Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMiscellaneous - 160 BOSTON STREET 4/30/2018 (2) / 160 BOSTON STREET 210/107.6-0035-0000-0 4 t 1 Y + J 4 i ff I L 1 I Y{ 1 1[ 41 i 2 Y Y I , G . i :" e C .., :�s III Y I i I ,, / I Lot & Street 14�6 Z29,5,70A) �5 / , Map/Parcel CONSTRUCTION APPROVAL Has plan review fee been paid: NO Permit# Plan Approval: Date: 745 63 Approved by: Designer: �►�s , lee�j d Plan Date: AL-3 Conditions: Water Supply: Town Well 4 Weil-Permit: Driller: Well Tests: Chem a1 Date Approved Bacteria I Date Approved Bacteria 11 Date Approved Plumbing Sign-Off: `Wiring Sign-off: Comments: Form °U" Approval: Approval to Issue: YES NO Date Issued By: Conditions: Final Approval: All Permits Paid? YES NO Well Construction Approval? YES NO Septic System Construction Approval? YES NO Certification? YES NO Other? YES NO Any Variance Needed? YES NO FINAL BOARD OF HEALTH APPROVAL: I DATE: APPROVED BY: r I SEPTIC SYSTEM INSTALLATION CONDITIONS: Is the installer licensed? YES NO Type of Construction: NEW REPAIR New Construction: Certified Plot Plan Review YES NO Floor Plan Review YES NO Conditions of Approval from Form U YES NO Issuance of DWC permit: YES NO DWC Permit Paid? YES NO DWC Permit# Installer: Begin Inspection: YES NO Excavation Inspection: Needed: Passed: By: Construction Inspection: Needed: As Built Plan Satisfactory: YES: Approval of Backfill: Date: By: Final Grading Approval: Date: By: Final Construction Approval: Date: By: Certificate of Compliance: Approval: Date: Pamela DelleChiaie From: Pamela DelleChiaie [/o=North Andover/ou=First Administrative Group/cn=Recipients/cn=pdellech] To: Sawyer Susan (E-mail) Subject: 160 Boston Street Need Final As Built and Certifications from the engineer, Jim Decoulos. Sandy had alot of problems with this one. I left a voice mail message for the engineer to get us the information. John Soucy will need to also sign the cert. forms when we get them. 910sf Regaads, Pa/ 10.04 DaB00401 flale Health Department Assistant Town of North Andover 1600 Osgood Street Building 20, Suite 2-36 North Andover,MA 01845 978.688.9540-Phone 978.688.8476-Fax http://www.townofnorthandover.com healthdept@townofnorthandover.com ' 1 Page 1 of 2 DelleChiaie, Pamela From: Santilli, Ray Sent: Monday, June 30, 2003 3:38 PM To: Griffin, Heidi; Starr, Sandy; 'James J. Decoulos' Cc: DelleChiaie, Pamela; D'Agata, Donna Mae Subject: RE: 160 Boston Street Since Sandy has confirmed that she is not available tomorrow afternoon(July l't)at 2:OOp, it is best to cancel the meeting scheduled by Community Development Director Heidi Griffin Ray Santilli Assistant Town Manager &Human Resources Director ----Original Message----- From: Griffin, Heidi Sent:Thursday,June 26, 2003 4:03 PM To: Starr, Sandy; Santilli, Ray; 'James I Decoulos' Cc: DelleChiaie, Pamela; D'Agata, Donna Mae Subject: 160 Boston Street Hi Sandy, Ray and Jim: As you know I will not be in the majority of tomorrow and will be on vacation next week. It is clear that this is issue will not be resolved unless there is a sit-down between all parties. In order to clear the air, I have set up a meeting for Tuesday July 1 st at 2:00 p.m. here at the Community Development Offices. As I will be out of the state, Ray will sit in forme. Sandy, you are more than welcome to invite the board of health to attend if you wish to do so. I did double-check your calendar to make sure you did not have a previously conflicting appointment before I scheduled the meeting. The purpose of the meeting will be to discuss the 45 day timeline issue [the homeowner and engineer contend that your characterization of the facts are not the facts] and to review timelines for review of the plans when revised plans are submitted. Mr. DeCoulos will be submitting a final set of revised plans[reflecting all of your June 13 notations]when the DEP issue is resolved. I would also suggest everyone at the table discuss an appropriate tum around time once the revised plans are submitted; [i.e. review will be completed within xxx amount of reasonable days once revised plans are submitted]. apologize I cannot attend and would have preferred that a meeting not have to occur. Nor do I want to waste anyone's time. However, I have received many phone calls and I think, at this point, a meeting would be beneficial for all parties involved in order that confusion no longer occurs. The meeting will be beneficial in that it will provide everyone to be on the same ground,with the same facts and future proceedings. The amount of time everyone here has spent on the phone could have probably been avoided if we set up a meeting quite some time ago. Please note: the purpose of the meeting will not to be dispute Sandy's interpretation of technical issues she advises the board of health on. It is to discuss the steps of the permitting/plan review process that have occurred thus far and determine a date for a final review when final, revised plans are submitted by the applicant once [and if]the DEP issues are resolved. Thank You, and Please let me know of your resolution. 7/1/2003 Page 2 of 2 Pam, per the below of Sandy's instructions can you please update the GeoTems to serve as a chronology[it only notes plans submitted from May on; it should reflect the original plan submittal in October 29, of 2002 and subsequent action per what is in the file] and attach appropriate documentation verifying the file contents and supply it via email,to myself and Ray and Sandy before the meeting on July 1st. Forgot to add-will get Pam to create chrono& I'll supplement it. Next 2 days, however, are devoted to reviewing the responses to the RFR, doing reference calls and evaluations, and meeting with the BOH to ID a consultant. Award date July 1st. S i.e. Plans submitted on October 2002; rejected by Steve Erickson, November 2002; Soil tests performed on [whatever date] per Steve Erickson's letter dated[whatever date] 1st revised plans submitted on [whatever date]; Those plans reviewed and rejected on [whatever date]; etc. etc. Also, please attach hard copies of documentation on the file verifying such[i.e. letters from you and Steve Erickson denying the plans, letters from engineer replying to such deficiencies, etc. facts as outlined in the chronology. However, if you could please send the chronology with back-up documentation to myself and Ray [and the board if you wish to]so that we have the factual snapshot of what occurred we can try to wade through the issues from a factual standpoint that will enable us to work towards a resolution. Could you please put together a chronology of events on this property for me? i.e. Plans submitted on October 2002; rejected by Steve Erickson, November 2002; Soil tests performed on[whatever date] per Steve Erickson's letter dated[whatever date] 15t revised plans submitted on[whatever date]; Those plans reviewed and rejected on [whatever date]; etc. etc. Also, please attach hard copies of documentation on the file verifying such [i.e. letters from you and Steve Erickson denying the plans, letters from engineer replying to such deficiencies, etc. facts as outlined in the chronology. This way I can have the documentation when i speak to the engineer. However, if you could please send the chronology with back-up documentation to myself and Ray [and the board if you wish to]so that we have the factual snapshot of what occurred we can try to wade through the issues from a factual standpoint that will enable us to work towards a resolution. Heidi Griffin Community Development&Services Director 27 Charles Street North Andover, MA 01845 (978)688-9531 (978)688-9542 fax 7/1/2003 j Page 1 of 2 DelleChiaie, Pamela From: Griffin, Heidi Sent: Thursday, June 26, 2003 4:03 PM To: Starr, Sandy; Santilli, Ray; 'James J. Decoulos' Cc: DelleChiaie, Pamela; D'Agata, Donna Mae Subject: 160 Boston Street Hi Sandy, Ray and Jim: As you know I will not be in the majority of tomorrow and will be on vacation next week. It is clear that this is issue will not be resolved unless there is a sit-down between all parties. In order to clear the air, I have set up a meeting for Tuesday July 1st at 2:00 p.m. here at the Community Development Offices. As 1 will be out of the state, Ray will sit in forme. Sandy, you are more than welcome to invite the board of health to attend if you wish to do so. I did double-check your calendar to make sure you did not have a previously conflicting appointment before I scheduled the meeting. The purpose of the meeting will be to discuss the 45 day timeline issue [the homeowner and engineer contend that your characterization of the facts are not the facts]and to review timelines for review of the plans when revised plans are submitted. Mr. DeCoulos will be submitting a final set of revised plans[reflecting all of your June 13 notations]when the DEP issue is resolved. I would also suggest everyone at the table discuss an appropriate tum around time once the revised plans are submitted; [i.e. review will be completed within xxx amount of reasonable days once revised plans are submitted]. 1 apologize I cannot attend and would have preferred that a meeting not have to occur. Nor do I want to waste anyone's time. However, I have received many phone calls and I think, at this point, a meeting would be beneficial for all parties involved in order that confusion no longer occurs. The meeting will be beneficial in that it will provide everyone to be on the same ground,with the same facts and future proceedings. The amount of time everyone here has spent on the phone could have probably been avoided if we set up a meeting quite some time ago. Please note: the purpose of the meeting will not to be dispute Sandy's interpretation of technical issues she advises the board of health on. It is to discuss the steps of the permitting/plan review process that have occurred thus far and determine a date for a final review when final, revised plans are submitted by the applicant once[and if]the DEP issues are resolved. Thank You, and Please let me know of your resolution. Pam, per the below of Sandy's instructions can you please update the GeoTems to serve as a chronology[it only notes plans submitted from May on; it should reflect the original plan submittal in October 29, of 2002 and subsequent action per what is in the file] and attach appropriate documentation verifying the file contents and supply it via email,to myself and Ray and Sandy before the meeting on July 1St. Forgot to add-will get Pam to create chrono&I'll supplement it. Next 2 days, however, are devoted to reviewing the responses to the RFR, doing reference calls and evaluations, and meeting with the BOH to ID a consultant. Award date July 1st. S i.e. Plans submitted on October 2002; rejected by Steve Erickson, November 2002; Soil tests performed on [whatever date] per Steve Erickson's letter dated [whatever date] 1st revised plans submitted on [whatever date]; Those plans reviewed and rejected on [whatever date]; etc. etc. Also, please attach hard copies of documentation on the file verifying such [i.e. letters from you and Steve Erickson denying the plans, letters from engineer replying to such deficiencies, etc. facts as outlined in the 6/26/2003 Page 2 of 2 w chronology. However, if you could please send the chronology with back-up documentation to myself and Ray[and the board if you wish to]so that we have the factual snapshot of what occurred we can try to wade through the issues from a factual standpoint that will enable us to work towards a resolution. Could you please put together a chronology of events on this property for me? i.e. Plans submitted on October 2002; rejected by Steve Erickson, November 2002; Soil tests performed on [whatever date] per Steve Erickson's letter dated [whatever date] 1st revised plans submitted on [whatever date]; Those plans reviewed and rejected on [whatever date]; etc. etc. Also, please attach hard copies of documentation on the file verifying such [i.e. letters from you and Steve Erickson denying the plans, letters from engineer replying to such deficiencies, etc. facts as outlined in the chronology. This way I can have the documentation when I speak to the engineer. However, if you could please send the chronology with back-up documentation to myself and Ray[and the board if you wish to] so that we have the factual snapshot of what occurred we can try to wade through the issues from a factual standpoint that will enable us to work towards a resolution. Heidi Griffin Community Development& Services Director 27 Charles Street North Andover, MA 01845 (978)688-9531 (978)688-9542 fax 6/26/2003 From:James J.Decoulos To:Sandra Starr Date:6/16/2003 Time:9:44:28 AM Page 1 of 14 FAX COVER Message: Date : 6/16/2003 Sandy, Attached is the DEP approval on the general use of Infiltrators. Page 3 of 5 of DEP's Certification for General Use describes how the Infiltrators can be used with aggregate when specified under 310 CMR 15.253 (see the second paragraph no.6). The entire 14 page approval was emailed to you on May 13th. To view all the pages, view the file with the Windows Imaging program which can be found at"Start- Programs-Accessories". The file is a multi-page TIF. I will be available all day to discuss. Jim tel: 617-489-7795 To: Sandra Starr From : James J. Decoulos Company: North Andover BOH Company: Decoulos& Company Fax Number : 1-978-688-9542 Fax Number: 877-842-9629 Pages including this cover page: 14 Subject : 160 Boston Street WinFax PRO Cover Page Page 1 of 1 DelleChiaie, Pamela From: Sandra Starr[sstarr@townofnorthandover.coml Sent: Thursday,June 26, 2003 12:13 PM To: Dave Ferris Cc: hgriffin@townofnorthandover.com; Jonathan Markey; Francis P MacMillan; Cheryl Barczak; rsantilli; Pamela DelleChiaie; James J. Decoulos Subject: Infiltrator proposed system Hi Dave, As per our telephone conversation earlier today I am following up with this e-mail about a proposed system in North Andover that uses the infiltrator chambers. The engineer has most recently proposed a leaching configuration using the high capacity chamber of 3 trenches that he's termed chamber trenches that are being used as galleries/pits/chambers under 310 CMR 15.253 and number 10 on page 4 of 8 of the Infiltrator Modified Certification for General Use. He also is using the effective leaching of 4.5 SF/LF for each chamber. The trench excavation is 6 feet wide and each trench holds 8 HC chambers. Aggregate (dw 3/4"to 1 1/2') is placed 5 inches deep under the chamber and on the sides,with 2"of dw pea stone on top. The system is sized for a GG and also includes a pump. Perc rate was 20 mpi. According to my documentation on the infiltrator approval,the effective leaching for high capacity chambers is 7.79 SF/LF each;the trench excavation should be only 3 feet wide;there should be no aggregate;the pertinent Title 5 section is 15.251, and the infiltrator design standards are numbers 2-5, covered on page 2 of 8 of the Infiltrator Modified Certification for General Use. Now can you please tell me which is the REAL effective leaching capacity of the HC chamber and whether I'm totally off the wall recommending 3'wide trenches and no aggregate? This project has been going on for some time, and I'd like to get it settled ASAP so the homeowner can have the system installed and move in. Please help. Many thanks. Sandy Starr 6/26/2003 Page 1 of 1 Sandra Starr From: "James J. Decoulos" <jamesj@decoulos.com> To: "Sandra Starr"<sstarr@townofnorthandover.com> Sent: Friday, June 27, 2003 10:13 AM Subject: Fwd: MA septic info Sandy, Infiltrator sent me the wrong approval. The rate of 7.79 sf/lf is correct. I will review and get back to you on Monday. Jim X-Symantec-TimeoutProtection: 0 X-Symantec-TimeoutProtection: 1 X-Symantec-TimeoutProtection: 2 X-Symantec-TimeoutProtection: 3 From: "Hutchinson,Jean" <JHutchinson@infiltratorsystems.net> To:jamesj@decoulos.com Subject:MA septic info Date: Fri,27 Jun 2003 09:55:00 -0400 Importance: high X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21) <<C44_MADesignManual.pdf>> new MA design manual with most up-to-date sizing. Sorry about the mix-up,I am faxing you the proper letter-jh Jean "utchinson %larket Devi loprinent Infiltrator Systems Inc 800-221-4436 880-577-7103 direct Iine 888-3335-8078 VVai ranty jhc� chi�san(r�infiitratorsyste�o�_net www.infiltratorsrst_. s.com James J. Decoulos,PE, LSP Decoulos&Company 3 Electronics Avenue Danvers,MA 01923 tel: 617-489-7795 fax: 877-842-9629 web: www.decoulos.com 6/27/2003 Page 1 of 4 Sandra Starr From: "Sandra Starr"<sstarr@townofnorthandover.com> To: "James J. Decoulos"<jamesj@decoulos.com> Sent: Friday, June 27, 2003 12:43 PM Subject: Re: 160 Boston Hi, I sure hope we can work this out soon. With all the e-mails, stuff I have to get together and send out to people abour what happened when, etc., 160 Boston is taking about a third of my time!! And I'm supposed to be finishing writing our emergency bioterrorism plan for smallpox response and evaluating the proposals for a septic consultant, among other things. (My inspector is off today and at the beach..... I'm jealous. ----Original Message From: James J. Deco_u_los To: Sandra Starr Sent: Friday, June 27, 2003 8:25 AM Subject: Re: 160 Boston Sandy, DEP has issued two different letters on February 21,2003 for the Infiltrator approval (both signed by Glen Haas and referencing the same exact application). The version I have (received directly from Infiltrator and which I provided to you on May 13th)does not contain a nitrogen loading number and requires a loading rate of 4.5 sf/lf for trenches without aggregate. I will resolve with DEP this morning, if possible. The system is designed for 660 GPD not 880 GPD. The 880 GPD you are referring to is for the sizing of the septic tank. Jim At 12:18 PM 6/26/2003 -0400,you wrote: Jim, I think you may have used the nitrogen loading number. Also in your e-mail of June 23, 2003 you cited a gpd of 660,whereas your plan states 880 gpd. Which is correct? Please address in your cover letter for the revisions as well as the reason trenches CAN't be used as per 310 CMR 15.240(6). Thanks. Sandy ----- Original Message ----- From: James J. D_e_coulos_ To: Sandra Starr Sent: Wednesday,June 25,2003 9:48 PM Subject: Re: 160 Boston Sandy, The February 21, 2003 approval from Glenn Haas,Director of DEP's Division of Watershed Management, states that High Capacity Infiltrators,when used in a trench configuration(pursuant to 310 CMR 15.251(1)(e))without aggregate, shall be sized for 4.5 sf/lf. I emailed you the approval on May 13th. I have no other written approval from DEP to use a different design rate. 6/27/2003 r Page 2 of 4 Please provide the written authorization from DEP to use 7.79 sf/lf if you have it. I will be out of the office on Thursday and will be unable to respond to emails until the evening or early Friday morning. Jim At 05:05 PM 6/25/2003 -0400,you wrote: Jim, Just found your message. I think it got opened when I was deleting my daily e-mails about Viagra and mortgages and I was looking for something I hadn't read so missed it. At least I didn't delete it. The information I have on the Infiltrator, and what Claire Golden of DEP has as well, is that the HC chamber's effective leach area is 7.79 sf/lf. Using this number would seem to allow for a trench configuration. Using yours certainly would create problems. Unfortunately you don't state that it is impossible to use trenches, as is expected when a variance, basically, is being requested. Can't you just say it's impossible because of the increased expense (give a figure that's significant)and be done with it? Explanation can be submitted with the few changes requested on the plan. It would behoove both of us to verify the figure approved by DEP. Please get changes back to me soon. Sandy Original Message ----- From: James J. D_ecoulos To: Sandra Star_r Sent: Monday,June 23, 2003 2:13 PM Subject:Re: 160 Boston Sandy, I returned your call and left a message. The design calls for 660 GPD (with a garbage disposal). With the 20 min/inch design perolation rate,the design requires 0.53 gals/sf/day. Total surface area required is therefore 1245 sf. Using the DEP approved rate for High Capacity Infiltrators in a trench configuration(4.5 sf/linear feet),we would need 277 linear feet of Infiltrators. Due to area limitations, it is impractical for us to provide for this length of trench(many more trees would have to be removed and additional fill would be required). The proposed design only requires 150 linear feet of 6/27/2003 7 i � � � 1 ' Page 3 of 4 Infiltrators. Please call me for the rest of the day. I will be out of the office and will have my calls forwarded to my cell phone. Thank you. Jim At 01:52 PM 6/23/2003 -0400,you wrote: Jim, I left you a message this morning saying that you should reference my letter of June 13,2003 to address issues with the most recent design. Also,you will need to state for the record why you believe(if you do)that you cannot comply with 310 CMR 15.240(6) - trenches are to be used whenever possible. Please check your calculations, make appropriate revisions and get the plans back to me ASAP. I'm pretty sure you'll agree with me that we wish to end this project. Sandy James J. Decoulos,PE,LSP Decoulos& Company 3 Electronics Avenue Danvers, MA 01923 tel: 617-489-7795 fax: 877-842-9629 web: www.decoulos.com James J. Decoulos,PE, LSP Decoulos&Company 3 Electronics Avenue Danvers,MA 01923 tel: 617-489-7795 fax: 877-842-9629 web: www.depoulos.com James J. Decoulos,PE,LSP Decoulos& Company 3 Electronics Avenue Danvers,MA 01923 tel: 617-489-7795 fax: 877-842-9629 6/27/2003 ,g Page 1 of 1- Pamela DelleChiaie From: "Sandra Starr"<sstarr@townofnorthandover.com> To: "Dave Ferris"<dave.ferris@state.ma.us> Cc: <hgriffin@townofnorthandover.com>; "Jonathan Markey" <jonathan@foresite1.com>; "Francis P MacMillan"<FPMMD@attbi.com>; "Cheryl Barczak"<cbarczak@attbi.com>; "rsantilli" <rsantilli@townofnorthandover.com>; "Pamela DelleChiaie" <pdellechiaie@townofnorthandover.com>; "James J. Decoulos" <jamesj@decoulos.com> Sent: Thursday, June 26, 2003 12:13 PM Subject: Infiltrator proposed system Hi Dave, As per our telephone conversation earlier today I am following up with this e-mail about a proposed system in North Andover that uses the infiltrator chambers. The engineer has most recently proposed a leaching configuration using the high capacity chamber of 3 trenches that he's termed chamber trenches that are being used as galleries/pits/chambers under 310 CMR 15.253 and number 10 on page 4 of 8 of the Infiltrator Modified Certification for General Use. He also is using the effective leaching of 4.5 SF/LF for each chamber. The trench excavation is 6 feet wide and each trench holds 8 HC chambers. Aggregate (dw 3/4"to 1 1/2') is placed 5 inches deep under the chamber and on the sides,with 2"of dw pea stone on top. The system is sized for a GG and also includes a pump. Perc rate was 20 mpi. According to my documentation on the infiltrator approval,the effective leaching for high capacity chambers is 7.79 SF/LF each;the trench excavation should be only 3 feet wide;there should be no aggregate;the pertinent Title 5 section is 15.251, and the infiltrator design standards are numbers 2-5, covered on page 2 of 8 of the Infiltrator Modified Certification for General Use. Now can you please tell me which is the REAL effective leaching capacity of the HC chamber and whether I'm totally off the wall recommending T wide trenches and no aggregate? This project has been going on for some time, and I'd like to get it settled ASAP so the homeowner can have the system installed and move in. Please help. Many thanks. Sandy Starr 6/26/2003 I Juno e-mail printed Fri, 27 Jun 2003 07:01:52 , page 1 From: Sandra L Starr<slstarr2@juno.com> To:jamesj@decoulos.com Date: Sat, 26 Apr 2003 13:55:48-0400 Subject: 160 Boston St. North Andover Message-ID: <20030428.135548.-16364099.0.sistarr2@juno.com> X-Mailer: Juno 4.0.11 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Full-Name: Sandra L Starr Hi Jim, I've just started in on the review for this site. Because the house is being enlarged and the septic system is being designed as more of an upgrade than a repair, we need to see a reserve area. Should be easy enough by adding reserve trenches between the primary. NA regs. state that minimum distance between trenches when reserve is proposed between is 10 feet so little bit more area required. I'll be in touch on Monday-or before if I find any other problems. I know that time is important. Is the owner SURE he doesn't want a garbage grinder? Sandy Starr Sb The Society and Its Environment 4P I a -•-e+ct � � -e. tea` $-.�a4.-..+ «. ,rt ' � � �!I 1 �l •.v*N1+i`�§�^�f"`uA`a.^Nm•�."Carn1P4"s�:+.w � ;l � Tl.rws�aM"' �c -`d.. malaria (3 percent). The leading causes of outpatient morbidity ( # c t in children under age five were upper respiratory illnesses, diar a 1 ":� rhea, eye infections including trachoma, skin infections, malnutri- tion. and fevers. Nearly 60 percent of childhood morbidity was preventable. The leading causes of adult morbidity were dysen- tery and gastrointestinal infections, malaria, parasitic worms, skin I ilIl } ...- ; •a>. a and eye diseases, venereal diseases, rheumatism, malnutrition, i, '.I •" fevers, upper respiratory tract infections, and tuberculosis. These diseases were endemic and quite widespread, reflecting the fact that I� Ethiopians had no access to modern health care. Tuberculosis still affected much of the population despite efforts ! to immunize as many people as possible. Venereal diseases, par- ( �� titularly syphilis and gonorrhea, were prevalent in towns and ci- I x f ties, where prostitution contributed to the problem. The high r. prevalence of worms and other intestinal parasites indicated poor - sanitary facilities and education and the fact that potable water was available to less than 14 percent of the population. Tapeworm in- fection was common because of the popular practice of eating raw or partially cooked meat. Schistosomiasis, leprosy, and yellow fever were serious health ." hazards in certain regions of the country. Schistosomiasis, a dis- ease caused by a parasite transmitted from snails to humans through t the medium of water, occurred mainly in the northern part of the r+ ita. highlands, in the western lowlands, and in Eritrea and Harerge. k, Leprosy was common in Harerge and Gojam and in areas bor- dering Sudan and Kenya. The incidence of typhoid, whooping cough, rabies, cholera, and other diseases had diminished in the t 1970s because of school immunization programs, but serious out- Jas breaks still plagued many rural areas. Frequent famine made health : conditions even worse. R' Smallpox has been stamped out in Ethiopia, the last outbreak having occurred among the nomadic population in the late 1970s. li Malaria, which is endemic in 70 percent of the country, was once i I] a scourge in areas below 1,500 meters elevation. Its threat had declined considerably as a result of government efforts supported ' by WHO and AID, but occasional seasonal outbreaks were com- mon. om mon. The most recent occurrence was in 1989, and the outbreak I�F was largely the result of heavy rain, unusually high temperatures, "« =s and the settling of peasants in new locations. There was also a report of a meningitis epidemic in southern and western Ethiopia in 1989, ,r t _ " even though the government had taken preventive measures by t ; vaccinating 1.6 million people. The logistics involved in reaching the 70ercent of Ethiopians who lived more than three days' walk ' P P Y 1 II Page 1 of 2 Sandra Starr From: "James J. Decoulos" <jamesj@decoulos.com> To: "Sandra Starr'<sstarr@townofnorthandover.com> Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2003 9:48 PM Subject: Re: 160 Boston Sandy, The February 21, 2003 approval from Glenn Haas, Director of DEP's Division of Watershed Management, states that High Capacity Infiltrators,when used in a trench configuration(pursuant to 310 CMR 15.251(1)(e)) without aggregate, shall be sized for 4.5 sf/lf. I emailed you the approval on May 13th. I have no other written approval from DEP to use a different design rate. Please provide the written authorization from DEP to use 7.79 sf/lf if you have it. I will be out of the office on Thursday and will be unable to respond to emails until the evening or early Friday morning. Jim At 05:05 PM 6/25/2003 -0400,you wrote: Jim, Just found your message. I think it got opened when I was deleting my daily e-mails about Viagra and mortgages and I was looking for something I hadn't read so missed it. At least I didn't delete it. The information I have on the Infiltrator, and what Claire Golden of DEP has as well, is that the HC chamber's effective leach area is 7.79 sf/lf. Using this number would seem to allow for a trench configuration. Using yours certainly would create problems. Unfortunately you don't state that it is impossible to use trenches, as is expected when a variance,basically,is being requested. Can't you just say it's impossible because of the increased expense(give a figure that's significant) and be done with it? Explanation can be submitted with the few changes requested on the plan. It would behoove both of us to verify the figure approved by DEP. Please get changes back to me soon. Sandy Original Message ----- From: James J. Decoulos To: Sandra Starr Sent: Monday, June 23, 2003 2:13 PM Subject: Re: 160 Boston Sandy, I returned your call and left a message. The design calls for 660 GPD (with a garbage disposal). With the 20 min/inch design perolation rate,the design requires 0.53 gals/sf/day. Total surface area 6/26/2003 Page 2 of 2---, required is therefore 1245 sf. Using the DEP approved rate for High Capacity Infiltrators in a trench configuration(4.5 sf/linear feet),we would need 277 linear feet of Infiltrators. Due to area limitations, it is impractical for us to provide for this length of trench (many more trees would have to be removed and additional fill would be required). The proposed design only requires 150 linear feet of Infiltrators. Please call me for the rest of the day. I will be out of the office and will have my calls forwarded to my cell phone. Thank you. Jim At 01:52 PM 6/23/2003 -0400,you wrote: Jim, I left you a message this morning saying that you should reference my letter of June 13,2003 to address issues with the most recent design. Also,you will need to state for the record why you believe (if you do)that you cannot comply with 310 CMR 15.240(6) -trenches are to be used whenever possible. Please check your calculations,make appropriate revisions and get the plans back to me ASAP. I'm pretty sure you'll agree with me that we wish to end this project. Sandy James J. Decoulos,PE,LSP Decoulos& Company 3 Electronics Avenue Danvers, MA 01923 tel: 617-489-7795 fax: 877-842-9629 web: www.decoulos.com James J. Decoulos, PE,LSP Decoulos& Company 3 Electronics Avenue Danvers,MA 01923 tel: 617-489-7795 fax: 877-842-9629 web: www.decoul os.com. 6/26/2003 I .. � i Page 1 of 1 Sandra Starr From: "James J. Decoulos" <jamesj@decoulos.com> To: "Sandra Starr" <sstarr@townofnorthandover.com> Sent: Monday, June 23, 2003 2:13 PM Subject: Re: 160 Boston Sandy, I returned your call and left a message. The design calls for 660 GPD (with a garbage disposal). With the 20 min/inch design perolation rate,the design requires 0.53 gals/sf/day. Total surface area required is therefore 1245 sf. Using the DEP approved rate for High Capacity Infiltrators in a trench configuration(4.5 sf/linear feet), we would need 277 linear feet of Infiltrators. Due to area limitations, it is impractical for us to provide for this length of trench (many more trees would have to be removed and additional fill would be required). The proposed design only requires 150 linear feet of Infiltrators. Please call me for the rest of the day. I will be out of the office and will have my calls forwarded to my cell phone. Thank you. Jim At 01:52 PM 6/23/2003 -0400,you wrote: Jim, I left you a message this morning saying that you should reference my letter of June 13, 2003 to address issues with the most recent design. Also,you will need to state for the record why you believe(if you do)that you cannot comply with 310 CMR 15.240(6) -trenches are to be used whenever possible. Please check your calculations,make appropriate revisions and get the plans back to me ASAP. I'm pretty sure you'll agree with me that we wish to end this project. Sandy James J.Decoulos,PE,LSP Decoulos&Company 3 Electronics Avenue Danvers,MA 01923 tel: 617-489-7795 fax: 877-842-9629 web: www.decoulos.com 6/25/2003 Starr, Sandy To: Griffin, Heidi Subject: 160 Boston Hi Heidi, I called Jim Decoulas, engineer of 160 Boston Street this morning and left a message. I told him to refer to my letter of June 13, 2003 to address issues with the current plans, and to comply or explain why he CANNOT comply with 310 CMR 15.240(6). This reference concerns the requirement to use a trench configuration whenever possible. He has proposed a gallery layout. S Page 1 of 1 Sandra Starr From: "Sandra Starr"<sstarr@townofnorthandover.com> To: "James J. Decoulos" <jamesj@decoulos.com> PC: <HGriffin@townofnorthandover.com> $0*: 'Monday, June 23, 2003 1:52 PM Se ct: '160 Boston Arn, I left you a message this morning saying that you should reference my letter of June 13, 2003 to address issues with the most recent design. Also, you will need to state for the record why you believe(if you do)that you cannot comply with 310 CMR 15.240(6) -trenches are to be used whenever possible. Please check your calculations, make appropriate revisions and get the plans back to me ASAP. I'm pretty sure you'll agree with me that we wish to end this project. Sandy 6/23/2003 DelleChiaie, Pamela From: DelleChiaie, Pamela Sent: Friday, June 20, 2003 2:14 PM To: Griffin, Heidi Subject: RE: 160 Boston Street- Call Requested Hi Heidi, I cut and pasted notes below. I believe on 6/10 that Jim was notified about possible items of concern (don't have file in front of me) and Sandy was still reviewing. I also believe this is the 3rd set of plans (5/16/03). Jim is continuing to call because he has not heard anything back since 6/10/03. --P Wed. 6/18/03 -Jim Decoulos called re: status of plans. Please call at 617-489-7795 to let him know. Sandy has file. Thurs. - 6/12/03 @ 10:45 a.m. -Jim Decoulos called looking for the final status of the plans. Please call him at 617-489-7795. Sandy said she will call Jim back. Tues. -6/10/03- Notified Jim DeCoulos of four items that Sandy outlined. She stated that plans will be done review by Wed. 6/4/03-Wed. - Mr. Hazarvartian called Town Hall looking for status of plans. File with all paperwork is in the septic plan review bin outside of SS office. Not clear as to what has been done, or if approved.--p.d. 5/16/03: Kim Hazarvartian's father dropped off their check today in the amount of$225.00 to cover the plan review for the third set of septic plans they submitted on May 8th. I do not have the 160 Boston Street file in the septic files. It is not in the general files. Therefore, I am assuming that you have the file in your office. I put the third set of plans and receipt from the check in your septic inbox on top of the bookcase outside of your office. 5/12/03- Left msg. With Jim DeCoulas that we need a check for$225. Third revised plans were received on Thurs. Afternoon with no check. I left previous msg. Explaining that we need a check. -----Original Message----- From: Griffin, Heidi Sent: Friday, June 20, 2003 1:05 PM To: DelleChiaie, Pamela Subject: FW: 160 Boston Street - Call Requested Hi Pam: Can you perhaps explain something to me? I see the engineer called twice 6-12 and 6-18 looking for"status of plans". But, he received a letter from Sandy outlining 4 things wrongs with plans. Did he submit revised plans from her letter? Is that why he is calling? I wasn't sure because I didn't see a note stating revised plans were received. If you have any information on this I would appreciate it. Thanks, Heidi -----Original Message----- From: Pamela DelleChiaie [mailto:pdellechiaie@townofnorthandover.com] Sent: Thursday, June 19, 2003 12:47 PM To: Sandra Starr 7 CC: Pamela DelleChiaie; Heidi Griffin; Brian LaGrasse Subject: 160 Boston Street - Call Requested Please call the engineer. See attached report. Tracking: Recipient Read Griffin, Heidi Read:6/20/2003 2:36 PM 8 �I DelleChiaie, Pamela From: DelleChiaie, Pamela Sent: Friday, May 16, 2003 9:54 AM To: Starr, Sandy Subject: 160 Boston Street-Check Received for 3rd Set of Plans (Hazarvartian) Importance: High Sandy, Kim Hazarvartian's father dropped off their check today in the amount of$225.00 to cover the plan review for the third set of septic plans they submitted on May 8th. I do not have the 160 Boston Street file in the septic files. It is not in the general files. Therefore, I am assuming that you have the file in your office. I put the third set of plans and receipt from the check in your septic inbox on top of the bookcase outside of your office. Pamela DelleChiaie, Health Dept.Assistant Town of North Andover Community Development& Services 27 Charles Street North Andover, MA 01845 pdellechiaie @ townofnorthandover.com Tel. 978-688-9540 Fax 978-688-9542 Tracking: Recipient Read Starr,Sandy Griffin, Heidi Read:5/19/2003 8:58 AM 10 i Board of Health North Andover Construction Summary Report-Sorted by Status ' Date Range:Submitted between 01/01/2001 And 04/29/2003 Printed On:Tue Apr 29,2003 Status Type of Permit PermitNo. Submitted Expires Applicant Work Location Open Design Approval-Plan Re-Sub BHP-2003-0042 04/23/2003 HAZARVARTIAN,KIM E&SUSAN M 160 BOSTON STREET Open Disposal Works Construction BHP-2003-0043 04/23/2003 HAZARVARTIAN,KIM E&SUSAN M 160 BOSTON STREET Open Repair Soil Tests BHP-2003-0041 04/23/2003 HAZARVARTIAN,KIM E&SUSAN M 160 BOSTON STREET Open Repair Soil Tests BHP-2003-0040 09/13/2002 Susan&Kim Hazarvartian 160 BOSTON STREET i Stats\us=Open: 4 46 i i i 1 a 1 GeoTMS®2003 Des Lauriers Municipal Solutions,Inc. Page 1 of 1 Page 1 of 2 Sandra Starr From: "Sandra Starr'<sstarr@townofnorthandover.com> To: "James J. Decoulos" <jamesj@decoulos.com> Sent: Tuesday, May 13, 2003 5:09 PM Subject: Re: 160 Boston Street, North Andover "Revisions" to an original design designate those plans that have been reviewed by Health,require additions or modifications but are the same design as was already reviewed. A "new" design changes either the location, the type of leaching area, sometimes elevations, etc. A first re-review of an already reviwed-in-full-plan as of January 1, 2003 does not require an additional fee; the $225 covers it. However, any additional changes after that first re-review will require an additional fee. Please note that until we receive a full submittal, which includes payment,the plans have officially not been accepted. It's the old "no tickee, no laundree". As soon as my secretary tells me the fee for the plans proposed for the rear of the house has arrived then I can take a look and see where we are. I sincerely hope that you didn't change the design again. ----- Original Message ----- From: "James J. Decoulos" <jamesj@decoulos.com> To: "Sandra Starr" <sstarr a townofnorthandover.com> Sent: Tuesday,May 13,2003 11:38 AM Subject: Re: 160 Boston Street,North Andover >Yes. You received another revision last Thursday. >At 11:23 AM 5/13/2003 -0400,you wrote: >>Since I haven't seen the design yet -is this yet another design? I don't >>remember reviewing a plan that had these as the leach area components. Have >>I just forgotten? SS >>----- Original Message ----- >>From: "James J. Decoulos" <jamesj cr decoulos.com> »To: <sstarr@townofnorthandover.com> >>Sent: Tuesday,May 13, 2003 10:30 AM >>Subject: 160 Boston Street,North Andover >>> Sandy, >>>Attached is the approval letter from Glen Haas of DEP dated February 21, >>> 2003 regarding the use and application of Infiltrators in leaching >>> facilities. The conditions of this approval were relied on in the latest 5/13/2003 Page 1 of 1 Town of North Andover E-Mail From: "James J. Decoulos" <jamesj@decoulos.com> To: "Sandra Starr"<sstarr@townofnorthandover.com> Cc: "Kim Hazarvartian"<keh@tepplic.com> Sent: Tuesday,April 29, 2003 8:54 AM Subject: Re: 160 Boston St. review Sandy, I am in receipt of your email on Saturday and yesterday's comments. The owners have rethought the garbage grinder issue and have asked(for the last time)to now provide for a garbage grinder. The septic tank and leaching area will be adjusted accordingly. Your comments from yesterday will be addressed in a revision to be submitted by the end of the week. Specific responses are as follows: Comment 9: A pump chamber is not a dosing chamber. There are some days when the Hazarvartian family will not generate enough wastewater to activate one pump cycle. How would you realistically expect me to specify 4 doses per day in the loamy sand material that 310 CMR 15.254(1)(d)requires? Comment 22: The leaching area provided will handle 446.79 GPD. I have checked the calculations four times. How do you arrive at 437 GPD? Are you not counting the trench ends in your sidewall calcs? Comment 26: General Note 7 is intended to protect the Owner from costly extra change requests from the Contractor. Comment 27: The first sentence in General Note 8 is designed to protect the Owner from mistakes made by the Contractor. The Owner does not want to remove this sentence. Please feel free to contact me anytime if you have any concerns. Thank you. Jim At 12:07 PM 4/28/2003 -0400,you wrote: Jim, There are a sizeable number of problems with this plan. I have to check and see if there needs to be an additional payment, but wanted you to get changes ASAP. Will be in touch. Sandy James J. Decoulos,PE,LSP Decoulos& Company 3 Electronics Avenue Danvers,MA 01923 tel: 617-489-7795 fax: 877-842-9629 wb: www.decoulos.com 4/29/2003 COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS kviEXECUTIVE OFFICE OF ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION METROPOLITAN BOSTON— NORTHEAST REGIONAL OFFICE MITT ROMNEY ELLEN ROY HERZFELDER Governor Secretary KERRY HEALEY ROBERT W.GOLLEDGE,Jr. Lieutenant Governor Commissioner July 18, 2003 Sandra Starr, R.S.; C.H.O.;Director Board of Health 27 Charles Street - �[)dV,v Gr,UDR E H p�;pO.'GR/ North Andover,Massachusetts 01845 1 CC PD OF HEALTH RE: Proposed Infiltrator System X 2 3a Dear Ms. Starr: On June 26, 2003,the Metropolitan Boston-Northeast Regional Office of the Department of Environmental Protection received an e-mail from you. In that e-mail you state that you clarification as to the leaching area per linear foot of trench for a system designed using High Capacity InfiltratorTm chambers. A local designer has opted to use e tes that you believe that the appropriate leaching ar y D�J n effective leaching area of 7.79 square feet per lir ` ;February 21, 2003 Modified Certification for Genert 'ea of 7.79 square feet per linear foot of chamber applies! without aggregate. Please refer to Modified Ce ber, Standard Chamber, Infiltrator 3050 and Egualiz( ��` to that the effective leaching area of 7.79 square ft � .alts in an overall reduction of 40 percent in the size of thl ed InfiltratorTm chambers without aggregate. e ate. L✓ �C/ From the information you have pri ted to utilize aggregate beneath and around the syster rsistent with item 10 of I1. Design Standards of the N icity Chamber, Standard Chamber, Infiltrator 3050 and n will therefore be designed as a more traditional chamb t result in an overall reduction of 40 percent in the siz The Department trusts that this letter has adequately clarified the matter for you. If you have any This information is available in alternate format by calling our ADA Coordinator at(617)574-6872. One Winter Street,Boston,MA 02108•Phone(617)654-6500•Fax(617)556-1049•TDD#(800)298-2207 DEP on the World Wide Web: http://www.state.ma.us/dep ea Printed on Recycled Paper F Sandra Starr, R.S., CHO Page 2 July 18, 2003 questions regarding this matter,please contact Claire A.Golden of my staff at(617)654-6516. Very truly yours, Madelyn Morris MM/CAG/cg Deputy Regional Director \2003 clarification l\noandoverinfiltratorsl Bureau of Resource Protection I I Town of North Andover, Massachusetts Form No.z N°RTM BOARD OF HEALTH 4,' P N 4 DESIGN APPROVAL FOR ` HUS SOIL SOIL ABSORPTION SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM F <2 Qr Applicant z Test N o. Site Location Reference Plans and Specs �/� ��5 ENGINEER DESIGN DATE t Permission is granted for an individual soil absorption sewage disposal system to be installed in accordance with regulations of Board of Health. r c ! —CHAIRMAN,BOARD OF HEALTH i t FeeSite System Permit No. �or�cJG� I DECOULOS & COMPANY ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING&LAND PLANNING VIA USPS PRIORITY MAIL DELIVERY CONFIRMATION#03010120 0009 0891 9052 Thursday, July 10, 2003 Sandra Starr, Health Director North Andover Board of Health 2 27 Charles Street _ North Andover, MA 01845 -1664 RE: 160 Boston Street; Map 107B, Parcel 35 - Dear Ms. Starr: On behalf of Susan and Kim Hazarvartian, enclosed herewith are two signed copies of the fourth revised septic system replacement design. The original plans were hand delivered to your office on October 23, 2002. All of the comments of your most recent letter dated June 13, 2003 have been addressed. Should you have any questions or need additional information please feel free to contact me. Thank you. Ve yours, ames J. Decoulos, PE, LSP jamesj @decoulos.com cc: Susan and Kim Hazarvartian 3 ELECTRONICS AVENUE,DANVERS,MASSACHUSETTS 01923 TEL:617.489.7795 FAX:877.842.9629 WWW.DE000LOS.COM lD � �/ /��/,:�) /J-, .2 V6 (61 be,<�- 7-,e2!W C Al�,5 45 A �tqQ���� QV P(� f f£�C� b nd O,reek, ZMac�L Add �Q� + w�a�e arts �. /V,,Ie -�2a 1n5; Il�ti q 5,cr-ee-ri- f f� i v) 5 ta/) -P-- Alp e�- I-Y-.e Y.) L �� -�� CJS�,�I �.e���/V�trZ�--�-�'��� 1 ,�G� f !°RTH 1 TOWN OF NORTH ANDOVER HEALTH DEPARTMENT 27 CHARLES STREET NORTH ANDOVER,MASSACHUSETTS 01845 �qs^_�••''qty SACHUSfc Sandra Starr Telephone(978)688-9540 Public Health Director FAX(978)688-9542 April 28, 2003 James J. Decoulos 248 Andover Street Peabody, MA 01960 jamesj@decoulos.com Re: 160 Boston Street Dear Mr. Decoulos: The proposed septic system design plans for the above site dated 4/23/2003 have been reviewed and have been found to have technical deficiencies that must be addressed prior to plan approval. They are as follows: 1. Names and address of applicant/owner missing. (NA 8.02k) 2. Limits of excavation of the leaching facility missing. (310 CMR 15.255(5) &(NA 8.02z)) 3. Pipe schedule and diameter of building sewer not specified. (3 10 CMR 15.222(1) and 222(3) and NA 11.02) 4. Size of stone beneath septic tank,pump chamber not specified. (3 10 CMR 15.221(2) and 228(1)). 5. Buoyancy calculations missing for all components missing. (3 10 CMR 15.221(8)). 6. Note on soil compaction beneath D-box missing. (3 10 CMR 15.221(2)). 7. Stone beneath D-box not specified. (3 10 CMR 15.221(2)). 8. D-box not specified as watertight. (3 10 CMR 15.221(1)). 9. Pump cycles per day not specified. (310 CMR 15.220(4), (254(1)(d), 231). 10. Pump calculations missing: volume+flowback; 24 hour emergency storage. (310 CMR 15.231(2)). 11. Pump capacity including TDH missing. (3 10 CMR 15.220(4)(r)). 12. Pump specifics on passing solids missing. (3 10 CMR 15.231(7)). 13. Missing pump performance curves. (3 10 CMR 15.220(4)(r)). 14. Requirement for manual operating switch missing. (NA 12.01) 15. Loading for septic tank and pump chamber missing. (3 10 CMR 15.226(1)). 16. Specification for watertight pump chamber missing. (3 10 CMR 15.221(1)). 17. Specification that septic tank and pump chamber can be no lower than 36"below grade missing. (310 CMR 15.221(7)). 18. Vent missing along with details. (310 CMR 15.251(11), 241(1)(b), (c) & (d)). 19. Missing reserve area. (3 10 CMR 15.248(1)). 20. Slope of leach area missing. (3 10 CMR 15.251(9)). 21. Separation between trenches less than 10'. (NA 14.01 & 14.03). 22. Insufficient leach area provided -437 gpd. 23. Site Evaluator forms not provided. 24. Certification as Site Evaluator not provided. 25. Please indicate that ALL pipe shall be a minimum of Sch 40. 26. What is general note#7 mean? 27. Please change general note#8 by deleting the first sentence and changing the second to read, "Any alterations must be approved in writing by the design engineer and the Board of Health". Please call the office if you have any questions. Sincerely, Sandra Starr, R.S., C.H.O. Public Health Director Cc: Homeowner CD&S Dir. File DECOULOS & COMPANY ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING&LAND PLANNING VIA FEDERAL EXPRESS Wednesday, April 23, 2003 _ .iA Sandra Starr, Health Director � �- - ._' Oi `-IEALTN_ _ North Andover Board of Health 27 Charles Street APR 2 Q North Andover, MA 01845 -1664 RE.- 160 Boston Street; Map 107B, Parcel 35 Dear Ms. Starr: On behalf of Susan and Kim Hazarvartian, enclosed herewith are two signed copies of the second revised septic system replacement design for 160 Boston Street. The design is now presented on two sheets. Original plans were hand delivered to your office on October 23, 2002; comments were received by facsimile on April 4, 2003; and, the first revised design was hand delivered to your office on April 11, 2003. Based upon a preliminary review of the April 11"' submittal by Norse Environmental Services, Inc. of Tyngsboro, MA, it was determined that additional percolation and deep hole testing would be beneficial. On Thursday, April 17, 2003, soil testing was conducted on site and witnessed by Steven Eriksen. The Hazarvartians no longer require that a garbage grinder discharge into the proposed sewage disposal system. That change, together with a new leaching area location that will require a pump chamber, constitute the major changes of this latest revision dated April 23, 2003. Should you have any questions or need additional information please feel free to contact me. Thank you. Vfry,txuly yours, ames J. Decoulos, PE, LSP jamesj@decoulos.com cc: Susan and Kim Hazarvartian 3 ELECTRONICS AVENUE,DANVERS,MASSACHUSETTS 01923 TEL:617.489.7795 FAX:877.842.9629 WWW.DE000LOS.COM { Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection 160 Boston Street Bureau of Resource Protection —Wastewater Permitting Program Site Address or Map/Lot Number 1 Form 11 - Soil Suitability Assessment for On-Site Sewage Disposal A. Facility Information 1. Facility Information Susan M.Hazarvartian and Kim E. Hazarvartian Owner Name 10 Rose Mary Court Map/Lot 1076/35 Street Address Concord NH 03303 City State Zip Code B. Site Information 1. (Check one) New Construction ❑ Upgrade ❑ Repair 2. Published Soil Survey available? Yes ® No ❑ If yes: 1981 1:15 840 CbC Year Published Publication Scale Soil Map Unit i Canton Very Stony Fine Sandy Loam Not suitable for farming Soil Name Soil limitations 3. Surficial Geological Report available? Yes ® No ❑ If yes: 1967 Year Published Publication Scale Map Unit I Glacial Outwash and Till Outwash Plain Geologic Material Landform 4. Flood Rate Insurance Map: Panel No. 25 0098 0010 B dated June 15, 1983 Above the 500 year flood boundary? Yes ❑ No ❑ Within the 100 year flood boundary? Yes ❑ No Within the 500 year flood boundary? Yes ❑ No ❑ Within a Velocity Zone? Yes ❑ No 5. Wetland Area: National Wetland Inventory Map Map Unit Name Wetlands Conservancy Program Map Map Unit Name 6. Current Water Resource Conditions (USGS) April, 2003 Range: Above Normal ® Normal ❑ Below Normal ❑ Month/Year 7. Other references reviewed: DEP Form 11 Soil Suitability Assessment for On-Site Sewage Disposal •Page 1 of 7 1 i LlMassachusetts Department of Environmental Protection 160 Boston Street Bureau of Resource Protection —Wastewater Permitting Program Site Address or Map/Lot Number Form 11 - Soil Suitability Assessment for On-Site Sewage Disposal C. On-Site Review (minimum of two holes required at every proposed disposal area) Deep Observation Hole A: April 17,2003 1300 Sunny,65 F Date Time Weather 1. Deep Observation Hole Logs Deep Hole Number DH-3 Ground Elevation at Surface of Hole 101.01 Location (Identify on Plan ) End of Chamber Trench C 2. Land Use: Cleared Woodland 8 (e.g.woodland,agricultural field,vacant lot,etc.) Surface Stones Slope(%) Underlying Brush Vegetation Landform Position on landscape(attach sheet) 3. Distances from: Open Water Body Drainage Way Possible Wet Area feet feet feet Property Line 40 Drinking Water Well Other feet feet 4. Parent Material: Fine Sandy Loam Unsuitable Materials Present: Yes ❑ No If Yes: Disturbed Soil❑ Fill Material❑ Impervious Layer(s) ❑ Weathered/Fractured Rock❑ Bedrock❑ 5. Groundwater Observed: Yes ® No ❑ If Yes: Depth Weeping from Pit 36" Depth Standing Water in Hole 100" Estimated Depth to High Groundwater: 36 98.01 { inches elevation i DEP Form 11 Soil Suitability Assessment for On-Site Sewage Disposal- Page 2 of 7 I LIMassachusetts Department of Environmental Protection 160 Boston Street Bureau of Resource Protection —Wastewater Permitting Program Site Address or Map/Lot Number Form 11 - Soil Suitability Assessment for On-Site Sewage Disposal Deep Observation Hole A: Deep Hole Number: DH-3 Soil Soil Matrix: Redoximorphic Features Soil Coarse Fragments Soil Structure Soil Horizon/ Color-Moist (mottles) Texture %by Volume Consistence Other Depth Layer (Munsell) (USDA) (Moist) (In.) Depth Color Percent Gravel Cobbles &Stones 0-9 A 7.5YR 3/1 Loam Topsoil 9-28 B 7.5 YR 4/4 Loamy Subsoil Sand 28-120 C 10 YR 5/6 Fine Sandy Loam i I Additional Notes DEP Form 11 Soil Suitability Assessment for On-Site Sewage Disposal•Page 3 of 7 Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection 160 Boston Street Bureau of Resource Protection —Wastewater Permitting Program Site Address or Map/Lot Number Form 11 - Soil Suitability Assessment for On-Site Sewage Disposal i C. On-Site Review (Cont.) Deep Observation Hole B: April 17,2003 1300 Sunny,65 F Date Time Weather 1. Deep Observation Hole Logs Deep Hole Number DH-6 Ground Elevation at Surface of Hole 100.30 Location (Identify on Plan ) Beginning of Chamber Trench B 2. Land Use: Cleared Woodland 8 (e.g.woodland,agricultural field,vacant lot,etc.) Surface Stones Slope(%) Underlyinq Brush Vegetation Landform Position on landscape(attach sheet) 3. Distances from: Open Water Body Drainage Way Possible Wet Area feet feet feet Property Line 60 Drinking Water Well Other feet feet 4. Parent Material: Fine Sandy Loam Unsuitable Materials Present: Yes ❑ No If Yes: Disturbed Soil❑ Fill Material❑ Impervious Layer(s) ❑ Weathered/Fractured Rock❑ Bedrock❑ { I 5. Groundwater Observed: Yes ® No ❑ If Yes: Depth Weeping from Pit 48" Depth Standing Water in Hole 96" i Estimated Depth to High Groundwater: 48 100.30 ' inches elevation DEP Form 11 Soil Suitability Assessment for On-Site Sewage Disposal• Page 4 of 7 Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection 160 Boston Street Bureau of Resource Protection —Wastewater Permitting Program Site Address or Map/Lot Number Form 11 - Soil Suitability Assessment for On-Site Sewage Disposal I Deep Observation Hole B: Deep Hole Number: DH-6 Soil Soil Matrix: Redoximorphic Features Soil Coarse Fragments Soil Structure Soil Depth Horizon/ Color-Moist (mottles) Texture %by Volume Consistence Other Layer (Munsell) (USDA) (Moist) (In.) Depth Color Percent Gravel Cobbles &Stones 0-9 A 7.5YR 3/1 Loam Topsoil 9-26 B 7.5 YR 4/4 Loamy Subsoil Sand 26-120 C 10 YR 5/4 48 20 Fine Sandy Loam 1 Additional Notes I I DEP Form 11 Soil Suitability Assessment for On-Site Sewage Disposal• Page 5 of 7 LlMassachusetts Department of Environmental Protection 160 Boston Street Bureau of Resource Protection —Wastewater Permitting Program Site Address or Map/Lot Number Form 11 - Soil Suitability Assessment for On-Site Sewage Disposal D. Determination of High Groundwater Elevation i 1. Method used: ❑ Depth observed standing water in observation hole A. B. inches inches ® Depth weeping from side of observation hole A. 36 B. 48 inches inches ® Depth to soil redoximorphic features (mottles) A. B. inches inches ❑ Groundwater adjustment(USGS methodology) A. B. inches inches 2. Index Well Number Reading Date Index Well Level Adjustment Factor Adjusted Groundwater Level E. Depth of Pervious Material 1. Depth of Naturally Occurring Pervious Material a. Does at least four feet of naturally occurring pervious material exist in all areas observed throughout the area proposed for the soil absorption system? Yes ® No ❑ b. If yes, at what depth was it observed? Upper boundary: 26 Lower boundary: 120 inches inches F. Certification Icert' th I ave passed the soil evaluator examination*approved by the Department of Environmental Protection and that the above anal i s e rmed by me consistent with the required training, expe ise and experience described in 310 CMR 15.017. Sign ture of Soil Evaluator Date ) 1--.11, Typed or Printed Name of Soil Evaluator *Date of Soil Evaluator Exam Name of Board of Health Witness Board of Health Note: This form must be submitted to the approving authority with Percolation Test Form 12 DEP Form 11 Soil Suitability Assessment for On-Site Sewage Disposal• Page 6 of 7 Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection 160 Boston Street Bureau of Resource Protection —Wastewater Permitting Program Site Address or Map/Lot Number Form 11 - Soil Suitability Assessment for On-Site Sewage Disposal Use this sheet for field diagrams: i DEP Form 11 Soil Suitability Assessment for On-Site Sewage Disposal• Page 7 of 7 ^ . '--- Ia :tea Hri NURSE ENVIRONMENTAL 6497582 P. 01 NORSE ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES, INC. 3 Poadvlew Place ryngsboro, Mass. 01879 1-EL. (978)649-9932 - FAX(978) 649-7582 Al)ril 17,2003 Sandra Starr,Director North Andover Board of Health 2;Charles Street North Andover, Mass. Re: Subsurface Disposal Services Ms, Starr; Attached are copies of field notes for your files for tests performed on 160 Boston Road and 106 Gray Road,as well as ]620 Turnpike Street. A short synopsis is as follows: 106Cis -RAad1�� fT 4/8/03 On site where Al Gala,Engineer, owner Charles Hat and the backhoe operator. This is a repair to an existing system.Percolation rates were 9 min./inch and 12 min-finch. Water Cables(Estimated seasonal high)were at 39"and 40",fairly consistent over the site. This u3 an ice contact ablation'till, lots of stones in a loamy sand son'!. There was a wet area to the rear of the lot near the fence that had a blely predominance of wetlarW vegetation and soils consistent-with-a.potential wetland.I alerted the engineer to this and he informed me he would have a wetland scientist view the area.No ledge or other site difficulties were Evident. There is a potential intermittent stream off site on adjacent lots,though the distance from this property do not seem to make it a problem. ; 660 Boston Road 4/17/03 On site were Jim Caroulis,Engineer and Kim Hadevarian„owner, and the backhoe . operator.This was also a repair.Jim had five deep tests open,three to the front right of the tot and two to the rear. Water tables to the front were at 36",30",and 30".To the rear they were at 48"and 52". This is a basal till soil consisting of tine sandy loam, compact Ln place, massive but friable. One percolation test(pere 2)performed at 56"was started, tut was going at greater than ten minutes per inch. I believe this test was into the seasonal high groundwater,or at least in the capillary layer resulting in the slower rate. A second test was performed slightly higher with a final rate of 18 minutes per inch. I believe this rate is representative of the soil. There are no wetlands,ledge,or other apparent difficulties on the lot. ,..,r�oe eivvie<unncntaL 64J7592 P. 02 +s I performed a short review of the design for this lot. There were many corrections necessary in the design, so I consulted with the engineer and made several suggestions_ A row design will be submitted.. 4/14/03 1620 Turnpike Road Installer Mike Reilly had requested a bed bottom inspection. The excavation was four to live feet in depth. No deleterious material was evident,all topsoil, subsoil and stones were removed. There was three to four inches of water in one corner of the bed area. The bottom was scoured nicely, I think he did a good job. A stockpile of good very coarse isand was on site, it looked excellent for septic installation. "There are new soil data forms available on-line. I provided copies of these to Mr. Gala and Mr. Caronlis. These will provide detailed soil information of the site. If you have any questions, please contact me. Thank you for the opportunity to be of ,service. Sincerely, Steven Eriksen CHECKLIST FOR NORTH ANDOVER SEPTIC SYSTEM PLANS The following is a checklist that incorporates all Title 5 and local regulations for septic plans. Name of Applicant: VR- / amof Designer: D& 20U1_0,i C"O, 63 Plan Date: V-03-OZ Revision Date: Date of Review: Property Address: 160 1305-FpJy S Map. 167 0 Lot: 3S- BOH Reviewer: A)Q CEType of Plan(new or upgrade): (� Number of Bedrooms in Assessor' s Records: gpd) Garbage Disposal Allowed: General Information: N.A. =North Andover Septic Regulations Other numbers refer to Title 5 OK Problem N/A V✓ Street number and map/lot-220(4)(u) 1/1 Maximum scale of 1 "=40' for plot plan-220(4) (1� Maximum scale of 1 "=20' for profile and component details-220(4) f/ Legal boundaries of the facility being served-220(4)(a) t/ Names of abutters from recent tax map- NA 8.02j Number of bedrooms, design calcs., -NA 8.02i Name& address of record owner&applicant- NA 8.02k Name&address of designer-NA 8.021 Holder and location of all easements-220(4)(b) Date plan drawn&any revision date- NA 8.02m All dwellings and buildings, existing and proposed-220(4)(c) ✓� Location of all existing or proposed impervious areas-220(4)(d) All distances on site plan-NA 8.03a-c z/r—'-Elevation of proposed driveway-NA 8.02t _V7___ -Locati8n and elevation of foundation drain-NA 8.02y Location and dimensions of the system incl. reserve(new const.)-220(4)(e) Limits of excavation of leach area on site plan-NA 8.02z Locus-plan-220(4)(t) North arrow-220(4)(g) Existing and proposed contours-220(4)(g) Locations and logs of deep holes-220(4)(h) t� Locations and logs of percolation tests-220(4)(1) Date(s)of soil testing-220(4)(h)&(i) Existing grade elevation of each deep hole-220(4)(h) Elevation of percolation tests-N.A. 8.02n r/ Name of approving authority representative-220(4)(h)&(i) "r Name of soil evaluator-220(4)0) Soil logs and perc test togs match BOH records Locations of waterlines, drains, and subsurface utilities-220(4)(m) Observed and adjusted g.w. elevation in the vicinity of the system-220(4)(n) Complete profile of the system to scale-220(4)(o),NA 8.02c l Cross section of leaching facility-NA 8.02w v Location of benchmark(s)within 50-75 feet of facility-220(4)(q) ✓; Note listing all variance requests with proper citations-220(4)(p) It -- Local upgrade approval request form submitted-4030) Original R.S./P.E. stamp, signature&date-220(1)&(2) I 2 sfc. supplies(w/in 400'), pub. wells(w/in 2501), Pvt.wells (w/in 150')-220(4)( Location-of watercourses,wetlands, wells, etc. w/in 150'of system-NA 8.02r _ Wetland disclaimer-NA 8.02s Land surveyor plan reference required(property line setbacks)-220(3) CK- >e' contains designer's certification statement tt/ Use approvals/standards checked for UA system-DEP docs., Perc rate>30 MPI-not allowed for new,LUA for upgrade-245(1)&('3) ;- erc rate > 60 MPI-must use modified tight tank or I/A technology-245(4) `___:R7��posed system qualifies as "shared" system-002(definitions) Flow is over 2,000 gpd-No R.S. allowed-220(1) Design flow was set in accordance with code-203 Existing system location and note on proper abandonment-354 V Leaching facility at least F above Base Flood elevation-NA 9.05 All piping Sch 40 minimum-NA 10.01 Basement floor minimum 1' above groundwater elevation-NA 5.04 7�Foundation drain present with elevation-NA 8.02y On-site Soil and Groundwater Review OK�Problem N/A Orll// Proper deep observation hole logs on plan-220(4)(h) All deep holes and peres shown, including aborted tests-NA 8.02n Soil evaluation forms submitted within 60 days of field work-018(2) Proper percolation test log-220(4)(i) Ample deep observation holes in primary disposal area(minimum 2)- 102(2) Ample deep observation holes in secondary disposal area(minimum 2)- 102(2) Ample perc testing(one in each disposal area, 3 in prim. >2,000 gpd)- 104(4) Deep hole testing conducted within two years-NA 7.05 Hole Identification Numbers: I 2 fob ground elevation el. t` .7 , IN, C-I, Cr ��� 3a acceptable soil el. q�{.�� Leach facilitv invert el. 1GG.7�! _1g /p _.7 g /66 ,7e ground water el. �� �� /00, Yl refusal el. (43, 7 bottom of leach facility el. lU6"'T thickness of acceptable soil 7,93 49, 735 before&after soil R&R 9-55 separation to groundwater , �, 2- separation separation to refusal ID, 7 soil class PDerc rate e vYL, loading rate 3 �l I septic tank below g.w. table (yes or no) pump tank below g.w.table 1 (yes or no) I.f in fill � -255(l) Setback Distances (Given in feet) 15.21 1 OK Problem N/A ?/ Is the lot in the Lake Cochiewick Watershed? NA 6.00& 5.02 J/ Septic Tank Leach Facility V Property line 10 10 Cellar wall 10 20 V Inground pool 10 20 Slab foundation 10 10 Deck, on footings, etc. 5 10 Waterline 10 10 Private drinking well 75 100 Irrigation well 75 100 Wetlands 75 100 Public well el 400 400 Wetlands bordering surface 150 150 water Supply or trib. (in Watershed) Trib. To Surface Water supply 325 325 Reservoirs 400 400 Tributaries to reservoirs 200 200 Drains(wat. supply/trio.) 50 100 L,-"" o,(intercept g.w.) 25 50 ` - Foundation drains 10 20 V/ Drains(Other) 5 10 Drywells 20 25 v Downhill slope I5'to 3:1 slope w/o barrier i 4 Building Sewer OK Problem N/ —1 Grease trap required for certain uses(check 230 for details) I Pipe diameter listed(4" minimum)-222(1) Pipe schedule listed-222(3) Pipe cast iron or Sch 40 PVC–NA 11.02 Watertight joints specified-222(3)&(4) Pipe laid on compact, fin base-222(5) Pipe laid on continuous grade in straight line-222(7)@ Cleanouts precede all changes in alignment and grade-222(8) Cleanout provided every 100 feet-222(8) Manhole at any 90 degree alignment change-222(8) Invert elevation at building: 14b , 77 Invert elevation at ,.� se ti ,tank: ,P, . Length of run: gt Slope: +O Z J (minimum of 0.01 -0.'02 desired)-222(6) 10'offset torivate well or suction line-222 P (2) Septic Tank OC roblem N/A Tank is accessible-228(3) Tank can accommodate both primary&reserve–NA 9.04 200%of flow(required&provided given. 1500 min.)- 220(4)(0&223)(1)(a) 2-3" drop from inlet to outlet-227(5) Minimum of 4' liquid depth-223(2) 3"air space above tees/baffles(minimum)-227(4) 9"air space above flow line(minimum)-227(4) rte✓ Tees are not to be replaced by baffles-227(1) Tees extend 6" above flow line-227(1) Inlet tee extends 10" below flow line(minimum)-227(6) Outlet tee extends 14" below flow line(more for deeper tanks)-227(6) Gas baffle installed on outlet-227(4) Access,manhole cover above center of tank&each tee(except 2 compart) 228(2) f' 3-20"manholes-228(2) 1 childproof, 24" riser/manhole to final grade if<1000gpd-228(2) Inlet and outlet tees on center line-227(1) DEO ' om 'on below tank specified(if soil is non-native)-221(2) /4"s one eneath tank specified-221(2)&22 8(1) '� ,00gpd not a single fam. dw–ell. must be 2 tks or 2 comp. -223(1)(b) y"�_If plan specifies disposal must be 2 tanks in series or 2 compart.tank-223(1)(c) �--- Buoyancy calcs. required if tank at or below water table-221(8) Tank is watertight ight-221 (1) 9" of cover over tank(minimum)-2280) H- 1 0 loading(min.)-H-20 if traffic-226(3) Top of tank<=36" below grade-221(7) ✓, All pumping to tank(if applies)in accordance with-229 Tank is set to keep old system in service during install if possible Ti ht Tank Check here if not resent: —� ( P ) f 5 Distribution Box(Check here if not present: ) O1K�Pioblem N/A .. , f�� Inlet elevation: /01.q Outlet elevation: /66, 7 OW OD�o 0.17'drop from inlet to outlei(minimum)-232(3)(b) 6" sump (minimum)-232(3)(e) All outlets at same elevation-232(3)(b) Outlet pipes laid level for first 2 ft. -232(3)(c) - Pipe Sch 40-NA 10.01 Number of outlets: Number of laterals: Size of outlets:kr r Inlet baffle/tee stun. 1" over outlet invert for all d-boxes-232(3)(a), 1�/ Soil compaction � �_ below distribution box specified (if soil is non-native)-221(2) k 6" of stone beneath distribution box specified-221(2) Box is water-tight-221 1 O Top of box<=36" below grade-221(7) 'r t/ Buoyancy calculations required if box is at or below water table-221(8) Pump Chamber(Check here if not present: ) OK,/ oblem N/A Volume specified: 1i0 6 220 4 r Pump on elev nion- _ �- 1 ✓220 4r � Pum off elevation: 220 4' • Pump - ( J(r) Alarm on elevation:_-�� – 220(4)(r) C17, 6 Number of cycles per day-220(4)(r) (also 254(l)(d)if gravity from d-box) Minimum 2" delivery g _ �.� line to d-box if gravity 254(1)(c) Pressure dosed l.f if flow>=2,000 gpd-254(1)(a)& 254(2)(a) FIZ~ Cycles per day is consistent with chamber volume-23 1 Volume calculations include flowback volume-2') 1(2) 24 hour,storage capacit above pump on elevation-231(2) Number of pumps: — 2 if system serves>2 dwelling units-231(6) Capacity of pumps)- Y6 gpm @/;.4 Z'TDH-220(4)(r) Pump cats pass 1 1/4 "solids(minimum)-231(7) Pump controls specified-220(4)(r) Alarm equipment specified-231(2) Alarm is in building and powered on separate circuit from pump-2') 1(9) Pump sequence correct(off-lead on-lag on-alan-n on)-231(8) _1= Pump performance curves included -220(4)(r) Manual operating switch-NA 12.01 a Check valve, bleeder hole-NA 12.01 ............ 1 childproof, 24" riser/manhole to final grade-2'31(5), Soil compaction beneath pump chamber specified(if soil is non-native)-221(2) 6"of<=3/4"stone beneath chmbr. specified-221(2)&228(1), Buoyancy calculations if chamber is at or below water table-221(8)@ 9" of cover over chamber(minimum)-228(l) H- 10 loading(min.)-H-20 if traffic-226(')), n+�1�_ ✓/ Chamber is watertight-221 (1) ✓ Top of chamber<=36" below grade-221(7) r V 6 Leaching Facility(general-complete for all designs) OK Problem N/A 50%larger if garbage disposal-240(4) Trenches to be used whenever possible-240(6) No vehicle access or imperv. area above l.f. unless unavoidable-240(7) Vented if under impervious cover-241 (1) �. Vented through same pipes as distribution system-241 (1,)(a) Vent protected from precipitation/animal entry-241 (1)(b) 77 AZI Vent is placed beyond traffic or impervious area-24 1 (1)(c) All lines connected to vent if bed or trenches-241(1)(d) 9" cover over peastone-240(9) Reserve area provided(new construction)- 248(l) Reserve 4' from primary leach area-NA 9.04 4' (5'if perc rate<=2 MPI) separation to g.w. -212(a)& (b) _ (down to 2'with variance or I/A-upgrades only) of natural soil under l.f. 7. GW separation is adjusted to highest existing grade if facility cuts into a hillside Pipe slope minimum of 0.005-25I(9) .-- Require 5'removal and replacement if in fill-255(5) .- Top of leach facility<=36" below grade-221(7) Final grade over l.f. minimum 0.02 ft/ft -240(1 0) Surface& subsurface drainage away from 11 -240(1 1)&245(5) Minimum design flow 440 gpd without deed restriction-NA 13.01 3:1 slope where grading required-255(2) 'Toe of fill slope stops 5'from property line or Swale installed-255(2) fA Impermeable barrier if<3:1 slope or< 15 feet to-3:lslope-255(2) Impermeable barrier/retaining wall poured concrete-NA 9.02 Retaining wall stamped by P.E. -255(2)(b) C Top,of retaining wall>=top of peastone elevation-255(2)(f 10' offset from edge of leach facility to edge of ret. wall -255(2)(g) Perc test(s) done in most restrictive Layer- 104(2) j Perc test 4' below leaching elevation-NA 7.06 Design flow listed and required/provided leach area given-220(4)(0 t' Leach pipes SCH40 PVC-NA 10.01 Leach pipes minimum 4" diameter except for dosed system-NA 14.04 Leach lines capped, vented, or connected together-251(9) �-- Pressure dosing guidance followed if pressure distribution-254(2)(c), V Pressure dosing required over 2,000 gpd or with I/A remedial use-231(1) Leaching Trenches(Check here if not present: ) 0 Problem N/A Number of trenches: _ � Minimum of 2 - � trenches NA 9,01 Ol Depth of trenches(max,eff. 2'): 1 -247(l) \---417 Width of trenches(2' min., 4' max.): >' -251 (1)(b) Length of trenches(100'max.): 74 -25 1 (1)(a) Trenches are vented(when>50') -251 (11) Trenches follow contour lines-251(2) Trench spacing 3 times effective width or depth-251 (1)(d) In fill or reserve between trenches, 10' min. -NA 14.01& 14.03 Available leach area given Min_,5-01,saf:)-NX 9:01() - � Bottom=L— x W 3 s.f. Sidewall=L_ x D x# _x2=? ��---s.f. 03 -5- e ,r I Effective leach area given T Loading factor: � '-'57� Effective area=total areae s.f. x LTAR� 7� =13 g/day Effective area is>=design flow of facility being served 2"of 1/8"- 1/2" 2x washed peastone.-247(2) _IZ Trench depth of 3/4"to 1 1/2" double washed stone-247(1) Leaching Pits(Check here if not present: �� ) OK Problem N/A #ofpits/pit systems: (dosing chamber if>1, 231 (1)) Dimensions of each pit or system: L W D Depth of pits(max eff. 2'): -253(1)(a) Available leach area given Bottom=L x W x 9 of systems= s.f. Sidewall =L+W x D x 2 x#of systems= s.f. Total area=bottom +sidewall = s.f. Effective,leach area given Loading factor: Effective area=total area s.f. x LTAR =_ /day Effective area is>=design flow of facility being served Minimum of 2 pits at least 13'X16'-NA 9.01(3) Distribution for gall eri es/chmb rs. in trench config. -pipe every 20'-253(6) Distribution for galleries/chmbrs. in bed config.-ea.pipe serves<=40 s.f.-253(6) Spacing- 2 times the effective width or depth(the greater)-253(I)(c) 2"of 1/8"- 1 /2" 2x washed peastone.-247(2) 3/4" to 1 1/2" double washed stone-247(1) Each pit has at least one 20" access cover. 24" CI to grade over 2,000 gpd -253(3) Surrounding aggregate thickness between P(min.)and 4'(max.)-253(1)(b) Vents, if necessary, extend under covers of pit(s)-241 (e) Leach Fields(Check here if not present: iy_) OK Problem N/A Number of fields: (need dosing chamber if> 1,231 (1)) Length(100' max.): -252(2)(b) Width: Total area: L x W s. f. Minimum 900 square feet-NA 9.01(1) Distribution lines connected with solid pipe-NA 15.01 Effective leach area given Loading factor: Effective area=total area s.f x LTAR = g/dav Effective area is>=design flow of facility being served Minimum of two distribution lines-252(2)(a) 6' line separation(max.)-252(2)(d) 4' maximum separation from edge of field to line-252(2)(e) 10' minimum separation between adjacent leach fields-252(2)(0 Between 6" and 12"of 3/4- 1 1/2" stone beneath field-252(2)(g)&247(2) 2"of 1/8"-1/2" 2x washed peastone.-247(2) -+ + ^ VrtoG G `Lv 1KVfYPIt fY1HL 64y7592 P. 02 I performed a short review of the design for this lot. There were many corrections in ecessary in the design, so I consulted with the engineer and made several suggestions_ A row design will be submitted. 4/03' l� Installer Mike Reilly had requested a bed bottom inspection. The excavation was four to five feet in depth. No deleterious material was evident, all topsoil, subsoil and stones were removed. There was three to four inches of water in one corner of the bed area. The bottom was scoured nicely, I think he did a good job. A stockpile of good very coarse sand was on site, it looked excellent for septic installation. 'Mere are new soil data forma available on-line. I provided copies of these to Mr. Gala and W. Caroulis. These will provide detailed soil information of the site. If you have any questions, please contact me. Thank you for the opportunity to be of :service. Sincerely, Steven Eriksen DECOULOS & COMPANY ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING&LAND PLANNING VIA HAND DELIVERY Friday, April 11, 2003 �._..�. � ~�i4�,0 C`P Sandra Starr, Health Director North Andover Board of Health pR t 27 Charles Street North Andover, MA 01845 -1664 RE: 160 Boston Street; Map 107B, Parcel 35 Dear Ms. Starr: On behalf of Susan and Kim Hazarvartian, enclosed herewith are two signed copies of a revised septic system replacement design for 160 Boston Street. The original plans were hand delivered to your office on October 23, 2002 and comments were received by facsimile on April 4, 2003. As stated on the original application, the design was for a repair of an existing three bedroom single family residence. The residence is being renovated to eight rooms, while retaining the three bedroom layout. The Hazarvartians have recently requested a garbage grinder for the kitchen. Based upon this request and your comments, the design has now been upgraded to four bedrooms with a 50% leaching area expansion of the proposed leach field. The design effluent is therefore 660 gallons per day. Other revisions to the plan based upon your comments are as follows: 1. The maximum groundwater elevation has been set to 96.57. 2. The area of the leaching field has been increased to 1200 square feet. 3. A 2,000 gallon two-compartment septic tank has replaced the proposed 1,500 gallon tank. 4. A designer certification has been added(a wetlands certification was already present on the plan). 5. Notes have been added to the distribution box to state that the outlets shall be level for the first two feet and that six inches of stone shall be placed below the box. 6. A wooden deck has been added behind the house addition and the line from the septic tank to the distribution box has been re-routed. 7. Existing system abandonment notes have been added on the plan. 8. General note number six (6) has been revised to state that tight joint piping shall be waterproof. 9. General note number thirteen (13) has been added to indicate that all piping shall be sloped at 1/8 inch per foot (0.005 ft/ft). 10. The profile and finished grades have been adjusted. 3 ELECTRONICS AVENUE, DANVERS, MASSACHUSETTS 01923 TEL:617.489.7795 FAX:877.842.9629 WWW.DE000LOS.COM r 4 Page 2 of,2 Sandra Starr, Health Director North Andover Board of Health Friday, April 11, 2003 Should you have any questions or need additional information please feel free to contact me. Thank you. V t 1 yours, ames J. Decoulos, PE, LSP jamesj@decoulos.com cc: Susan and Kim Hazarvartian From:James J.Decoulos To:Sandy Starr Date:4/3x1003 Time:8:45:18 AM Page 1 of 1 DECOULOS &COMPANY ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING 8 LAND PLANNING VL4 FACSIMILE Thursday, April 03, 2003 Sandra Starr, Health Director North Andover Board of Health 27 Charles Street North Andover, MA 01845 -1664 RE:Private residence of Susan and Kim Hazarvartian; 160 Boston Street;Map 107B, Parcel 35 Dear Ms. Starr: On October 23, 2002, a septic system replacement design and application to construct an individual sewage disposal system was hand delivered to your office for the above referenced property. To date, no action has been taken by the North Andover Board of Health on the application. I will call you later this morning to discuss this situation. Thank you. Very truly yours, James J. Decoulos, PE, LSP iamesj(ddecoulos.com cc: Susan and Kim Hazarvartian 3 ELECTRONICS AVENUE,DANVERS,MASSACHUSETTS 01923 TEL:617.489.7795 FAX:877.842.9629 1NWW.DE000LOS.COM ti DECOULOS & COMPANY ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING&LAND PLANNING ""OWN H TOWN OF N�iF A DOVER/ BOARD' -TH VIA FACSIMILE AND IST CLASS MAIL Monday,November 04, 2002 Sandra Starr, Health Director North Andover Board of Health 27 Charles Street North Andover, MA 01845 -1664 RE: 160 Boston Street; Map 107B, Parcel 35 Dear Ms. Starr: Enclosed herewith for the above referenced property are the following: • Form 11 — Soil Evaluator Form for DH1 • Form 11 — Soil Evaluator Form for DH2 • Form 12—Percolation Test Form for PTI Should you have any questions or need additional information please feel free to contact me. Thank you. V ry truly yours, aures J. Decoulos, PE, LSP jamesj@decoulos.com cc: Susan and Kim Hazarvartian 3 ELECTRONICS AVENUE, DANVERS, MASSACHUSETTS 01923 WWW.DE000LOS.COM TEL:617.489.7795 J i r.v FORM 11 - SOIL EVALUATOR FORINI Page 1 of 3 No. 1 Date: Nov 4, 2002 Commonwealth of Massachusetts North Andover, Massachusetts Soil Suitability Assessment 'or. On-si Seware Disposal Performed By: James J. Decoulos Date: October 17, 2002 Witnessed By: .. . ...Spndra..S-tarr.. . ....... ... . .. _ ............. ......... .... .. ... pion^dui or owner's Nam,Susan and Kim Hazarvartian AW 160 Boston Street, North Andover Te><p�P 160 Boston Street North Andover, MA 01845 ew construction ❑ Repair ® 978-688-8969 Office Review Published Soil Survey Available: No ❑ Yes n Year Published Feb 198.1......... . Publication Scale 1:15„840 Soil Map Unit CbC .. Drainage Class well drained- Soil LimitationsSlope........... ...... Surf cial Geologic Report Available: No ❑ Yes n Year Published 1967 Publication Scale Geologic Material (Map Unit) till ............, Landform ....moraine.. ..... ............_........._....... ........... ............ ........... Flood Insurance Rate Map: 250098 0010 B Above 500 year flood boundary No ❑Yes Within 500 year flood boundary No ®Yes ❑ Within 100 year flood boundary No DYes ❑ Wetland Area: National Wetland Inventory Map (map unit) ..... Wetlands Conservancy Program Map(map unit) Current Water Resource Conditions(USGS): Month September 2002... Range :Above Normal ®Normal ❑Belcw Normal ❑ Ocher References Reviewed: National Weather Service. DEP APPROVED FORM-12/07195 f FORM 11 - SOIL EVALUA"1'UK FUKi1I Page 2 of 3 Location Address or Lot No. 160 Boston Street, North Andover an--site Review Deep Hole Number Date: 10/17/2002 Time: 1:00pm Weather sunny Location (identify on site plan) DH1 Land Use residential Slope {%) 10% Surface Stones Vegetation wooded ' Landform outwash Position on landscape (sketch on the back) Distances from: Open Water Body feet Drainage way 100 feet Possible Wet Area 250 feet Property Line 25 feet Drinking Water Well feet Other DEEP OBSERVATION HOLE LOG' Depth from Soil Horizon Soil Texture Soil Color Soil Other Surface llnches) (USDA) {Munsell) Mottling (Structure,Stones, Boulders, Consistency, % Gravel) 0-9 A topsoil 7.5 yr 3/1 9-18 131 subsoil 7.5 yr 4/4 •18-24 132 sandy 10 yr 5/6 loam 24-39 C1 loamy 10 yr 6/6 sand 39-72 C2 hard pack 2.5 y 7/3 silty sand 72-114 C3 hard pack 10 yr 5/4 app. 200/ sandy silt MINIMUM OF 2 HOLES KEQUI EVERY PROPOSED DISPOSAL AKtA Parent Material(geologic) glacial till DepthtoBedrock: Depth to Groundwater: Standing Water in the Hole: Weeping from Pit Face: _ Estimated Seasonal High Ground Water: 45" DEP APPROVED FORM•12/07/95 NORM 11 - SOIL LVALUATOR FORM Page 3 of 3 Location Address or Lot No. 160 Boston Street, North Andover Determination for Seasonal High Water Table Method Used: ❑ Depth observed standing in observation hole inches ❑ Depth weeping from side of observation hole.. inches ® Depth to soil mottles .. .45 inches ❑ Ground water adjustment .... ............. feet Index Well Number -- . ..... Reading Date ......... Index well level . ... . Adjustment factor .................. Adjusted ground water level .................................... _._ __. Depth of Naturally Occurring Pervious Material Does at least four feet of naturally occurring pervious material exist in all areas observed throughout the area proposed for the soil absorption system. ? yes If not, what is the depth of naturally occurring pervious material? Certification I certify that on 11/94 (date) I have passed the soil evaluator examination approved by the l3epartment of Environmental Protection and that the above analysis was performed by me consistent with the required training, expertise and experience described in 310 CMR Signature Date Nov 4, 2002 DEP APPROVED FORM•12/07/95 FORM 11 - SOIL EVALUATOR FORM Page I of 3 No. 2 Date: Nov 4, 2002 Commonwealth of Massachusetts North Andover, Massachusetts Soil, Suitability Assessmentr - ire &ware DiWssd Performed By: James J. Decoulos . .. ._ . Date: October 17, 2002 Witnessed By: . . . Sandra..Starr.. ....._. __ . ,=uio„^,&e,:or °.ter',"--Susan and Kim Hazarvartian 160 Boston Street, North Andover T 160 Boston Street North Andover, MA 01845 pew construction ❑ Repair ® 978-688-8969 Office Review Published Soil Survey Available: No ❑ Yes FX Year Published Feb 1981.......,. Publication Scale 1:15„840 Soil Map Unit CbC .. Drainage Class well drained_ Soil Limitations .......... _.., _ ._... Surf cial Geologic Report Available: No ❑ Yes ED Year Published 1967 Publication Scale Geologic Material (Map Unit) till ..... Landform ....moraine . .... ..................._......... ....... ............. .......... Flood Insurance Rate Map: 250098 0010 B Above 500 year flood boundary No ❑Yes 0 Within 500 year flood boundary No ®Yes ❑ Within 100 year flood boundary No Dyes ❑ Wetland Area: National Wetland Inventory Map (map unit) ..... ......... ........... ........ ............................... Wetlands Conservancy Program Map(map unit) Current Water Resource Conditions(USGS): Month September 2002... Range :Above Normal ®Normal ❑Belc,v Normal ❑ Other References Reviewed: National Weather Service. DEP APPROVED FORM-12/07195 FORM II - SOIL EVALUATOR FORM Page 2 of 3 Location Address or Lot No. 160 Boston Street, North Andover On-site Review Deep Hole Number. 2 Date: 10/17/2002 Time: 1:30pm Weather sunny Location (identify on site plan) DH2... . . . Land Use .. residential Slope M 10% Surface Stones Vegetation . Wooded Landform ... Outwash Position on landscape (sketch on the back) Distances from: Open Water Body feet Drainage way 100 feet Possible Wet Area 250 feet Property Line 25 feet Drinking Water Weil feet Other DEEP OBSERVATION HOLE LOG* Depth from Soil Horizon Soil Texture Soil Color Soil Other Surface llnches) IUSDA) (Munsell) Mottling (Structure,Stones, "uldars, Consistency, % Gravel) 0-9 A topsoil 7.5 yr 3/1 9-26 B subsoil 7.5 yr 4/4 '26-88 C1 loamy 10 yr 6/6 sand 88-112 C2 hard pack 10 yr 4/6 medium sandy loam Parent Material{geologic) glacial till Depttvtogelrock: Depth to Groundwater: Standing Water in the Hole: Weeping from Pit Face: _ Estimated Seasonal High Ground Water: 48" DEP APPROVED FORM-12/07!95 FORM 11 - SOIL LVALUATOR FORM Page 3 of 3 Location Address or Lot No. 160 Boston Street, North Andover Determination for Seasonal High Water Table Method Used: ❑ Depth observed standing in observation hole ....... inches ❑ Depth weeping from side of observation hole... inches ® Depth to soil mottles . .48 inches ❑ Ground water adjustment ................... feet Index Well Number ................ Reading Date .........._._.. Index well level Adjustment factor .............._ Adjusted ground water level ....... ....................... .... .__... Depth of Naturally Occurring Pervious Material Does at least four feet of naturally occurring pervious material exist in all areas observed throughout the area proposed for the soil absorption system? des If not, what is the depth of naturally occurring pervious material? Certification I certify that on 11/94 (date) I have passed the soil evaluator examination approved by the Department of Environmental Protection and that the above analysis was performed by me con 'stent with the required training, expertise and experience described in 310 CMR 15 017 Signatur Date Nov 4, 2002 DEP APPROVED FORM•12/07/95 A FORM 12 - PERCOLATIOIN TEST Location Address or Lot No. 160 Boston Street, North Andover COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS North Andover, Massachusetts Percolation Test' Date: October 17, 2002 Time:. 2:00pm Observation Hole # PT1 Depth of Perc 48" Start Pre-soak 11:41 End Pre-soak 11:56 Time at 12" 11:56 Time at 9" 12:19 Time at 6" 12:56 Time (9"-6") 37 minutes Rate Min./Inch 13 " Minimum of 1 percolation test must be performed in both the primary area AND reserve area. Site Passed ® Site Failed ❑ .....................................................................................................................................- Performed By: James J. Decoulos Witnessed By: Sandra Starr Comments: DFP APPROVED TORM-12!07/!5 DECOULOS & COMPANY ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING&LAND PLANNING VIA HAND DELIVERY Wednesday, October 23, 2002 Sandra Starr, Health Director North Andover Board of Health 27 Charles Street North Andover, MA 01845 -1664 RE.- 160 Boston Street; Map 107B, Parcel 35 Dear Ms. Starr: On behalf of Susan and Kim Hazarvartian, enclosed herewith are three signed copies of a septic system replacement design for 160 Boston Street together with an application for a disposal system construction permit. Susan and Kim have been anxiously awaiting to make improvements to their property and would appreciate an expedited review from your office if possible. They are seeking to obtain a building permit and start renovation work before the winter weather arrives. Should you have any questions or need additional information please feel free to contact me. Thank you. V ry I ours, James J. Decoulos, PE, LSP jamesj@decoulos.com cc: Susan and Kim Hazarvartian 3 ELECTRONICS AVENUE, DANVERS,MASSACHUSETTS 01923 WWW.DE000LOS.COM TEL:617-489-7795 DECOULOS & COMPANY ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING&LAND PLANNING BOARL OF HFJ`,'T!-i F------- F .' 2 5 2002 VIA FACSIMILE AND 1 sT CLASS MAIL Friday, September 13, 2002 Sandra Starr, Health Director North Andover Board of Health 27 Charles Street North Andover, MA 01845 -1664 RE: 160 Boston Street; Map 107B, Parcel 35 Dear Ms. Starr: On behalf of Susan and Kim Hazarvartian, enclosed is a completed application for soil tests for the upgrade of an existing septic system. Attached is a plot plan from Griggs Engineering dated November, 1994 that shows the existing house, garage and septic system. A check in the amount of$225.00 and proof of land ownership will be delivered toyour office no later than Tuesday, September 17'n. We look forward to hearing from you on the first available date to conduct the testing. Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions or concerns. Thank you. V r t ours Y YY , ames J. Decoulos, PE, LSP James j @decoulos.com cc: Susan and Kim Hazarvartian 248 ANDOVER STREET,PEABODY, MASSACHUSETTS 01960 TEL:978 532 8154 FAX:978 359 6034 WWW.DE000LOS.COM GRIGGS ENGINEERING -tA Or Ms 13 BOW DRIVE FRANCIS E. RIGGS, JR. *��.��•,CNo. 24157 HAVERHILL, MA �, w, ;vY, F,E, GRIGGS, JR. PLS 24157 NORTH r� 4'X24' PROPOSED GARAGE AREA= 45,190 SF J, G �rL g 9y 68.25' 0 In N m .� f'') B❑! S yST�� � RTIAN T A GRIGGS ENGINEERING •`<.o`� 13 DOW DRIVE ��w'.�� QcS FNRANCIS V,,1C E. + u` GRIGGS. HAVERHILL, MAN°. znisz FZ GRIGGS, JR, PLS 24157 NORTH r� 4'X24' PROPOSED GARAGE AREA= 45,190 SF G �rL 5 92 68.25' 0 to in r7 (U m 263,18' BOSTON STREET PLOT PLAN LANDS OF M . HAZARVARTIAN 160 BOSTON STREET NORTH ANDOVER, MA SCALE 1'=50' NOV 1994 r , 160 BOSTON STREET JS-2003-0604 Project Detail Report Printed On:Thu Jun 19,2003 GIS#: 7631 JProject No: JS-2003-0604. Owner of Record'HAZARVARTIAN, KIM E&' Map: 107.8 Date Submitted: Apr-23-2003,,.,- 160 BOSTON'S'T'REET Block: 0035 Status: Open NORTH ANDOVER,MA 01845 Lot: Work Category: Work Location- '160 BOSTON STREET Zoning: Proposed Use: District: land Use: 101 Proposed Use Detail Subdivision Description Septic Testing,Design,Construction of Work: Department Status GeoTMS Module: Status File No. Comments: LCDate: Board of Health GREEN FLAG BHJ-2003-0010 Wed.6/18/03-Jim Decoulos called re:status of plans. Please call at 617-489-7795 to let him know. Sandy has file. Thurs.-6/12/03 @ 10:45 a.m.-Jim Decoulos called looking for the final status of the plans. Please call him at 617-489-7795. Sandy said she will call Jim back. Tues.-6/10/03-Notified Jim DeCoulos of four items that Sandy outlined. She stated that plans will be done review by Wed. 6/4/03-Wed.-Mr.Hazarvartian called Town Hall looking for status of plans. File with all paperwork is in the septic plan review bin outside of SS office. Not clear as to what has been do or if approved.--p.d. 5/16/03: Kim Hazarvartian's father dropped off their check today in the amount of$225.00 to cover the plan review for the third set of septic plans they submitted on May 8th. I do not have t 160 Boston Street file in the septic files. It is not in the general files. Therefore,I am assuming that you have the file in your office. I put the third set of plans and receipt from the check in yot septic inbox on top of the bookcase outside of your office. 5/12/03-Left msg.With Jim DeCoulas that we need a check for$225. Third revised plans were received on Thurs.Afternoon with no check. I left previous msg.Explaining that we need a chec 4/29/03-9:30 a.m.-:Per Sandy-the plans she has now she needs$225 to be submitted for thei as they are completely different plans from what was submitted last fall. If revised plans are submitted after these current plans,the fee is covered in the$225 we are now waiting for. If plans are submitted after the revised plans,there will be an additional$225 fee. 1 called and left a message with Jim DeCoulas,letting him know that we need a check,and no further review will be done on this file until the check is received,per Sandy.--p.d. Permit History Type: Permit No: Issue Date Status Work Category Project No: Description of Work: Design Approval-Plan Re-BHP-2003-0042 Apr-23-2003 OPEN JS-2003-0604 2nd Design Approval GeoTMS®2003 Des Lauriers Municipal Solutions,Inc. Page 1 of 2 w 160 BOSTON STREET JS-2003-0604 Proiect Detail Report Printed On:Thu Jun 19,2003 Disposal Works ConstructioBHP-2003-0043 Apr-23-2003 OPEN JS-2003-0604 DWC Repair Soil Tests BHP-2003-0041 Apr-23-2003 OPEN JS-2003-0604 Soil Testing Repair i i 1 1 GeoTMS®2003 Des Lauriers Municipal Solutions,Inc. Page 2 of 2 i 160 BOSTON STREET .is-2003-0604 Project Detail Report Printed On:Thu Jun 12,2003 GIS#: 7631 Project No: JS-2003-0604 Owner of Record HAZARVARTIAN,KIM E& Map: 1073 Date Submitted: Apr-23-2003 160 BOSTON STREET Block: 0035 Status: Open NORTH ANDOVER,MA 01845 Lot: Work Category: Work Location: 160 BOSTON STREET Zoning: 1Proposed Use: i IDistrict: land Use: 101 JProposed Use Detail I ISubdivision Description Septic Testing Design;Construction of Work: Department Status GeoTMS Module: Status File No. Comments: LCDate: Board of Health GREEN FLAG BHJ-2003-0010 Thurs.-6/12/03 @ 10:45 a.m.-Jim Decoulos called looking for the final status of the plans. Please call him at 617489-7795. Sandy said she will call Jim back. ' Tues.-6/10/03-Notified Jim DeCoulos of four items that Sandy outlined. She stated that plans i will be done review by Wed. 6/4/03-Wed.-Mr.Hazarvartian called Town Hall looking for status of plans. File with all paperwork is in the septic plan review bin outside of SS office. Not clear as to what has been done, or if approved--p.d. 5/16/03: Kim Hazarvartian's father dropped off their check today in the amount of$225.00 to cover the plan review for the third set of septic plans they submitted on May Sth. I do not have the 160 Boston Street file in the septic files. It is not in the general files, Therefore,I am assuming that you have the file in your office. I put the third set of plans and receipt from the check in your septic inbox on top of the bookcase outside of your office. 5/12/03-Left msg.With Jim DeCoulas that we need a check for$225. Third revised plans were received on Thurs.Afternoon with no check. I left previous msg.Explaining that we need a check. 4/29/03-9:30 a.m.-:Per Sandy-the plans she has now she needs$225 to be submitted for them, as they are completely different plans from what was submitted last fall. If revised plans are submitted after these current plans,the fee is covered in the$225 we are now waiting for. If plans are submitted after the revised plans,there will be an additional$225 fee. I called and left a message with Jim DeCoulas,letting him know that we need a check,and no further review will be done on this file until the check is received,per Sandy.--p.d. Permit History Type: Permit No: Issue Date Status Work Category Project No: Description of Work: Design Approval-Plan Re- BHP-2003-0042 Apr-23-2003 OPEN JS-2003-0604 2nd Design Approval Disposal Works Constructio BHP-2003.0043 Apr-23-2003 OPEN JS-2003-0604 DWC Repair Soil Tests BHP-2003-0041 Apr-23-2003 OPEN JS-2003-0604 Soil Testing Repair GeoTMS®2003 Des Lauriers Municipal Solutions,Inc. Page 1 of 2 160 BOSTON STREET JS-2003-0604 Project Detail Report Printed On: Wed Oct 22,2003 Project Name: GIS#: 7631 Project No: JS-2003-0604 Owner of Record HAZARVARTIAN,KIM E& Map: 1073 Date Submitted: Apr-23-2003 160 BOSTON STREET Block: 0035 Status: Open NORTH ANDOVER,MA 01845 Lot: lWork Category: Septic System Work Location: 1160 BOSTON STREET . Zoning: JProposed Use: Residential District: land Use: 101 JProposed Use Detail Single Family Home Subdivision Description Septic Testing,Design,Construction for 2 additions Comments: Plans rejected 3-4 times because of changed locations,designs,etc. of Work: Department Status GeoTMS Module: Status File No. Comments: LCDate: Board of Health GREEN FLAG BHJ-2003-0010 10/22/03-Received Construction Report from Consultant 10/17/03-John Soucy called re:Bottom of Bed inspection. Passed onto Consultant. 7/23/03-Letter received from DEP(Claire Golden)in response to questions posed in Infiltrator systems. Letter put in file and given to Sandy for review. --p.d. 7/17/03-Faxed Design Approval Permit to Engineer,Jim DeCoulos.--p.d. 7/15/03-reviewed. Sent e-mail asking about infiltrator detail that has not been changed. 7/11/03-Plans received 6/30/03-Eng.Re-designing plan to re-submit around Wed.6/18/03-Jim Decoulos called re:status of plans. Please call at 617489-7795 to let him know. Sandy has file. I Thurs.-6/12/03 @ 10:45 a.m.-Jim Decoulos called looking for the final status of the plans. Tues.-6/10/03-Notified Jim DeCoulos of four items that need attention 6/4/03-Wed.-Mr.Hazarvartian called Town Hall looking for status of plans. 5/16/03: Kim Hazarvartian's father dropped off their check today in the amount of$225.00 to cover the plan review for the third set of septic plans they submitted on May 8th. 5/12/03-Left msg.With Jim DeCoulas that we need a check for$225. Third revised plans were received on Thurs.Afternoon with no check. I left previous msg.Explaining that we need a check. 4/29/03-9:30 a.m.-:Per Sandy-the plans she has now she needs$225 to be submitted for them, as they are completely different plans from what was submitted last fall. GeoTMS®2003 Des Landers Municipal Solutions,Inc. Page 1 of 2 160 BOSTON STREET JS-2003-0604 Project Detail Report Printed On:Wed Oct 22,2003 If revised plans are submitted after these current plans,the fee is covered in the$225 we are now waiting for. If plans are submitted after the revised plans,there will be an additional$225 fee. I called and left a message with Jim DeCoulas,letting him know that we need a check,and no further review will be done on this file until the check is received,per Sandy—p.d. Permit History , Type: Permit No: Issue Date Status Work Category Contractor Project No: Description of Work: Design Approval-Plan Re- BHP-2003-0042 Apr-23-2003 OPEN JS-2003-0604 4th Design Approval Disposal Works Constructio BHP-2003-0043 Apr-23-2003 OPEN JS-2003-0604 DWC-septic repair Repair Soil Tests BHP-2003-0041 Apr-23-2003 SIGNED OFF JS-2003-0604 Soil Testing Repair Inspection History Inspection Type: Permit Type: Permit No: Insp Date: Status: Inspector: Project No: Comment: Bed bottom DWC-System Construction BHP-2003-0043 Oct-17-2003 FULL COMPLY Dan Ottenheimer JS-2003-0604 I� I I GeoTMS®2003 Des Lauriers Municipal Solutions,Inc. Page 2 of 2 i Town of North Andover, Massachusetts Form No.3 t N�o'rh BOARD OF HEALTH +s^ a �''°•,..o �"� DISPOSAL WORKS CONSTRUCTION PERMIT ,S.3 CHUSEt Applicant NAME/ ADDRESS TELEPHONE Site Location Z,/� ©•5��� 2' &4/"U7, y� P-4-ifTZI/r%eSS Permission is hereby granted to Construct (, or Repair ( ) an Individual Soil Absorption �l Sewage Disposal System as shown on the Design Approval S.S. No. t CHAIRMAN,BOARD OF HEALTH Fee D.W.C. No. a oo� ti i APPLICATION FOR DISPOSAL WORKS CONSTRUCTION PERMIT DATE: 3—;&_03 CURRENT INSTALLER'S LICENSE# LOCATION: C7 &S-,(ov1 LICENSED INSTc LA SIGNATURE: TELEPHONEq? CHECK ONE: REPAIR: l/ NEW CONSTRUCTION: IF NEW CONSTRUCTION, PLEASE ATTACH FOUNDATION AS-BUILT. Administrative Use Only $175.00 Fee Attached? Yes No Foundation As-built? Yes No Floor plans on file? Yes No Approval_ Date: 10, MAR 262003 INSTALLER PROJECT MANAGEMENT OBLIGATIONS As the North Andover licensed installer for the construction of the septic system for the property at L S-F,o� relative to the application of Qs ,dated `3 —�%cc's for plans by l�_1�v�o5 �0, and dated I D-a-3 U with revisions dated, I understand the following obligations for management of this project: 1. As the installer I am obligated to obtain all permits and Board of Health approved plans prior to performing any work on a site. I must have the approved plans and the permit on site when any work is being done. 2. As the installer I must call for any and all inspections. If homeowner, contractor, project manger, or any other person not associated with my company schedules an inspection and the system is not ready then item three shall be applicable. 3. As the installer I am required to have the necessary work completed prior to the applicable inspections as indicated below. I understand that requesting an inspection, without completion of the items in accordance with Tile 5 and the Board of Health Regulations may result in a$50.00 fine being levied against my company. a) Bottom of Bed -generally first inspection unless there is a retaining wall which should be done first. Installer must request the inspection but does not have to be present. b) Final inspection — Engineer must first do their inspection for elevations, ties, etc. As-built or verbal OK from engineer must be submitted to Board of Health, after which installer calls for inspection time. Installer must be present for this inspection. With pump system all electrical work must be ready and able to cause pump to work and alarm to function. c) Final Grade Installer must request inspection when all grading is complete. Does not have to be on site. 4. As the installer I understand that only I may perform the work(other than simple excavation) required to complete the installation of the system identified in the attached application for installation. I further understand that work by others unlicensed to install septic systems in North Andover can constitute reasons for denial of the system, and/or revocation or suspension of my license to operate in the Town of North Andover; significant fines to all persons involved are also possible. 5. As the Installer I understand that I must be on site during the performance of the following construction steps: a) Determination that the proper elevation of the excavation has been reached. b) Inspection of the sand and stone to be used. c) Final inspection by Board of Health staff or consultant. d) Installation of tank, D-box, pipes, stone, vent, pump chamber, retaining wall and other components. 6. As the installer I understand that I am solely responsible for the installation of the system as per the approved plans. No instructions by the homeowner, general contractor, or any other Persons shall absolve me of this obligation. Undersi tensed Septi nstaller Date: Disposa orks Construction Permit# Page 1 of 1 DelleChiaie, Pamela From: Dan Ottenheimer[info@millriverconsulbng.com] Sent: Tuesday, October 21, 2003 1:58 PM To: Heidi Griffin; Brian LaGrasse; Pamela Dellechiaie Subject: 160 Boston Street Heidi, Brain and Pam, Attached please find the construction inspection form for the bottom of bed inspection performed at 160 Boston Street. No problems found. Dan Mill River Consulting Septic System Management Services 5 Blackburn Center Gloucester, MA 01930-2259 978-282-0014 or 1-800-377-3044 fax: 978-282-0012 info@millriverconsulting.com 10/22/2003 r � TOWN OF NORTH ANDOVER SEPTIC SYSTEM CONSTRUCTION NOTES ADDRESS: 160 Boston Street MAP: LOT: INSTALLER: John Soucy DESIGNER: PLAN DATE: BOH APPROVAL DATE ON PLAN: SELECT SYSTEM TYPE GRAVITY DISTRIBUTION PRESSURE DISTRIBUTION * PRESSURE DOSING HOLDING TANK ADVANCED TREATMENT OTHER COMPONENT SUMMARY FROM PLAN GALLON TANK = 1500 LOADING OF SEPTIC TANK = GALLON PUMP CHAMBER = 1000 LOADING OF PUMP CHAMBER = TYPE OF SAS = DIMENSIONS AND DETAILS OF SAS: SITE CONDITIONS Date & Initials Inspections ❑ Existing septic tank properly abandoned ❑ Internal plumbing all to one building sewer ❑ Topography not appreciably altered Comments: SEPTIC TANK ❑ Bottom of tank hole has 6" stone base ❑ Weep hole plugged 10/17/03 MRC D 1500 gallon tank has been installed (H-10 or H-20) (monolithic or 2 piece) ❑ Water tightness of tank has been achieved (Visual or Vacuum Test or Water held for 24 hrs) Page 1 of 4 J ❑ Inlet tee installed, over access port ❑ Outlet tee (gas baffle or effluent filter) installed, over access port ❑ inch cover to within 6" of final grade installed over one access port, must be over outlet of tank if effluent filter is present ❑ Hydraulic cement around inlet & outlet Comments: PUMP CHAMBER ❑ Bottom of tank hole has 6" stone base ❑ Weep hole plugged 10/17/03 MRC ❑ 1000 gallon Pump Chamber installed (H-10 or H-20) (monolithic or 2 piece) ❑ Inlet tee installed, over access port ❑ Pump(s) installed on stable base ❑ Alarm float working ❑ Pump On/Off float working ❑ Drain hole in pressure line ❑ inch cover to within 6" of final grade installed over one access port ❑ Water tightness of tank has been achieved Visual or Vacuum Test or Water held for 24 hrs ❑ Hydraulic cement around inlet & outlet Comments: D-BOX ❑ Installed on stable stone base ❑ Inlet tee (if pumped or >0.08'/foot) ❑ Hydraulic cement around inlet & outlets ❑ Observed even distribution ❑ Speed levelers provided (not required) Comments: SOIL ABSORPTION SYSTEM 10/17/03 MRC ❑X Bottom of SAS excavated down to C soil layer, as provided on plan Page 2 of 4 10/17/03 MRC Size of SAS excavated as per plan ❑ Title 5 sand installed, if specified on plan ❑ 3/4-1 1/" double washed stone installed ❑ 1/8-1/2" (peastone) double washed stone installed ❑ laterals installed and ends connected to header (and vented if impervious material above) ❑ Orifices @ 5 & 7 o'clock positions ❑ Gravelless disposal systems: type, number and location as per plan ❑ Elevations of laterals installed as on approved plan ❑ 40 Mil HDPE barrier installed ❑ Retaining wall (boulder/concrete /timber/ block) ❑ Final cover as per plan Comments: CONTROL PANEL ❑ Alarm & Pump are on separate circuits ❑ Alarm sounds when float is tripped ❑ Location of control panel: ❑ Rated for exterior if placed outside Comments: SYSTEM ELEVATIONS Benchmark: Rod at Benchmark: Height of Instrument: INVERT ON DESIGN PLAN ELEV A TOP OF PIPE INVERT ELEVATION Building Sewer OUT Septic Tank IN Septic Tank OUT Pump Chamber IN Pump Chamber OUT Distribution Box IN Distribution Box OUT Manifold Lateral 1 HIGH Lateral 1 LOW Lateral 2 HIGH Lateral 2 LOW Lateral 3 HIGH Lateral 3 LOW Lateral 4 HIGH Page 3 of 4 Lateral 4 LOW Lateral 5 HIGH Lateral 5 LOW Page 4 of 4 • "` Town of North Andover, Massachusetts Form No. 1 01 NORTH ••"� BOARD OF HEALTH O L^ ^ APPLICATION FOR SITE TESTING/INSPECTION °RATED pPP'y.�5 �9SSACHUS�( i Applicant GGG� NAME ADDRESS TELEPHONE Site Location Engineer NAME ADDRESS TEL PHONE Test/Inspection Date and Time c ,p CHAIRMAN,BOARD OF HEALTH Fee UJ6 Test No. S.S. Permit No. D.W.C. No. C.C. Date Plbg. Permit No. Town of North Andover, Massachusetts Form No. 1 NORTHA" ABOARD OF HEALTH 3�OO �StLED /b�A � 416�Y APPLICATION FOR SITE TESTING/INSPECTION ��SSACHUSE��y .s ppi c a n t NAME � � AD..� 1' TELEPHONE Site Location Engineer NAMEADDRESS TEL PHONE Test/Inspection Date and Time CHAIRMAN,BOARD OF HEALTH Fee G% Test No. S.S.-Permit No. D.W.C. No. C.C. Date Plbg. Permit No. BOARD OF HEALTH NORTH ANDOVER, MA 01845 978-688-9540 APPLICATION FOR SOIL TESTS DATE: /��f 4 Z MAP&PARCEL: /07 r-0 3 LOCATION OF SOIL TESTS: 6n/ Sim SvS41✓ .,4- 1:::� OWNER: 1114 7�2 I/fid 9 7-1;41V-' TEL. NO.: -a�� d 1 ADDRESS: l0e�,e /1114�2 y �' y/Z i, �NCo 02� ,�(✓�/ 4 3 30 01 ENGINEER: IJM'<�i17 �✓` P� Ca v L DS TEL. NO.: 9-7 8 4-502- 916-4- CERTIFIED 1S4CERTIFIED SOIL EVALUATOR: _ �`I��� _J ��GO U &C�S Intended Use of Land: Residential Subdivisionmgle Family Home Commercial Is This: Repair Testing: ✓ Undeveloped lot testing: In the Lake Cochichewick Watershed? Yes No THE FOLLOWING MUST BE INCLUDED WITH THIS FORM D 1. Proof of land ownership (Tax bill, or letter from owner permitting test) b 2. Plot plan & Location of Testing 3. Fee of$425.00 per lot for new construction. This covers theminim two deep holes and two percolation tests required for each disposal area. Fee of$225.00 per lot for repairs or up ades. (If time is not critical, fee for repairs is$75.00) GENERAL INFORMATION 1. Only Certified Soil Evaluators may perform deep hole inspections. 2. Only Mass. Registered Sanitarians and Professional Engineers can design septic plans. 3. At least two deep holes and two percolation tests are required for each septic system disposal area. 4. Repairs require at least two deep holes and at least one percolation test,at the discretion of the BOH representative. 5. Full payment will be required for all additional tests'within two weeks of testing. 6. Within 45 days of testing, a scaled plan(no smaller than 1"-100') shall be submitted to the Board of Health showing the location of all tests(including aborted tests). 7. Within 60 days of testing soil evaluation forms shall be submitted. Please Do Not Write Below This Line i N.A. Conservation Commission Approval: Date Received: Check Amount: Check Date: r ' Y GRIGGS ENGINEERING 13 DOW DRIVE FRAJUIS wN GR2CC�.1R, HA VERHILL, MA <,:�r,e.t„5, F.E. GRIGGS, JR. PLS 24157 NORTH v� ,go 4'X24' PROPOSED GARAGE AREA= 45,190 SF 5 9y v 68.25' 7CAL Jo o /lir 611124G t N f �Jl%�iiiNl� i!a v5E ci M CV) 263.18' BOSTON STREET r Septic plan locations PLOT PLAN taken from as-built plan P dated 7/17/57. LANDS [IF” M, HAZARVARTIAN 160 BOSTON STREET NORTH ANDOVER, MA SCALE 1'=50' NOV 1994 LOC, ION: =COL i(ON i S i .= G F _ iiNlE 0\"E= N. I G i lvi E E i= Ni= i " Ti 1 ` _ J f Y1.441- Jill i l l i i At I ii II I I I ' i ,y r� COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION a i TITLE 5 OFFICIAL INSPECTION FORM—NOT FOR VOLUNTARY ASSESSMENTS SUBSURFACE SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM FORM PART A CERTIFICATION 424 �� z;�;r�� ��'R, Property Address• /����o� .�"`; 2 ' Owner's Name: z6de z a Owner's Address: s , by ,,• :r.. Date of Inspection: /D--0/ +Name of Inspector:(please print) ' C e-^Q4 Company Name: 7 C Mailing Address: G S Telephone Number._ q -3 27 7/ .Z r .X 'CERTIFICATION STATEMENT � �"••I certify that I have personally inspected the sewage disposal system at this address and thatthe information reported below is true,accurate and complete as of the time of the inspection.The inspection was performed based on my training and experience in the proper function and maintenance of on site sewage disposal systems.I am a DEP app roved system m ins pector pursuant to Section 15.340 of Title S(310 CMR 15.000 . The system: x' � t'f;;xflxli4 *��i�Ir4 J i , asses Conditionally Passes Needs F r Evaluation by the Local Approving Authority Z r' Inspector's Signature: ate: r� Thesystem inspector steal4mit a copy of this inspection report to the Approving Authority(Board of Health or DEP)within 30 days of completing this inspection.If the system is a shared system or has a design flow of 10,000 gpd or greater,the inspector and the system owner shall submit the report to the appropriate regional office of the DEP.The original should be sent to the system owner and copies sent to the buyer,if applicable,and the approving authority41Tv l+}sit kr , v m& r ., BOARD OF HEAL, .� . �a and comm, ments G I 42001 "' ee 'This report only describes conditions at the time of inapectio ' and under tbe�eonditions-0t u °at that time.This inspection does not address bow the system will perform in the future under the same or different conditions of use. Inspection Form. 6/1=000 ° page 1 ` ' Page 2 of l l OFFICIAL INSPECTION FORM—NOT FOR VOLUNTARY ASSESSMENTS SUBSURFACE SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM INSPECTION FORM PART A CERTIFICATION (continued) Property Address: nJ SZ- ,, // SZ- AM N Owner: !7G 2zI r Date of Inspection: 77/4^Q/ Inspection Summary: Check A,B,C,D or E/ALWAYS complete all of Section D A. System Passes: I have not found any information which indicates that any of the failure criteria described in 310 CMR 15.303 or in 310 CMR 15.304 exist. Any failure criteria not evaluated are indicated below. Comments: B. System Conditionally Passes: One or more system components as described in the"Conditional Pass"section need to be replaced or repaired:The system,upon completion of the replacement or repair,as approved by the Board of Health,will pass. Answer yes,no or not determined(Y,N,ND)in the for the following statements. If"not determined"please explain. The septic tank is metal and over 20 years old*or the septic tank(whether metal or not)is structurally unsound,exhibits substantial infiltration or exfiltration or tank failure is imminent. System will pass inspection if the existing tank is replaced with a complying septic tank as approved by the Board of Health. *A metal septic tank will pass inspection if it is structurally sound,not leaking and if a Certificate of Compliance indicating that the tank is less than 20 years old is available. ND explain: Observation of sewage backup or break out or high static water level in the distribution box due to broken or obstructed pipe(s)or due to a broken,settled or uneven distribution box. System will pass inspection if(with approval of Board of Health): broken pipe(s)are replaced obstruction is removed distribution box is leveled or replaced ND explain: The system required pumping more than 4 times a year due to broken or obstructed pipe(s).The system will pass inspection if(with approval of the Board of Health): broken pipe(s)are replaced obstruction is removed ND explain: 2 Page 3 of 1 I OFFICIAL INSPECTION FORM-NOT FOR VOLUNTARY ASSESSMENTS SUBSURFACE SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM INSPECTION FORM PART A CERTIFICATION(continued) Property Address: 6 ©-T PJ Jc 1— A),0 N ejA,,4,,L Owner:Ala Z Cf V Ll 4? f Date of Inspection: 7 C. Further Evaluation is Required by the Board of Health: Conditions exist which require further evaluation by the Board of Health in order to determine if the system is failing to protect public health, safety or the environment. 1. System will pass unless Board of Health determines in accordance with 310 CMR 15.303(1)(b)that the system is not functioning in a manner which will protect public health,safety and the environment: _ Cesspool or privy is within 50 feet of a surface water Cesspool or privy is within 50 feet of a bordering vegetated wetland or a salt marsh 2. System will fail unless the Board of Health(and Public Water Supplier,if any)determines that the system is functioning in a manner that protects the public health,safety and environment: _ The system has a septic tank and soil absorption system(SAS)and the SAS is within 100 feet of a surface water supply or tributary to a surface water supply. The system has a septic tank and SAS and the SAS is within a Zone 1 of a public water supply. The system has a septic tank and SAS and the SAS is within 50 feet of a private water supply well. _ The system has a septic tank and SAS and the SAS is less than 100 feet but 50 feet or more from a private water supply well". Method used to determine distance "This system passes if the well water analysis,performed at a DEP certified laboratory,for coliform bacteria and volatile organic-compounds.indicates that the-well is-free-from pollution from that facility and the presence of ammonia nitrogen and nitrate nitrogen is equal to or less than 5 ppm,provided that no other failure criteria are triggered.A copy of the analysis must be attached to this form. 3. Other: 3 Page 4 of 11 / OFFICIAL INSPECTION FORM—NOT FOR VOLUNTARY ASSESSMENTS SUBSURFACE SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM INSPECTION FORM PART A CERTIFICATION(continued) Property Address: D ?� Owner: 114a 2Q/ Ila r r i G U Date of Inspection: D. System Failure Criteria applicable to all systems: You must indicate"yes"or"no"to each of the following for all inspections: Yes No V Backup of sewage into facility or system component due to overloaded or clogged SAS or cesspool _LeDischarge or ponding of effluent to the surface of the ground or surface waters due to an overloaded or 01 cogged SAS or cesspool vStatic liquid level in the distribution box above outlet invert due to an overloaded or clogged SAS or cesspool _ Liquid depth in cesspool is less than 6"below invert or available volume is less than '/z day flow _ Required pumping more than 4 times in the last year NOT due to clogged or obstructed pipe(s).Number of times pumped _ 'Any portion of the SAS,cesspool or privy is below high ground water elevation. _ _jAny portion of cesspool or privy is within 100 feet of a surface water supply or tributary to a surface water supply. _ ,!/Any portion of a cesspool or privy is within a Zone 1 of a public well. Any portion of a cesspool or.privy is within 50 feet of a private water supply well. _ _Z,,-Any portion of a cesspool or privy is less than 100 feet but greater than 50 feet from a private water supply well with no acceptable water quality analysis. [This system passes if the well water analysis, performed at a DEP certified laboratory,for coliform bacteria and volatile organic compounds indicates that the well is free from pollution from that facility and the presence of ammonia nitrogen and nitrate nitrogen is equal to or less than 5 ppm,provided that no other failure criteria are triggered.A copy of the analysis must be attached to this form.] (Yes/No)The system fails. I have determined that one or more of the above failure criteria exist as described in 310 CMR 15.303,therefore the system fails. The system owner should contact the Board of Health to determine what will be necessary to correct the failure. E. Large Systems: To be considered a large system the system must serve a facility with a design flow of 10,000 gpd to 15,000 gpd• You must indicate either"yes"or"no"to each of the following: (The following criteria apply to large systems in addition to the criteria above) yes no _ the system is within 400 feet of a surface drinking water supply _ the system is within 200 feet of a tributary to a surface drinking water supply the system is located in a nitrogen sensitive area(Interim Wellhead Protection Area—IWPA)or a mapped Zone Il of a public water supply well .a If you have answered"yes"to any question in Section E the system is considered a significant threat,or answered "yes"in Section D above the large system has failed.The owner or operator of any large system considered a significant threat under Section E or failed under Section D shall upgrade the system in accordance with 310 CMR 15.304.The system owner should contact the appropriate regional office of the Department. 4 Page 5 of 11 OFFICIAL INSPECTION FORM-NOT FOR VOLUNTARY ASSESSMENTS SUBSURFACE SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM INSPECTION FORM PART B CHECKLIST Property Address:&0 Q' Owner:1-4 z q ✓ ZI/"t'/q Date of Inspection: /D-d Check if the following have been done.You must indicate"yes"or"no"as to each of the following: Yes No Pumping information was provided by the owner,occupant,or Board of Health Were any of the system`components pumped out in the previous two weeks'? Iz— Has the system received normal flows in the previous two week period? Have large volumes of water been introduced to the system recently or as part of this inspection? I/�Were as built plans of the system obtained and examined?(If they were not available note as N/A) Was the facility or dwelling inspected for signs of sewage back up? Was the site inspected for signs of break out? Were all system components,excluding the SAS, located on site? Were the septic tank manholes uncovered,opened,and the interior of the tank inspected for the condition ofthe baffles or tees,material of construction,dimensions,depth of liquid,depth of sludge and depth of scum? Was the facility owner(and occupants if different from owner)provided with information on the proper maintenance of subsurface sewage disposal systems? The size and location of the Soil Absorption System(SAS)on the site has been determined based on: Yes no /'Existing information.For example,a plan at the Board of Health. _ Determined in the field(if any of the failure criteria related to Part C is at issue approximation of distance is unacceptable)[3 10 CMR 15.302(3)(b)] 5 Page 6 of l l i, OFFICIAL INSPECTION FORM-NOT FOR VOLUNTARY ASSESSMENTS SUBSURFACE SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM INSPECTION FORM PART C / SYSTEM INFORMATION Property Address:/ b N s% /v .0 CIO d Owner• l!Za a LlOr / AA-� Date of Inspection: FLOW CONDITIONS RESIDENTIAL Number of bedrooms(design): Number of bedrooms(actual): DESIGN flow based on 310 CMR 15.203(for example: 110 gpd x#of bedrooms): Number of current residents:_/ Does residence have a garbage grinder(yes or no):�!D Is laundry on a separate sewage system(yes or no):" [if yes separate inspection required) Laundry systim inspected(yes or no): Seasonal use: (yes or no)tVp Water meter readings,if available(last 2 years usage(gpd)): Sump pump(yes or no):A,�a Last date of occupancy: 0 CG U P 1-4- COMMERCIAL/INDUSTRIAL Type of establishment: Design flow(based on 310 CMR 15.203): gpd Basis of design flow(seats/persons/sqft,etc.): Grease trap present(yes or no):_ Industrial waste holding tank present(yes or no):_ Non-sanitary waste discharged to the Title 5 system(yes or no): Water meter readings, if available: Last date of occupancy/use: OTHER(describe): GENERAL INFORMATION Pumping Records Source of information: Was system pumped asart of t e inspection(yes or no):V'es If yes,volume pumped:��_gallons--How was quanliiy pumped determined? Reason for pumping: AC S 17-AT •G?.VI�_ , TYPF SYSTEM Septic tank,tt'islribntion be,soil absorption system _Single cesspool Overflow cesspool —Privy _Shared system(yes or no)(if yes,attach previous inspection records,if any) _Innovative/Alternative technology. Attach a copy of the current operation and maintenance contract(to be obtained from system owner) Tight tank _Attach a copy of the DEP approval _Other(describe): �yAppr imate age of all components,date installed(if known)and source of information: Were sewage odors detected when arriving at the site(yes or no)://4 6 Page 7 of 11 OFFICIAL INSPECTION FORM—NOT FOR VOLUNTARY ASSESSMENTS SUBSURFACE SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM INSPECTION FORM PART C SYSTEM INFORMATION(continued) Property Address:&6 'gosZaL2 Vr .ys 0!1N Owner: Date of Inspection: / Of BUILDING SEWER(locate on site plan) Depth below grade: .3G Materials of construction:—L--fSt iron _40 PVC_other(explain): Distance from private water supply well or suction line: Comments(on condition of joints,venting,evidence of leakage,etc.): SEPTIC TANK:V(locate on site plan) Depth below grade:L— Material of construction:I.L-erncrete_metal_fiberglass polyethylene —other(explain) If tank is metal list age:_ Is age confirmed by a Certificate of Compliance(yes or no):_(attach a copy of certificate) Dimensions: Sludge depth Distance from top of slyfte to bottom of outlet tee or baffle:9 Scum thickness:_ ; Distance from top of scum to top of outlet tee or baffle: 4 Distance from bottom of scum to botto of outlet tee or baffle:L� How were dimensions determined: !'J'zGLZSy e^{, Comments(on pumping recommendations, inlet and outlet tee or baffle condition,structural integrity, liquid levels as rela d to outlet invert,evidence of leakage,etc.): -eC S La G 6 SZrc. c Tya L 4 m 4- GREASE TRAP: . (lgcate on site plan), Depth below grade: Material of construction:_concrete_metal_fiberglass polyethylene_other (explain): Dimensions: Scum thickness: Distance from top of scum to top of outlet tee or baffle: Distance from bottom of scum to bottom of outlet tee or baffle: Date of last pumping: Comments(on pumping recommendations,inlet and outlet tee or baffle condition,structural integrity, liquid levels as related to outlet invert,evidence of leakage,etc.): 7 Page 8 of l l a OFFICIAL INSPECTION FORM—NOT FOR VOLUNTARY ASSESSMENTS SUBSURFACE SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM INSPECTION FORM PART C SYSTEM INFORMATION(continued) Property Address/60 &V $ Owner://a 7-a jr[/G/v 7-i e.,­/ Date of Inspection: TIGHT or HOLDING TANK: (tank must be pumped at time of inspection)(locate on site plan) Depth below grade: Material of construction: concrete metal fiberglass_polyethylene other(explain): 4, Dimensions: A Capacity: gallons Design Flow: gallons/day Alarm present(yes or no): Alarm level: Alarm in working order(yes or no): Date of last pumping: Comments(condition of alarm and float switches,etc.): DISTRIBUTION BOX:P 1f present must be opened)(locate on site plan) Depth of liquid level above outlet invert: Comments(note if box is level and distribution to outlets equal,any evidence of solids carryover,any evidence of leakage into or out of box,etc.): PUMP CHAMBER: (locate on site plan) Pumps in working order(yes or no): Alarms in working order(yes or no): Comments(note condition'of pump chamber,Acondition ofpumps and appurtenances,etc): 8 Page 9 of 11 OFFICIAL INSPECTION FORM—NOT FOR VOLUNTARY ASSESSMENTS SUBSURFACE SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM INSPECTION FORM PART C SYSTEM INFORMATION(continued) Property Address:/ D CS c J 1b a ck� Owner:Aa —Fe7Ct v Date of Inspection: —/0 b —a 1 SOIL ABSORPTION SYSTEM(SAS): (locate on site plan,excavation not required) If SAS not located explain why: Type leaching pits,number:_ leaching chambers,number: leaching galleries,number: leaching trenches,number,length: j6 0 leaching fields,number,dimensions: overflow cesspool,number: innovative/alternative system Type/name of technology: Comments(note condition of soil,signs of hydraulic failure, level of ponding,damp soil,condition of vegetation, etc.): t 0U Gly 60 , GN CESSPOOLS: (cesspool must be pumped as part of inspect ion)(locate on site plan) Number and configuration: Depth—top of liquid to inlet invert: Depth of solids layer: Depth of scum layer: Dimensions of cesspool: Materials of construction: Indication of groundwater inflow(yes or no): Comments(note conditioQ of soil,signs of hydraulic faiture,:level of ponding,condition of vegetation,etc.): PRIVY: (locate on site plan) Materials of construction: Dimensions: Depth of solids: Comments(note condition of soil,signs of hydraulic failure,level of ponding,condition of vegetation,etc.): 9 Page 10 of 11 OFFICIAL INSPECTION FORM—NOT FOR VOLUNTARY ASSESSMENTS SUBSURFACE SEWAGE flISPOSAL SYSTEM INSPECTION FORM PART C SYSTEM INFORMATION(continued) Property Address:&6 & 7- �u &t4 w- Owner:hk Z12 //R 171_41 A-> Date of'Inspection: 2-/6-Q/ SKETCH OF SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM Provide a sketch of the sewage disposal system including ties to at least two permanent reference landmarks or benchmarks. Locate all wells within 100 feet.Locate where public water supply enters the building. � 4 G 1 -G ^ 2-L. 10 f Page 11 of 11 OFFICIAL INSPECTION FORM—NOT FOR VOLUNTARY ASSESSMENTS SUBSURFACE SEWAGE DI60SAL SYSTEM INSPECTION FORM - PART C SYSTEM INFORMATION(continued) Property Address:, ✓ 'Ove O_ Owner: : Date of Inspection: SITE EXAM Slope Surface water r Check cellar Shallow wells Estimated depth to groundwater ? feet Please indicate(check)all methods used to determine the high ground water elevation: { Obtained from system design plans on record-If checked,date of design plan reviewed: Observed site(abutting property/observation hole within 150 feet of SAS) Checked with local Board of Health-explain: Checked.with local excavators,installers-(attach documentation) Accessed USGS database-explain: You ust descri a how you established a high ground water elevation: 6V 0 L o a a a/Aji /,j 74� � l I ' 11 Wm. Cambell, Jr. Lot 12 Boston St. APPLICATION FOR SEWAGE DISPOSAL INSTALLATION 7�Q fI A4 rte_ HEALTH DEPAitTMNT--NORTH AIMOVER, MASS. V I hereby make application for a permit for a sewage disposal installation at Lot 12 Boston St. . I will install this system in accordance with all the laws of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts and regulations of the Board of Health of the Town of North Andover. Further, I will construct the house server of bell and spigot pipe., the minimum diameter being 4 inches, and will maintain a minimum grade of 1% until 10 feet preceding the septic tankjo where the grade shall not exceed 2%. T will install a concrete septic tank of Z50 gal, in size. A manhole (s) permittingg -easy cleaning will be provided with removable cover (s) of iron or concrete within 12 inches of the ground surface. I will provide subsurface disposal field with open jointed bell and spigot Ackron pipe at least 4 inches in diameter and laid in a series of trenches, the bottom of which will provide a minimum of - ,152 lineal JL=LiMj feet of effective absorption area. The pipes will be laid, on a 6 inch layer of washed gravel or crushed stone ranging in size from 3/4 to 1-1/2 inches (dia.) and the pipes will be surrounded by similar material to a height of 2 inches above the crown of the pipe. The joints of these pipes will be protected from clogging and before filling the trench, 2 inches of gravel or stone 1/80 to 1/41i* (dia.) will be placed over the course gravel or stone. The disposal field will be installed at a grade of 4 to 6 inches/100 feet. No single the line will exceed 100 feet in length and in any case, two lines of tile will be installed. A minimum of 6 feet will be maintained between the center lines of the disposal field trenches and the average depth of trench shall not exceed 36 inches. No pea-t of the in— stallation will be less than 100 feet from any private water supply, 25 feet from any stream, 20 feet from any dwelling or 10 feet from any property line. I further / agree not to cover any portion of this installation until a�roved by the inspection officer, as provided below, and to incorporate any additional requirements that may be attached to the permit. Plot Plans must be submitted with application. DATE „ 7/1$/57 f Signature of A cant I hereby issue the above permit for the Board of Health of the Town of North Andover, Massachusetts. Signature Health Agent I have inspected the uncovered system indicated above and find everything done as described. n DATE Signature ,inspecting Officer Percolation Test �' �' , -, ���� ! -- cd—t Garbage Grinder Lti C TI - � �- BOARD OF HEALTH TOWN OF NORTH ANDOVER., MASS. lL ti i ♦`y 1. NAPM .✓ J .,tt"r l . G ,rte: •. DATE 2. ADDRESS �f`���.7j. .J-�f,� . LCT N0. TEL �r 30 N0, OF BEDROOP- . . DEN YES . . . o o NO.o . . . . 4. GARBAGE GRINDER 'YES o NO.. .. 5. SHON DIMNSIONS OF HOUSE b« SHOW DISTANCES OF HOUSE TO ALL PROPERTY LINES 7, SHOW DIPlENSIONS OF LOT 8. SHOW LOCATION AND SIZE OF SEPTIC TANK OR CESSPOOL 9. NOTE LOCATION AND DISTANCE OF WELL FROTJ SEWERAGE SYSTEM 10. SHOW LOCATION OF BROOKSp STREA.M. DITCHES, IEDGE OUTCROP, ETC. 11, SHOW DISTANCE OF SEPTIC TANK OR CESSPOOL FROI!4 HOUSE NOTE: LOCAL REGULATIONS SHOULD HE READ CAREFULLY. July 15, 1957 Miss Mary Sheridan R. N. Health Agent Board of Health North Andover, Mass. Dear Miss Sheridan: An examination was made as requested in order to determine the suitability of the soil for the subsurface disposal of sewage on the proposed Boston St. Lot No. 12 building site of Mr. William F. Campbell. The subsoil in the area was a mixture of gravel and clay and a 2-minute percolation test was conducted. The land in general is high and apparently dry. It is recommended that a 750 gallon concrete septic tank be installed together with 152 lineal feet of drain pipe in order to take care of an automatic washer. Very truly yours, vV William J. scoll