water table reaches the top of the tank. The curtain drain will prevent this from happening.
As a result of the additional excavation done by the contractor and the better than expected soils
found, the newly renovated septic system at this property should function at a level sufficient to
adequately serve this residence. Prior to this work, the previous system consisted of a single
leach pit which functioned since 1992. Although it was under sized and did not meet the current
septic system inspection standards,there were no obvious signs of breakout or eruption in the
yard. The new leaching system covers almost 20 times more area than the old system,therefore,
it is reasonable to expect that the new system will function properly. If any other information is
required, please feel free to contact me.
Yours truly,
2r711,t,jdr-,76e0C-
James A. Gracia, PE
Enc.
CC: Ernest Mathieu, Northampton Health Dept.
Atty. John Moriarty
Eric &Tracy Indyk
James A. Gracia,PE
99 Glendale Sty,Easthanp ors MA 01027