HomeMy WebLinkAboutJASMINE S12406Onsite File
January 14, 2020
Municipality of Anchorage — Building Safety
On Site Water and Wastewater Program
4700 Elmore Street
Anchorage, AK 99507
Attention: Deb Wockenfuss
Subject: Jasmine Subdivision
Septic System Feasibility and Water Availability Study
Dear Deb:
A petition has been submitted to subdivide one parcel into twelve lots and one tract, forming
the new Jasmine Subdivision. We our presenting our findings that each new lot will have
sufficient area and potential for on-site wells and septic systems.
The property in general is moderately sloped towards the north, at grades ranging from 12%
up to around 30%. Most of the area is in the 10-20% range, with a few portions steeper than
25%. There are also some areas where, for short distances, the slopes are greater than 46%.
Property sizes are all over 40,000 SF each, and the attached site plan demonstrates that there
is enough space available to meet separation requirements for the wells and future septic
systems.
Test holes were dug in late January and early February of 2018. Two test holes were placed
on each property in areas that seemed appropriate for septic locations. Monitoring tubes were
placed in the test holes and groundwater checked on February 9"', over a week after the last
hole was excavated. The test holes were dug down to 14'-16' in most areas, except in cases
where bedrock was encountered- at around 8'-10' on several properties. Groundwater was
encountered in only 4 of the test holes, between 10'-12'. Soils were fairly uniform in the
area, consisting mostly of gravelly and silty sands (SP/SW). Percolation benches were
constructed between 4-6' below the ground surface in each test hole. The percolation cavity
in each bench was prepared and presoaked in accordance with municipal requirements.
Again, results were very uniform in the area, with almost all perk tests results falling under
5 min/in. Individual test results are including in the attached test hole information.
Using the slope and perk test information, areas appropriate for septic systems were set aside
for each lot. According to Table 7 of municipal code, perk rates between 1-5 minutes/inch
require 10,000 SF of reserve area. This is appropriate for all properties except for Lots 4, 5
and 8, where the highest perk rates were 5.7 min/in, 25 min/in, and 6.7 min/in respectively.
On Lot 5, 16,000 SF of septic reserve was designated, and the other two lots have 12,000
SF.
Lot 2 has both of its test holes covered by the 100' well radius to the north, found after holes
were dug. Both of the test holes perked under 5 min/in, as well as on the properties on each
side and to the south. As the soils are so consistent, and a test hole is less than 15' from the
designated area, we would like to request that it be accepted for the calculation of the reserve
area. Records shoe that the same soils were also found to the north: the test hole on Skyline
Sub, Block 5 Lot 4B perked at under 1 min/in, while the test hole on Lot 4A perked at just a
little over 5 min/in (5.7).
Several of the test holes perked at under 1 min/in. These lots may require a sand filter with
a shallow trench. Although the slopes would not allow a wide bed, a 5' wide trench with a
6" effective depth would meet the code requirements for use of a sand filter.
Nearly all of the septic reserve areas designated are on slopes under 25%. Most of them are
greater than 50' upslope from these steeper slopes, as well. However, there are a few small
sections in the reserve areas where the slopes exceed 25%. In addition, any trench that
crosses these small sections will need to be constructed to meet the "steep slopes"
requirements of the code, including vertical separation distances measured from the up -
gradient side of the field; trenches 5' or narrower; natural vegetation retained or erosion
control measures taken; and the distribution pipe placed sufficiently deep. Under these
guidelines, these small sections of steeper slopes are appropriate for development as septic
systems.
There are two lots with reserve areas within 100' of slopes greater than 46%. Lot 4 has a
portion of steep slopes within about 30' of the reserve area, and Lot 6 has some slopes of
50% within 50' of the reserve area. The soils are silty sands (SP -SM) with an estimated
hydraulic conductivity of 1.2 in/hr- water passes through them fairly quickly. This means
that the effluent will migrate down through the soils more than it will spread laterally. While
Lot 4 has bedrock at around 10, keeping the effluent from sinking further, the steep slopes
are only about 10' high. The effluent will soak down while the surface drops, keeping it from
daylighting. Lot 6 does not have evidence of bedrock, so the effluent will continue to migrate
downward instead of laterally.
Although the groundwater monitoring was not done during the months when, historically,
the water is at its highest, we are confident that the lack of groundwater discovered is typical
of the area. Groundwater levels will be recorded again during the seasonal high in May. In
the meantime, we are confident that groundwater will not be an impediment the design and
construction of septic systems on this parcel.
Additionally, we found well information for four of the six lots directly adjacent to the new
subdivision to the north. This information was taken from the well logs and the most recent
COSA documentation in the Municipal on-site records, and is collected in the following
table. These are the closest wells to the properties and are representative of the wells that
would be drilled on these lots. Although they are not high -producing wells, they are
sufficient to support a typical single-family home.
Property Leal Well depth (Ft) Flow rate
Skyline View #1, Block 5 Lot 2A 220 1?20 GPH
Skyline View #1, Block 5 Lot 2B 116 0.33 GPM
Skyline View #1, Block 5 Lot 4A 160 2 GPM
Skyline View 91, Block 5 Lot 4B 285 1.43 GPM
It seems reasonable to conclude that the aquifer has the capacity to support new wells on the
lots to the south. Any new wells will likely be around 200' deep and produce 1-2 GPM. All
of the lots are sufficiently sized that the wells shouldn't have a significant effect on the
existing wells. An aquifer study will be performed to verify this conclusion.
An examination of the historical data for nitrates in the drinking water showed nitrates well
within normal levels, and our conclusion is that additional septic systems in this area will
not cause any problems. The following table lists nitrate information collected.
Property Legal
Nitrate Level (my/L)
Date Collected
007, Tract B
0.558
5/22/2001
007, Tract B
2.62
10/11/2019
Skyline View #1, Block 5 Lot 2B
1.72
7/27/2004
Skyline View 41, Block 5 Lot 4A
0.162
6/9/2009
Skyline View #1, Block 5 Lot 4A
1.75
5/11/2017
Skyline View #1, Block 5 Lot 4B
0.686
4/7/2015
Skyline View #1, Block 5 Lot 4B
0.3
6/25/1991
Suetawn Estates, Lot 5
2.12
6/22/2000
Suetawn Estates, Lot 6
6.7
8/28/1990
Suetawn Estates, Lot 9
2.73
11/21/2006
Based on our field studies, research, and water monitoring completed to date, it is clear that
all lots of the proposed subdivision are capable of supporting new wells and onsite septic
systems.
Sincerely,
co 7
Benjamin Schiller, PE
BenjaArYSchller IRZ
CE 12592
�'��QpROFESSIONP .
642
.
0
644
.
0
646.0
648.
0
650.0
652
.
0
654
.
0
656.0 658
.
0
66
0
.
0
66
2
.
0
66
4
.
0
66
6
.
0
66
8
.
0
670.
0
672
.
0
67
4
.
0
676.0
6
7
8
.
0
6
8
0
.
0
682.0
684
.
0
686.0
688
.
0
690.0
692.0
694.0
696.0
698.0
700
.
0
7
0
2
.
0
7
0
4
.
0
650.0
652.0
654.0
656.0
658
.
0
660.0
662.0
664.0
666.
0
668.
0
670.
0
67
2
.
0
67
4
.
0
6
7
4
.
0
6
7
2
.
0
67
0
.
0
6
6
8
.
0
6
6
6
.
0
664
.
0
6
6
2
.
0
6
6
0
.
0
694.0
692.
0
690.0
688.0
686.0
708.0
706.0
71
0
.
0
712.0
714.0
716.0
718.0
720.0
72
2
.
0
724
.
0
50.7%
50.4%
51.5%
52
.
9
%
54
.
6
%
49
.
2
%
48
.
4
%
48
.
4
%
49
.
5
%
48.4
%
39
.
0
%
58
.
0
%
43
.
2
%
5
7
.
3
%
4
3
.
8
%
47.9%
48.1%
44.8%
35
.
2
%
4
4
.
0
%
2
8
.
1
%
33.3
%
67.
9
%
2001000
FEET
1"=100'
NO WELLS OR SEPTIC WITHIN 250' OF PROPERTY LINE
TH#1
JASMINE CIRCLE
JASMINE SUBDIVISION
Forge Engineering
PO Box 240773
Anchorage, AK 99524
907-522-7773
165 E Parks Hwy, Ste 200
Wasilla, AK 99654
907-357-9394
Troy Davis Homes, Inc.811
862-4112
333-2411
278-3121
ALASKA DIG LINE -
IS A PARTIAL LIST:
MILITARY PETROLEUM LINES
STATE STORM/STREET LIGHTS
AND ALASKA FIBER STAR.)
CALL BEFORE YOU DIG
(INCLUDES ACS, AWWU, CEA, ENG, BUTLER AVIATION/TESORO,
GCI CABLE, MLP, TRAFFIC SIGNALS, MOA STORM/STREETS,
THE CONTRACTOR SHALL NOTIFY ALL AREA UTILITY COMPANIES
PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF EXCAVATION. THE FOLLOWING
LOCATE CALL CENTER OF ALASKA
TH#2
PLATTED UTILITY EASEMENTS
MOA WETLANDS
TH#1
TH#2
TH#1
TH#2TH#1
TH#2
TH#1
TH#2
TH#1
TH#2
TH#1 TH#2
TH#1
TH#2
TH#1
TH#2
TH#1
TH#2
TH#1
TH#2
TH#1
TH#2
SEPTIC RESERVE AREAS
LEGEND
SLOPES EXCEEDING 25%
APPROX AREAS WHERE SOME SLOPES EXCEED 46%
JA
S
M
I
N
E
R
O
A
D
16,000 SF
12,000 SF
10,000 SF
10,000 SF
10,000 SF
10,000 SF
10,000 SF
10,000 SF
10,000 SF
12,000 SF
10,000 SF
10,000 SF
Jun 25, 2020
NO
W
E
L
L
S
O
R
S
E
P
T
I
C
W
I
T
H
I
N
2
5
0
'
O
F
P
R
O
P
E
R
T
Y
L
I
N
E
SU
E
T
A
W
N
S
U
B
SKYLINE VI
E
W
#
1
B
L
O
C
K
5
APPROX LOCATIONS OF EXISTING SEPTIC SYSTEMS
50' STATE OF ALASKA SECTION LINE EASEMENT (BY PATENT)
MUNICIPALITY OF ANCHORAGE
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT
4700 ELMORE ROAD ANCHORAGE, AK 99519-6650 0* TH
SOILS LOG AND PERCOLATION TEST J
F Benjarryn Schiller
CE
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: JASMINE SUBDIVISION - LOT ( 42092
Jl PERFORMEDFOR: TROY DAVIS PROPESSI®m�4
DATE: 01/26/18 PROJECT No.: Professional Engineers Stamp:
PARCEL ID#: TECHNICIAN: C. JOHANSEN
DEPTH TEST HOLE # 1
(feet)
1 OB SLOPE SITE PLAN
OVERGROWTH
2
3
4 SILTY SAND (SP -SM)
5 SEE SITE PLAN
6 LARGE ROCKS
7 BETWEEN 3' - 7'
S
8
9
1 WAS GROUND WATER ENCOUNTERED? No
IF YES @ WHAT DEPTII? -
I I DEPTH OF WATER AFTER MONITORING: ONE
DATE OF MONITORING: 5/29/ I8 P
• s E
12 • . �.
13 f.
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
PERCOLATION RATE: 1.2 (MIN/INCH) FERC. HOLE DIA.�INCHES)
TEST RUN BETWEEN: 5 FT. and 6 FT.
COMMENTS: -
DATE
READING
GROSS TIME
(MINUTES)
NET TIME
(MINUTES)
DEPTH To
WATER
(INCHES)
NET DROP
(INCHES)
1/26
TEST HOLE PRESOAKED PRIOR TO TESTING:
I
10:30/10:37
7:22
6" / 12"
6"
2
10:38/10:46
7:23
6" / 12"
6"
3
10:47/10:54
7:20
6" / 12"
6"
4
10:55/11:03
7:20
6" / 12"
6"
5
11:04/11:11
7:20
6" / 12"
6"
6
11:12/11:20
7:20
6" / 12"
6"
DEPTH
(feet)
1 -
2-
4-
5-
6-
7-
8-
9-
10-
11-
12-
13-
14-
15-
16-
17-
18-
19-
20-
MUNICIPALITY OF ANCHORAGE
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT
4700 ELMORE ROAD ANCHORAGE, AK 99519-6650
SOILS LOG AND PERCOLATION TEST
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: JASMINE SUBDIVISION - LOT I
PERFORMED FOR: TROY DAVIS
DATE: 01/26/18 PROJECT No.:
PARCEL ID#: TECHNICIAN:
TEST HOLE 42
IN
. J SILTY SAND (SP -SM)
i
MORE GRAVEL W/
INCREASED DEPTH
C. JOHANSEN
SLOPE
SITE PLAN
SEE SITE PLAN R
•
READING
WAS GROUND WATER ENCOUNTERED?
YES
DEPTH To
WATER
(INCHES)
NET DROP
(INCHES)
1/26
IF YES a. WHAT DEPTH?
12.7' S
1
12:08
0
DEPTH OF WATER AFTER XIONITORING:
6'
2
12:38
30
1 1/4"
DATE OF MONITORING:
5/29/18
3
12:39
0
4
1:09
30
1 1 /4"
1 1/4"
5
1:10
0
COMMENTS: --
DATE
READING
GROSS TIME
(MINUTES)
NET TIME
(MINUTES)
DEPTH To
WATER
(INCHES)
NET DROP
(INCHES)
1/26
TEST HOLE PRESOAKED PRIOR TO TESTING:
1
12:08
0
2
12:38
30
1 1/4"
1 1/4"
3
12:39
0
4
1:09
30
1 1 /4"
1 1/4"
5
1:10
0
6
1:40
30
1 1/4"
1 I/4"
PERCOLATION RATE: 2.4 (MIN/INCH) PERC. HOLE DIA.6(INCHES)
TEST RUN BETWEEN: 4 FT. and 5 FT.
MUNICIPALITY OF ANCHORAGE
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT
L+700 ELMORE ROAD ANCHORAGE, AK 99519-6650
SOILS LOG AND PERCOLATION TEST
Benja 'rr r Schiller
CE92
2020
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: JASMINE SUBDIVISION — LOT 2 2
PERFORMED FOR: TROY DAVIS
DATE: 01/26/18 PROJECT No.: P=�reSs,onal E °ears s`am'
PARCEL ID#: TECHNICIAN: C. JOHANSEN
DEPTH TEST HOLE # 1
(feet)
1 • OB SLOPE SITE PLAN
2
4
5 SEE SITE PLAN
SILTY SAND
6 W/ SOME GRAVEL (SP -SM)
7 i
8 • '
9 l
1 WAS GROUND WATER ENCOUNTERED? No
IF YES @ WHAT DEPTH? - S
11 DEPTH OF WATER AFTER NIONITORING: 7ONE hU
DATE OF MONITORING: 5/29/1812—
P
. E
13 f:
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
PERCOLATION RATE: 0.4 (MIM/INCH) PERC. HOLE DIA.�INCHES)
TEST RUN BETWEEN: 4 FT. and 5 FT.
COMMENTS: -
GROSS TIME NET TIME DEPTH To NET DROP
DATE READING (MINUTES) (MINUTES) WATER (INCHES)
(INCHES)
1/26 TEST HOLE PRESOAKED PRIOR TO TESTING:
I 12:15/12:17 2:05 0" / 6" b"
2 12:18/12:20 2:10 0" / b" b"
3 12:21/12:23 2:12 0" / b" b"
4 12:24/12:26
2:10
0" J 6"
6"
5
12:27/12:29
2:12
0" / b"
b"
6
12:30/12:32
2:12
0" ! b"
b"
DEPTH
(feet)
1-
2 -
3-
4-
5-
6-
7
8
9-
10-
11-
12-
13-
14-
15-
16-
17-
18-
19-
20 -
MUNICIPALITY OF ANCHORAGE
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT
4700 ELMORE ROAD ANCHORAGE, AK 99519-6650
SOILS LOG AND PERCOLATION TEST
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: JASMINE SUBDIVISION - LOT 2
PERFORMED FOR: TROY DAVIS
DATE: 01/26/18 PROJECT No.:
PARCEL ID#: TECHNICIAN: C. JOHANSEN
TEST HOLE #2
COMMENTS: _
0
SILTY SAND
W/ SOME GRAVEL (SP -SM)
SLOPE
SITE PLAN
SEE SITE PLAN
WAS GROUND WATER ENCOUNTERED? NO
READING
IF YES a WHAT DEPTH? _
S
DEPTH To
WATER
(INCHES)
DEPTH OF WATER AFTER MONITORING: NONE
IUs
TEST HOLE PRESOAKED PRIOR TO TESTING:
DATE OF MONITORING: 5/29/18
1
10:30/10:40
DATE
READING
GROSS TIME
(MINUTES)
NET TIME
(MINUTES)
DEPTH To
WATER
(INCHES)
NET DROP
(INCHES)
1/29
TEST HOLE PRESOAKED PRIOR TO TESTING:
1
10:30/10:40
10
0" /3 %8"
3 %8"
2
10:41/10:51
10
0" / 3"
3"
3
10:52/11:02
10
0" / 3"
3"
4
11:03/11:13
10
0" / 3"
3"
5
11:14/11:24
10
0" / 3"
3"
6
11:25/11:35
10
0" / 3"
3"
PERCOLATION RATE: 3.3 (MIN/INCH) PERC. HOLE DIA. 6 (INCHES)
TEST RUN BETWEEN: 4 FT. and 5 FT.
DEPTH
(feet)
1 -
2-
3 '
4-
5-
6-
7'
8-
9-
10-
11-
12-
13-
14-
15-
16-
17-
18-
19-
20 -
MUNICIPALITY OF ANCHORAGE
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT
4700 ELMORE ROAD ANCHORAGE, AK 99519-6650
SOILS LOG AND PERCOLATION TEST
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: JASMINE SUBDIVISION - LOT 3
PERFORMED FOR: TROY DAVIS
DATE: 01/26/18 PROJECT No.:
PARCEL ID#: TECHNICIAN: C. JOHANSEN
TEST HOLE # l
10.
SILTY SAND
W/ SOME GRAVEL (SP -SM)
z
WAS GROUND WATER ENCOUNTERED?
IF YES a, WH
DEPTH OF WATER AFTER bIO
DATE OF MO
. s
COMMENTS: —
=a
No
SIT E PLAN
SEE SITE PLAN $
AT DEPTH? -
NITORING: 9'
MONITORING: 5/29/18 P
E
DATE
READING
GROSS TIME
(MINUTES)
NET TIME
(MINUTES)
DEPTH To
WATER
(INCHES)
NET DROP
(INCHES)
1/26
TEST HOLE PRESOAKED PRIOR TO TESTING:
1
1:06/1:13
6:49
0" / 6"
6"
2
1:14/1:21
6:52
0" / 6"
6"
3
1:22/1:29
6:53
0" / 6"
6"
4
1:30/1:37
6:50
0" ! 6"
6"
5
1:38/1:45
6:52
0" / 6"
6"
6
1:46/1:53
6:50
0" / 6"
6"
PERCOLATION RATE: I.1 (MIN/INCH) PERC. HOLE DIA. () (INCHES)
TEST RUN BETWEEN: 4 FT. and 5 FT.
MUNICIPALITY OF ANCHORAGE
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT
4700 ELMORE ROAD ANCHORAGE, AK 99519-6650/ 0
SOILS LOG AND PERCOLATION TEST / ="?? "
Ben jarnjrySchiller
,
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: JASMINE SUBDIVISION - LOT 3 ao
9? 2
CE
PROFESSIDNP
PERFORMED FOR: TROY DAVIS
DATE: 01/26/18 PROJECT No.: Professional Engineers Stamp:
PARCEL ID#: TECHNICIAN: C. JOHANSEN
DEPTH TEST HOLE #2
( feet)
1 OB SLOPE SITE PLAN
4
5 SEE SITE PLAN
SILTY SAND
6 N!/ SOME GRAVEL (SP -SM)
7 5
8
9
1
WAS GROUND NATER ENCOUNTERED? YES
IF YES m WHAT DEPTH? III
11 DEPTH OF WATER AFTER MONITORING 14'
DATE OFMONITORING: 5/24/18 P
E
12 'r •
13 f:
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
PERCOLATION RATE: 0. b (MIN/INCH) PERC. HOLE DIA.�INCHES)
TEST RUN BETWEEN: 5 FT. and 6 FT.
COMMENTS: -
DATE
READING
GROSS TIME
(MINUTES)
NET TIME
(MINUTES)
DEPTH To
WATER
(INCHES)
NET DROP
(INCHES)
1/26
TEST HOLE PRESOAKED PRIOR TO TESTING:
I
2:05/2:08
3:38
0" / 6"
6"
2
2:09/2:13
3:40
0" / b"
6"
3
2:14/2:18
3:41
0" / 6"
6"
4
2:19/2:22
3:40
0" / 6"
b"
5
2:23/2:27
3:41
0" / b"
6"
b
2:28/2:32
3:41
0" J b"
b"
MUNICIPALITY OF ANCHORAGEAw
��iFA(�®l�
READING
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT
(MINUTES)
�s'°'��P
NET DROP
(INCHES)
4700 ELMORE ROAD ANCHORAGE, AK 99519-6650
TEST HOLE PRESOAKED PRIOR TO TESTING:
TH
® ���
I
1:35/1:45
10
0" /3 %2"
3 /2"
SOILS LOG AND PERCOLATION TEST
2
Benjarr�q?Schiller
10
0" /3 3/8"
3 s/8"
GE a2o9?'���G�ti-®��'�
3
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: JASMINE SUBDIVISION — LOT 4
10
0" /3 3/8"
3 3/8"
PERFORMED FOR: TROY DAVIS
4
0®F;a®:�'°°'
10
DATE: 01/30/18 PROJECT NO.:
3 %,"
Professional Engineers Stamp:
5
PARCEL ID#: TECHNICIAN: C. JOHANSEN
10
DEPTH
TEST HOLE #1�
6
(feet)
10
0" /3 %,"
3 %,"
OB
1
SLOPE
SITE PLAN
2
4
5
.• ••�
SILTY SAND
SEE SITE PLAN
6
W/ SOME GRAVEL (SP -SM)
7
i
8
9
t
1
WAS GROUND WATER ENCOUNTERED'? NO
BEDROCK IF YES rt_ WH AT DEPTH') -
S
I I
DEPTH OF WATER AFTER NIO NITORING: NONE
DATE OF N10 NITORING: 5/29/18
P
12
GROSS TIME
NET TIME DEPTH
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
PERCOLATION RATE: 3.1 (MIN/INCH)
PERC. HOLE DIA, 6 (INCHES)
TEST RUN BETWEEN:
4 FT. and 5
FT.
COMMENTS: -
DATE
READING
(MINUTES)
(MINUTES)
To
WATER
(INCHES)
NET DROP
(INCHES)
1/30
TEST HOLE PRESOAKED PRIOR TO TESTING:
I
1:35/1:45
10
0" /3 %2"
3 /2"
2
1:46/1:56
10
0" /3 3/8"
3 s/8"
3
1:57/2:07
10
0" /3 3/8"
3 3/8"
4
2:08/2:18
10
0" /3 %4"
3 %,"
5
2:19/2:29
10
0"
6
2:30/2:40
10
0" /3 %,"
3 %,"
MUNICIPALITY OF ANCHORAGE
�G OF!4(,����
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT.orco
-'
4700 ELMORE ROAD ANCHORAGE, AK 99519-6650
.7��
TH x ��
SOILS LOG AND PERCOLATION TEST
BenjarrlLr}Schiller
CE 4209220
4:02
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: JASMINE SUBDIVISION - LOT 4
0
�F9F0 'e '-,
PERFORMED FOR: TROY DAVIS
4:32
30
5 %4
5
DATE: 01/50/18 PROJECT No.:
Professional Engineers Stamp:
PARCEL ID#: TECHNICIAN:
C. JOHANSEN
DEPTH
TEST HOLE #2
(feet)
I
OB
SLOPE
SITE PLAN
2
3
4
5
,• �•1
SEE SITE PLAN
SILTY SAND
6
W/ SOME GRAVEL (SP -SM)
7
S
8
9
+
1
1
WAS GROUND WATER ENCOUNTERED?
NO
IF YES WHAT DEPTH?
@-
I I
DEPTH OF WATER AFTER NIONITORING:
10'
BEDROCK DATE OF MONITORING:
5/29/18
12
DATE
GROSS TIME
NET TIME DEPTH To NET DROP
13
READING
(MINUTES)
(MINUTES) WATER (INCHES)
(INCHES)
14
1/30
TEST HOLE PRESOAKED PRIOR TO TESTING:
15
I
3:01
0
16
2
3:31
30 5 %r, 5 %4
3
3:31
0
17
4
4:01
30 5 %4 5/4
18
19
201
1 1 t�
PERCOLATION RATE: 5.7 (MIN/INCH)
PERC. HOLE DIA.�INCHES)
TEST RUN BETWEEN:
4 FT. and
5 FT.
COMMENTS:
-
5
4:02
0
6
4:32
30
5 %4
5
DEPTH
(feet)
1 -
2
3-
4-
5
6-
7-
8-
9-
10-
11-
12-
13-
14-
15-
16-
17-
18-
19-
20 -
MUNICIPALITY OF ANCHORAGE
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT
4700 ELMORE ROAD ANCHORAGE, AK 99519-6650
SOILS LOG AND PERCOLATION TEST
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: JASMINE SUBDIVISION - LOT 5
PERFORMED FOR: TROY DAVIS
DATE: 02/01/18 PROJECT No.:
PARCEL ID#: TECHNICIAN:
TEST HOLE #1
COMMENTS: —
W.
SILTY SAND
W/ SOME GRAVEL (SP -SM)
C. JOHANSEN
SLOPE
WAS GROUND NATER ENCOUNTERED? No
IF YES a WHAT DEPTH? - S
DEPTH OF WATER AFTER MONITORING: 14' hU
DATE OF MONITORING: 5/29/18 P
SITE PLAN
SEE SITE PLAN
: TH
, . .
Benjarn(n=chiller
CE 12592
��j�o pROFESS10�a��.®�
DATE
READING
GROSS TIME
(MINUTES)
NET TIME
(MINUTES)
DEPTH TO
WATER
(INCHES)
NET DROP
(INCHES)
2/05
TEST HOLE PRESOAKED PRIOR TO TESTING:
1
11:05
0
2
11:35
30
2 3/4
2 3/4
3
11:36
0
4
12:06
30
2 7/
2 �/8
5
12:07
0
6
12:37
30
2 %8
2 �/8
PERCOLATION RATE: 10.3 (MIN/INCH) PERC. HOLE DIA._6 (INCHES)
TEST RUM BETWEEN: 5 FT. and 6 FT.
�������0
MUNICIPALITY OF ANCHORAGE �'�G
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT
4700 ELMORE ROAD ANCHORAGE, AK 99519-6650 s TH
SOILS LOG AND PERCOLATION TEST B '�
' BenjaOn Schiller
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: JASMINE SUBDIVISION - LOT 5 Fp CE 42092
PROFESSIONP .�
PERFORMED FOR: TROY DAVIS
DATE: 02/01/18 PROJECT NO.: Professional Engineers Stamp:
PARCEL ID#: TECHNICIAN: C. JOHANSEN
DEPTI-1 TEST HOLE #2�
(feet)
49
1 OB SLOPE SITE PLAN
2
4
5 ••r SEE SITE PLAN
SILTY SAND
6 W/ SOME GRAVEL (SP -SM)
7 i
8
9
1
WAS GROUND NATER ENCOUNTERED? No
1 IF YES a WHAT DEPTH? -
11 DEPTH OF WATER AFTER MONITORING: NONE
DATE OF MONITORING: 5/29/18
12 't •
13 .
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
PERCOLATION RATE: 25 (MIN/INCH) PERC. HOLE DIA. 6 (INCHES)
TEST RUN BETWEEN: 4 FT. and 5 FT.
COMMENTS: -
GROSS TIME NET TIME DEPTH To NET DROP
DATE READING (MINUTES) (MINUTES) WATER (INCHES)
(INCHES)
2/05 TEST HOLE PRESOAKED PRIOR TO TESTING:
I 1:08 0
2 1:38 30 ( % I %
3
1:39
0
4
2:09
30
13/6
13/b
5
2:10
0
6
2:40
30
13/6
i 3/6
DEPTH
Meet)
1 -
2-
3 —
4-
5-
6-
7-
8-
9-
10-
11-
12-
13-
14-
15-
16-
17-
18-
19-
20 -
MUNICIPALITY OF ANCHORAGE
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT
4700 ELMORE ROAD ANCHORAGE, AK 99519-6650
SOILS LOG AND PERCOLATION TEST
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: JASMINE SUBDIVISION — LOT 6
PERFORMED FOR: TROY DAVIS
DATE: 02/02/18 PROJECT No.:
PARCEL ID#: TECHNICIAN: C. JOHANSEN
TEST HOLE 91
HE
ROCKS ENCOUNTERED
AROUND 2'
SILTY SAND
W/ SOME GRAVEL (SP -SM)
L •'
WAS GROUND WATER ENCOUNTERED? NO
IF YES m WHAT DEPTH? — S
DEPTH OF WATER AFTER MONITORING: NONE U
DATE OF MONITORING: 5/29/18
. • s
' S r
COMMENTS: _
SITE PLAN
SEE SITE PLAN
DATE
READING
GROSS TIME
(MINUTES)
NET TIME
(MINUTES)
DEPTH To
WATER
(INCHES)
NET DROP
(INCHES)
2/05
TEST HOLE PRESOAKED PRIOR TO TESTING:
1
3:30/3:31
0:37
0 / 6
6
2
3:32/3:33
0:36
0 / 6
6
3
3:34/3:37
0:38
0 / 6
6
4
3:36/3:37
1 0:39
0 / 6
6
5
3:38/3:39
0:39
0 / 6
6
6
3:40/3:41
0:39
0 / 6
6
PERCOLATION RATE: 0. 05 (MIN/INCH) PERC. HOLE DIA. (D INCHES)
TEST RUN BETWEEN: 4 FT. and 5 FT.
DEPTH
(feet)
1 -
3-
4-
5-
6-
7-
8-
9-
10-
11-
12-
13-
14-
15-
16-
17-
18-
19-
20 -
MUNICIPALITY OF ANCHORAGE
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT
4700 E:LMORE ROAD ANCHORAGE, AK 99519-6650
SOILS LOG AND PERCOLATION TEST
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: JASMINE SUBDIVISION - LOT (D
PERFORMED FOR: TROY DAVIS
DATE: 02/02/18 PROJECT No.:
PARCEL ID#: TECHNICIAN
TEST HOLE #2
COMMENTS: --
M0:
SILTY SAND
W/ SOME GRAVEL (SP -SM)
C. JOHANSEN
SLOPE
of A_-
*; 49 M
Benjarrri(q)Schiller
Ir� �TF�CJ. E 42020 `,12
�Q,FO PROFESS0 m
SITE PLAN
SEE SITE PLAN
WAS GROUND NATER ENCOUNTERED? No
READING
IF YES a. WHAT DEPTH? -
NET TIME
(MINUTES)
DEPTH To
WATER
(INCHES)
DEPTH OF WATER AFTER MONITORING: NONE
2/05
TEST HOLE PRESOAKED PRIOR TO TESTING:
DATEOFMONITORING: 5/29/18
P
3:01/3:02
2:09
E
6
DATE
READING
GROSS TIME
(MINUTES)
NET TIME
(MINUTES)
DEPTH To
WATER
(INCHES)
NET DROP
(INCHES)
2/05
TEST HOLE PRESOAKED PRIOR TO TESTING:
1
3:01/3:02
2:09
0 / 6
6
2
3:03/3:05
2:08
0 / 6
6
3
3:06/3:08
2:07
0 / 6
6
4
3:09/3:11
2:08
0 / 6
6
5
3:12/3:14
2:06
0 / 6
6
6
3:15/3:17
2:08
0 / 6
6
PERCOLATION RATE: 0.3 (MIN/INCH) PERC. HOLE DIA. 6 (INCHES)
TEST RUN BETWEEN: 4 FT. and 5 FT.
MUNICIPALITY OF ANCHORAGE
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT
'CO
4700 ELMORE ROAD ANCHORAGE, AK 99519-6650 49
SOILS LOG AND PERCOLATION TEST
BenjaatiSchiller
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: JASMINE SUBDIVISION - LOT 7 9Fa CE y2o92 `v���`�®�
PERFORMED FOR: TROY DAVIS
DATE: 0 2 / 0 2 / 18PROJECT No.: Professional Engineers stamp:
PARCEL ID#: TECHNICIAN: C. JOHANSEN
DEPTH TEST HOLE # 1�
(feet)
1 OB SLOPE SITE PLAN
2
3 •• .
4
5 ' f SEE SITE PLAN
SILTY SAND
6 W/ SOME GRAVEL (SP -SM)
7 S
g
9
1 WAS GROUND NATER ENCOUNTERED? NO
(F YES a: WH S
11 DEPTH OF WATER AFTER NO
DATE OF X10
13 f:
14
S r
15
16
17
18
19
20
PERCOLATION RATE: 0.19 (MIN/INCH) PERC. HOLE DIA. INCHES)
TEST RUN BETWEEN: FT. and FT.
COMMENTS: -
AT DEPTIi? -
NITORING: NONE
NITORING: 5/29/18 P
DATE READING GROSS TIME NET TIME E�
DEPTH TO
NET DROP
(MINUTES) (MINUTES) (INCHES) (INCHES)
2/06
TEST HOLE PRESOAKED PRIOR TO TESTING:
I
3:41/3:42
0:41
0 / b
b
2
3:43/3:44
I:Ob
0 / b
6
3
3:45/3:4b
I:Ob
0 / b
b
4
3:47/3:48
1:07
0 / b
b
5
3:49/3:50
1:07
0 / b
b
b
3:51/3:52
1:07
0 / b
b
DEPTH
(feet)
1 -
2
3-
4-
5-
6-
7
8
9-
1.0-
11-
12-
13-
14-
15-
16-
17-
18-
19-
20 -
MUNICIPALITY OF ANCHORAGE
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT
4700 ELMORE ROAD ANCHORAGE, AK 99519-6650
SOILS LOG AND PERCOLATION TEST
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: JASMINE SUBDIVISION — LOT 7
PERFORMED FOR: TROY DAVIS
DATE: 02/02/18 PROJECT No.:
PARCEL ID#: TECHNICIAN,
TEST HOLE #2
W-11
•J SILTY SAND
W/ SOME GRAVEL (SP -SM)
• S
C. JOHANSEN
SLOPE
WAS GROUND WATER ENCOUNTERED? No
IF YES a; WHAT DEPTH? - S
• DEPTH OF WATER AFTER \MONITORING: NONE
DATE OF MONITORING: 5/29/18
• s
COMMENTS: --
49 TH
. . ..
Benjam'TSchiller
CE 4125922020
OFESStONp�
SITE PLAN
SEE SITE PLAN
DATE
READING
GROSS TIME
(MINUTES)
NET TIME
(MINUTES)
DEPTH To
WATER
(INCHES)
NET DROP
(INCHES)
2/06
TEST HOLE PRESOAKED PRIOR TO TESTING:
1
2:21/2:23
2:08
0 / 6
6
2
2:24/2:26
2:09
0 / 6
6
3
2:27/2:29
2:11
0 / 6
6
4
2:30/2:32
2:10
0 / 6
6
5
2:33/2:35
2:11
0 / 6
6
6
2:36/2:38
2:09
0 / 6
6
PERCOLATION RATE: 0.3 (MN/INCH) PERC. HOLE DIA. 6 (INCHES)
TEST RUN BETWEEN: 4 FT. and 5 FT.
MUNICIPALITY OF ANCHORAGE �.G CSF
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT
;' TH
4700 ELMORE ROAD ANCHORAGE, AK 99519-6650 •, � • . • ��
SOILS LOG AND PERCOLATION TEST
Benr*12i11er
CE 12592
J. 14 2020
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: JASMINE SUBDIVISION - LOT 8 ���F9F�PROFESStONA���o
PERFORMED FOR: TROY DAVIS DATE: 02/02/18 PROJECT No.: P�resttoa,i Eng[aeers smP:
PARCEL ID#: TECHNICIAN: C. JOHANSEN
DEPT1-1 TEST HOLE # 1
(feet)
1 OB SLOPE SITE PLAN
2
4
5 SEE SITE PLAN
SILTY SAND
6 W/ SOME GRAVEL (SP -SM)
7 s
8
9 +
1 WAS GROUND NATER ENCOUNTERED? NO
IF YES a WHAT DEPTH? - S
1 1 DEPTH OF NATER AFTER MONITORING: NONE Us
DATE OF MONITORING: S/29/18 P
. E
12 '; .'f•
13 f.
14
3
15
16
17
18
19
20
PERCOLATION RATE: 6.7 (MIN/INCH) PERC. HOLE DIA. (D
TEST RUN BETWEEN: 4 FT. and S FT.
COMMENTS: -
GROSS TIME NET TIME DEPTH To NET DROP
DATE READING (MINUTES) (MINUTES) WATER (INCHES)
(INCHES)
2/06 TEST HOLE PRESOAKED PRIOR TO TESTING:
I 12:30 0
2 I:00 30 4 %, 44
3 I:01 0
4 1:31 30 4/2
4 %2
5
1:32
0
6
2:02
30
4 %2
4 %2
DEPTH
(feet)
1-
2-
3 -
4-
5-
6-
7-
8-
9-
10-
11-
12-
13-
14-
15-
16-
17-
18-
19-
20 -
MUNICIPALITY OF ANCHORAGE
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT
4700 ELMORE ROAD ANCHORAGE, AK 99519-6650
SOILS LOG AND PERCOLATION TEST
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: JASMINE SUBDIVISION - LOT 8
PERFORMED FOR: TROY DAVIS
DATE: 02/02/18 PROJECT No.:
PARCEL ID#: TECHNICIAN: C. JOHANSEN
TEST HOLE #2
COMMENTS: _
SITE PLAN
SEE SITE PLAN
SILTY SAND
W/ SOME GRAVEL (SP -SM)
WAS GROUND WATER ENCOUNTERED? No
READING
IF YES a, WHAT DEPTH? -
NET TIME
(MINUTES)
DEPTH To
WATER
(INCHES)
DEPTH OF WATER AFTER MONITORING: NONE
2/06
TEST HOLE PRESOAKED PRIOR TO TESTING:
DATE OF MONITORING: 5/29/18
P
11:41/11:43
2:09
E
6
DATE
READING
GROSS TIME
(MINUTES)
NET TIME
(MINUTES)
DEPTH To
WATER
(INCHES)
NET DROP
(INCHES)
2/06
TEST HOLE PRESOAKED PRIOR TO TESTING:
1
11:41/11:43
2:09
0 / 6
6
2
IL•44/11:46
2:10
0 / 6
6
3
11:47/11:49
2:09
0 / 6
6
4
11:50/11:52
2:08
0 / 6
6
5
11:53/11:57
2:08
0 / 6
6
6
11:58/12:00
2:08
0 / 6
6
PERCOLATION RATE: 0.4 (MIN/INCH) PERC. HOLE DIA._ 6 CINCHES)
TEST RUN BETWEEN: 4 FT. and 5 FT.
,aoao��1
MUNICIPALITY OF ANCHORAGE Fq���
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT co����j
4700 E:LMORE ROAD ANCHORAGE, AK 99519-6650 �' 4� lli;'kP�
SOILS LOG AND PERCOLATION TEST
Benjamj- ,`chiller
F� CE 12592J 14 202D A-
wti
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: JASMINE SUBDIVISION - LOT 9 k�FQpROFESSiONP'�,®-°-�
PERFORMED FOR: TROY DAVIS ��0���a��
DATE: 01/30/18 PROJECT No.: Professional Engineers Stamp:
PARCEL ID#: TECHNICIAN: C. JOHANSEN
DEPTH TEST HOLE # 1
(feet)
1 OB SLOPE SITE PLAN
2 .
4
5 ••� SEE SITE PLAN
SILTY SAND
6 VAJ/ SOME GRAVEL (SP -SM)
7 s
3
9
1 WAS GROUND NATER ENCOUNTERED? No
IF YES r WHAT DEPTH? - S
1 I DEPTH OF WATER AFTER IONITORING: NONE U
DATE OF MONITORING: 5/29/18 P
' E
12—}
13 .
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
PERCOLATION RATE: 0.7 (MIN/INCH) PERC. HOLE DIA..(INCHES)
TEST RUN BETS\SEEN: 4 FT. and 5 FT.
COMMENTS: -
DEPTH To
DATE READING GROSS TIME NET TIME WATER NET DROP
(MINUTES) (MINUTES) (INCHES) (INCHES)
2/06 TEST HOLE PRESOAKED PRIOR TO TESTING:
I 10:13/10:17 4:00 0/b 6
2 10:18/10:22 4:01 0 / 6 6
3 10:23/10:27 4:02 0 / 6 6
4 10:28/10:32 4:04 0/ 6 6
5 10:33/10:37 4:04 0 /6
b
b
10:38/10:42
4:04
0 / 6
6
MUNICIPALITY OF ANCHORAGE
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT
o
c49
I
4700 ELMORE ROAD ANCHORAGE, AK 99519-6650
TH
0 / b
6
2
SOILS LOG AND PERCOLATION TEST
Benjarrtg.Schlller
0 / b
b
CE 42x92
3
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: JASMINE SUBDIVISION -.LOT 9
Fa
�������®����
0 / b
PERFORMED FOR: TROY DAVIS
4
DATE: 02/02/18 PROJECT No.:
Proe�ss;on3, > �6 �r�rs scamp:
0 / b
PARCEL ID#: TECHNICIAN: C. JOHANSEN
DEPTH
TEST HOLE 42
3:06
(feet)
b
1
OB SLOPE
SITE PLAN
2
..
3
4
•
SEE SITE PLAN
SILTY SAND
6
W/ SOME GRAVEL (SP -SM)
7
s
8
9
10
WAS GROUND WATER ENCOUNTERED? No
IF YES 0 WHAT DEPTH? - S
1 1
DEPTH OF WATER APTERMONITORING: NONE IUB
DATEOFMONITORING: 5/29/18
• s
12
13
• .•,"
DATE READING GROSS TIME
NET TIME DEPTH To NET DROP
WATER
BEDROCK (MINUTES)
(MINUTES) (INCHES) (INCHES)
14
2/06
15
16
17
18
19
20
PERCOLATION RATE: 0.5 (MINANCH)
PERC. HOLE DIA.�INCHES)
TEST RUN BETWEEN: 4 FT. and 5
FT.
COMMENTS:
-
TEST HOLE PRESOAKED PRIOR TO TESTING:
I
10:55/10:58
3:17
0 / b
6
2
10:59!11:03
3:21
0 / b
b
3
11:04/11:07
3:25
0 / b
b
4
11:08/11:11
3:05
0 / b
b
5
11:12/11:15
3:06
0/b
b
b
11:16/11:19
3:06
0/b
6
DEPTH
(feet)
1-
2-
4-
5-
6-
7'
8-
9-
10-
11-
I2-
13-
14-
15-
16-
17-
18-
19-
20 -
MUNICIPALITY OF ANCHORAGE
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT
4700 ELMORE ROAD ANCHORAGE, AK 99519-6650
SOILS LOG AND PERCOLATION TEST
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: JASMINE SUBDIVISION - LOT 10
PERFORMED FOR: TROY DAVIS
DATE: 01/24/18 PROJECT No.:
PARCEL ID#: TECHNICIAN: J. MILLETTE
TEST HOLE # l I
i
3ED•ROCK
COYIMENTS: _
ill
SILTY SAND
W/ SOME GRAVEL (SP -SM)
SLOPE
WAS GROUND WATER ENCOUNTERED? NO
IF YES a WHAT DEPTH? - S
DEPTH OF WATER AFTER NIONITORING: NONE
DATE OF NIONITORING: 5/29/18
SITE PLAN
SEE SITE PLAN R
DATE
READING
GROSS TIME
(MINUTES)
NET TIME
(MINUTES)
DEPTH TO
WATER
(INCHES)
NET DROP
(INCHES)
1/25
TEST HOLE PRESOAKED PRIOR TO TESTING:
I
1:41/1:41
0:21
0 / 6
6
2
1:42/1:42
0:21
0 / 6
6
3
1:43/1:43
0:21
0 / 6
6
4
1:44/1:44
0:22
0 / 6
6
5
1:45/1:45
0:22
0 / 6
6
6
1:46/1:46
0:22
0 / 6
6
PERCOLATION RATE: 0.1 (MIN/INCH) PERC. HOLE DIA. 6 (INCHES)
TEST RUN BETWEEN: 3 FT. and 4 FT.
of=
MUNICIPALITY OF ANCHORAGE
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENTTH
4700 ELMORE ROAD ANCHORAGE, AK 99519-6650 ® >�
SOILS LOG AND PERCOLATION TEST-'''"
/P Benjam(n.Schiller
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: JASMINE SUBDIVISION - LOT 10 ��sl`e9Fp CE J.a2a9?
PROFESSk* ®.
PERFORMED FOR: TROY DAVIS
DATE: 01/24/18 PROJECT No.: P`of�sslon�I F sl ee`S s" P:
PARCEL ID#: TECHNICIAN: J. M ILLETTE
DEPT1-I TEST HOLE #2�
(feet)
1 OB SLOPE SITE PLAN
2
J
4
5 ..•j SEE SITE PLAN �
SILTY SAND
6 W/ SOME GRAVEL (SP -SM)
7 s
8
9
1 WAS GROUND WATER ENCOUNTERED? No
IF YES a WHAT DEPTH? III
11 DEPTH OF WATER AFTER MONITORING: 7'
DATE OF MONITORING: 5/29/I8 P
• s E
12 •
t
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
PERCOLATION RATE: 0.2 (iV rN/INCH) PERC. HOLE DIA.�INCHES)
TEST RUN BETWEEN: 3 FT. and 4 FT.
COMMENTS: -
GROSS TIME NET TIME DEPTH To NET DROP
DATE READING (MINUTES) (MINUTES) WATER
(INCHES)
(INCHES)
1/25
TEST HOLE PRESOAKED PRIOR TO TESTING:
I
2:02/2:03
0:52
0 / 6
6
2
2:01+/2:05
0:52
0 / 6
b
3
2:06/2:07
0:56
0 / 6
6
4
2:08/2:09
0:56
0 / b
b
5
2:10/2:11
0:56
0 / 6
6
6
2:12/2:13
0:56
0 / b
6
DATE
READING
GROSS TIME
(MINUTES)
NET TIME
(MINUTES)
DEPTH To
WATER
(INCHES)
MUNICIPALITY OF ANCHORAGE
1/25
®
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT
12:31/12:34
s A
®`��
s�CO
0 / b
4700 ELMORE ROAD ANCHORAGE, AK 99519-6650
49
12:35/12:38
SOILS LOG AND PERCOLATION TEST
0 / b
i11er
Ben12592
3
12:39/12:42
C
14,2020
0 / b
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: JASMINE SUBDIVISION — LOT 11
OPROfESS10Np�`.
12:43/12:4b
PERFORMED FOR: TROY DAVIS
0 / b
b
DATE: 01/24/18 PROJECT No.:
12:47/12:50
Professional Engineers Stamp:
0 / b
PARCEL ID#: TECHNICIAN: J. MILLETTE
DEPTH
TEST HOLE # 1
2:44
0 / b
(feet)
1
OB SLOPE
SITE PLAN
2
3
4
•,
SEE SITE PLAN
SAND WITH GRAVEL (SP)
6
7
• 1
8
ED ROCK
9
1
WAS GROUND WATER ENCOUNTERED? NO
IF YES n, WHAT DEPTHS -
S
I 1
DEPTH OF WATER AFTER MONITORING: NONE
hU
DATE OF MONITORING: 5/29/18
P
12
E
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
PERCOLATION RATE: 0.5 (M[N/INCH) PERC. HOLE DIA. 6 (INCHES)
TEST RUN BETWEEN:
3 FT. and 4
FT.
COMMENTS:
-
DATE
READING
GROSS TIME
(MINUTES)
NET TIME
(MINUTES)
DEPTH To
WATER
(INCHES)
NET DROP
(INCHES)
1/25
TEST HOLE PRESOAKED PRIOR TO TESTING:
I
12:31/12:34
2:45
0 / b
b
2
12:35/12:38
2:47
0 / b
b
3
12:39/12:42
2:44
0 / b
b
4
12:43/12:4b
2:44
0 / b
b
5
12:47/12:50
2:44
0 / b
b
b
12:51/12:54
2:44
0 / b
6
MUNICIPALITY OF ANCHORAGE
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT
4700
ELMORE ROAD ANCHORAGE, AK 99519-6650'_�
®,,s�co��'
49 IH
.... .._.
SOILS
LOG AND PERCOLATION TEST
Benjarn�rtSchiller 0
�E
/1:16
LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
JASMINE SUBDIVISION — LOT 11
b
�F94?09?'`����c����
F�
��� pROFESS10Np .,�
b
PERFORMED
FOR: TROY DAVIS
0 / b
b
DATE:
01/24/18 PROJECT NO.:
Professional Engineers scamp:
PARCEL ID#: TECHNICIAN: J. MILLETTE
DEPTH
TEST HOLE #2
(feet)
1
OB SLOPE
SITE PLAN
2
3
�• .
4
5
•• •,
SEE SITE PLAN
SAND WITH GRAVEL (SP)
6
7
s
8
9
+
t
1
WAS GROUND WATER ENCOUNTERED? NO
IF YES @ WHAT DEPTH? —
1
DEPTH OF WATER AFTER NIONITORING: NONE
• s
DATE OF MONITORING: 5/29/18
12
•r...•,-
13
DATE READING GROSS
TIME
NET TIME DEPTH To NET DROP
WATER
(MINUTES)
(MINUTES) (INCHES) (INCHES)
14
'
1/25 TEST HOLE PRESOAKED PRIOR TO TESTING:
t
15
I
I:II/I:II
0:28 0 / b b
16
2
1:12/1:12
0:29 0/b b
3
1:13/1:13
0:29 0/b 6
17
4
1:11+/1:14
0:30 0 / b b
18
5
I:16
19
20
PERCOLATION RATE: 0.1
('MIIN/fNCH) PERC. HOLE DIA.�INCHES)
TEST RUN BETWEEN: 4
FT. and
5 FT.
COMMENTS:
-
/1:16
0:30
O l b
b
b
1:17/1:17
0:30
0 / b
b
DEPTF-1
(feet)
1-
2-
3-
4-
5-
6-
7-
8-
9-
10-
11-
12-
13-
14-
15-
16-
17-
18-
19-
20 -
MUNICIPALITY OF ANCHORAGE
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT
4700 ELMORE ROAD ANCHORAGE, AK 99519-6650
SOILS LOG AND PERCOLATION TEST
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: JASMINE SUBDIVISION - LOT 12
PERFORMED FOR: TROY DAVIS
DATE: 0112L,118 PROJECT No.:
PARCEL ID#: TECHNICIAN: J. MILLETTE
TEST HOLE #�
3ED ROCK
COMMENTS: _
0:
SILTY SAND
�N/ SOME GRAVEL (SP -SM)
SITE PLAN
SEE SITE PLAN
WAS GROUND WATER ENCOUNTERED? NO
READING
IF YES n WHAT DEPTH? -
S
DEPTH To
WATVVATERES)
(INCHES)
DEPTH OF WATER AFTER ilIONITORING: 9.5'
U
TEST HOLE PRESOAKED PRIOR TO TESTING:
DATE OF MONITORING_ 5/29/18
I
11:02/11:04
DATE
READING
GROSS TIME
(MINUTES)
NET TIME
(MINUTES)
DEPTH To
WATVVATERES)
(INCHES)
NET DROP
(INCHES)
1/25
TEST HOLE PRESOAKED PRIOR TO TESTING:
I
11:02/11:04
2:18
0 / 6
6
2
11:05/11:07
2:17
0 / 6
6
3
11:06/11:08
2:18
0 / 6
6
4
11:09/11:11
2:15
0 l 6
6
5
11:12/11:13
2:20
0 / 6
6
6
11:14/11:16
2:18
0/6
6
PERCOLATION RATE: 0.4 (MIN/INCH) PERC. HOLE DIA.__L__fINCHES)
TEST RUN BETWEEN: 3.5 FT. and 4.5 FT.
(INCHES)
MUNICIPALITY OF ANCHORAGE
1/25
or-
FDEVELOPMENT
DEVELOPMENTSERVICES DEPARTMENT
11:35/11:38
3:06
0 / 6
4700 ELMORE ROAD ANCHORAGE, AK 99519-6650
T,49
, ,
11:39/11:42
3:04
0 / 6
6
SOILS LOG AND PERCOLATION TEST
Benjam(nx5chiller
3:08
016
6
j CE `2092 �`�®�
4
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: JASMINE SUBDIVISION - LOT 12
FD
����R���®����
O 16
PERFORMED FOR: TROY DAVIS
5
11:51/11:54
DATE: 01/24/18 PROJECT No.:
0 / 6
Profess onai Engineers scamp:
PARCEL ID#: TECHNICIAN:
J. M ILLETTE
3:09
DEPTH
TEST HO�#2
I r«I)
1
OB
SLOPE
SITE PLAN
2
3
4
j
,• ••j
SEE SITE PLAN
SILTY SAND
6
IN/ SOME GRAVEL (SP -SM)
7
s
8
ED ROCK
9
1
WAS GROUND WATER ENCOUNTERED?
NO
IF YES ru WHAT DEPTH?
-
1 1
DEPTH OF WATER AFTER NIONITORING:
NONE
DATE OFMONITORING:
5/29/18 P
12
E
13
DATE
READING GROSS TIME
NET TIME DEPTH To NET DROP
WATERNET
(MINUTES)
(MINUTES)
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
PERCOLATION RATE: 0.5 (MIN/INCH) PERC. HOLE DIA. 6 (INCHES)
TEST RUN BETWEEN:
3 FT. and
4 FT.
COMMENTS:
-
(INCHES)
1/25
TEST HOLE PRESOAKED PRIOR TO TESTING:
I
11:35/11:38
3:06
0 / 6
6
2
11:39/11:42
3:04
0 / 6
6
3
11:43/11:46
3:08
016
6
4
11:47/11:50
3:07
O 16
6
5
11:51/11:54
3:10
0 / 6
6
6
11:55/11:58
3:09
016
6
MUNICIPALITY OF ANCHORAGE
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT
4700 ELMORE ROAD ANCHORAGE, AK 99519-6650.4 TM
SOILS LOG AND PERCOLATION TEST �F BenjamUr Schiller
CE 12592lo ll2M
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: JASMINE SUBDIVISION ROAD TEST HOLE �����F�PROFESStONP?�
PERFORMED FOR: TROY DAVIS HOMES
Professional Engineers Stamp:
DATE: 03/15/18 PROJECT No.:
PARCEL ID#: TECHNICIAN: C. JOHANSEN
Dehrll TEST HOLE #1
(reel)
1 OB SLOPE SITE PLAN
2
3
4 WELL -GRADED GRAVEL W/ SAND
j . J (GW) NFS SEE SITE PLAN
6
7 S
8
9
1 O WAS GROUND WATER ENCOUNTERED? No
• IF YES r�( 1VH� S
1 1 DEP'I'l1 OF WATER AFTER \-10
DATE OF NO
12
r ' WELL -GRADED GRAVEL W/
13 SILT AND SAND (GW -GM) FI
14
S •
15
16-
17-
18-
19
6171819
20
PERCOLATION RATE: (MIN/INCH) PERC. HOLE DIA. INCHES)
TEST RUN BETWEEN: FT. and FT.
COMMENTS: -
�'I' DEP-1-1-l'?
-
NffO1ZING: 10.5'
NI'fOR1NG: 5/20/19
DATE
READING
GROSS TIME
(MINUTES)
NET TIME
(MINUTES)
DEPTH To
WATER
(INCHES)
NET DROP
(INCHES)
TEST HOLE PRESOAKED PRIOR TO TESTING:
DEPTH
{feet)
1 -
2 -
3-
4-
5-
6-
7-
8-
9'
10-
11-
12-
13-
14-
15-
16-
17-
18-
19-
20 -
MUNICIPALITY OF ANCHORAGE
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT
4700 ELMORE ROAD ANCHORAGE, AK 99519-6650
SOILS LOG AND PERCOLATION TEST
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: JASMINE SUBDIVISION ROAD TEST HOLE
PERFORMED FOR: TROY DAVIS HOMES
DATE: 03/15/18 PROJECT No.:
PARCEL ID#: TECHNICIAN: C. JOHANSEN
TEST HOLE #2
COMMENTS: —
is
SILTY SAND W/ GRAVEL (SM)
F2
SLOPE
SITE PLAN
SEE SITE PLAN
WAS GROUND WATER ENCOUNTERED? NO
IF YES @, WHAT DEPTH? _
S
DEPTH OI' WATER AFTER MONITORING: 9
DATE OP NIONITORING: 5/20/19
P
E
GROSS TIME NET TIME DEPTH To NET DROP
DATE READING (MINUTES) (MINUTES) WATER (INCHES)
(INCHES)
TEST HOLE PRESOAKED PRIOR TO TESTING:
PERCOLATION RATE: (MIN/INCH) PERC. HOLE DIA_INCHES)
TEST RUN BETWEEN: FT. and FT.
DEP'rt I
(reel)
1-
2 -
3-
4-
J
6-
7-
8-
9-
10-
11-
12-
13-
1411-
1J-
16-
17-
18-
19-
20-
MUNICIPALITY OF ANCHORAGE
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT
x+700 ELMORE ROAD ANCHORAGE, AK 99519-6650
SOILS LOG AND PERCOLATION TEST
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: JASMINE SUBDIVISION ROAD TEST HOLE
PERFORMED FOR: TROY DAVIS HOMES
DATE: 03/15/18 PROJECT No.:
PARCEL ID#: TECHNICIAN: C. JOHANSEN
COMMENTS: _
TEST HOLE #3
OB
POORLY -GRADED GRAVEL W/ SAND
(GP) NFS
s:
SITE PLAN
SEE SITE PLAN $
WAS GROUND WATER ENCOUNTERED? NO
READING
IF YES @ WHAT DEPTH? -
NET TIME
(MINUTES)
DEPTH To
WATER
(INCHES)
DEP'1'11 01' \V'A'TER AFTER MONITORING: NONE
TEST HOLE PRESOAKED PRIOR TO TESTING:
DATE OF MONITORING: 5/20/19
P
E
POORLY -GRADED GRAVEL W/
SILT AND SAND (GP -GM) FI
DATE
READING
GROSS TIME
(MINUTES)
NET TIME
(MINUTES)
DEPTH To
WATER
(INCHES)
NET DROP
(INCHES)
TEST HOLE PRESOAKED PRIOR TO TESTING:
PERCOLATION RATE: (MINIINCH) PERC. HOLE DIA.(INCHES)
TEST RUN BETWEEN: FT. and FT.
MUNICIPALITY OF ANCHORAGE� OF
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT coTH
'�'"
L,700 ELMORE ROAD ANCHORAGE, AK 99519-6650
A_
SOILS LOG AND PERCOLATION TEST
Benjar�r Schiller
CE 12592 \014e®�
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: JASMINE SUBDIVISION ROAD TEST HOLE ����Fa%'ROfESSi0NP4.��
PERFORMED FOR: TROY DAVIS HOMES
03 / 15 / 18 Professional Engineers Stamp:
DATE: PROJECT No.:
PARCEL ID#: TECHNICIAN: C. JOHANSEN
DEPTH TEST HOLE #4
(beet)
1 OB SLOPE SITE PLAN
2
4
:., WELL-GRADED GRAVEL W/ SAND SEE SITE PLAN
(GW) NFS
6
7 r
8
9 +
1
WAS GROUND N'A'I'ER ENCOUNTERED? NO
IF YES �g '✓HAT DEPTH'? —
1 1 DEPI'11 OI: WA'FL'R AP"I`ER �IONI'I'ORING: NONE
DATEOPNIONITORING: 5/20/19 P
• ` E
12 a ..•�•
13 .
s
15
16
17
18
19
20
PERCOLATION RATE: (MIN/INCH) PERC. HOLE DIA__ (INCHES)
TEST RUN BETWEEN: FT. and FT.
COMiVIENTS: -
GROSS TIME NET TIME DEPTH To NET DROP
DATE READING (MINUTES) (MINUTES) WATER (INCHES)
14
(INCHES)
TEST HOLE PRESOAKED PRIOR TO TESTING:
J. A. MUNTER CONSULTING, INC.
5701 PENNY CIRCLE, ANCHORAGE, AK, 99516
jamunter@arctic.net
PHONE (907) 345-0165; FAX (907) 348-8592
February 17, 2021
Mr. Troy Davis
Troy Davis Homes, Inc.
165 E. Parks Highway, Suite 200
Wasilla AK 99654
Re: Evaluation of aquifers at the proposed Jasmine Subdivision, Anchorage, Alaska.
Dear Mr. Davis:
This report provides the findings of an evaluation of aquifers near the proposed Jasmine
Subdivision. The purpose of the evaluation is to determine if there is enough water to support
on-site wells and to determine whether surrounding well owners would be able to reasonably
acquire water with development of the new subdivision.
HYDROGEOLOGIC SETTING
The general groundwater conditions in the vicinity of the site are described by Brunett and Lee
(1983) and Zenone and others (1974). A detailed geologic map of the area by Yehle and
Schmoll (1987) shows that the site is situation on an alluvial fan of Little Peters Creek. The
more hilly terrain surrounding the alluvial fan consists of ground moraine and kame deposits
associated with the Elmendorf glaciation, the youngest of the Quaternary glaciations in this part
of Cook Inlet. The regional hydrogeology is described by Kikuchi (2013) whose study area
includes a large portion of the Matanuska Susitna Borough directly across Knik Arm from this
site and only a few miles away.
Unconsolidated deposits in the area are underlain by bedrock units of an unnamed complex,
chiefly metamorphosed igneous and sedimentary rocks (Zenone and others, 1974; Yehle and
Schmoll, 1987). Zenone and others (1974) illustrate that a "probable old major fault zone" with
multiple splays is thought to be present along the mountain front near the proposed Jasmine
Subdivision.
METHODS AND SOURCES OF DATA
This report provides a vicinity analysis that includes an evaluation of well data from surrounding
properties to evaluate the general conditions in the area. Groundwater recharge information is
reviewed to estimate potential sustainable aquifer yields. Test well drilling and aquifer testing
were conducted to determine the properties of aquifers present at the site. Aquifer test data were
analyzed using software by AQTESOLVtm (Duffield, 2007). The aquifer characteristics are used
to model expected responses in wells from the proposed new pumping and assess the water-
supply potential at the proposed Jasmine Subdivision and surrounding properties.
J. A. MUNTER CONSULTING, INC.
Evaluation of aquifers at Page 2 of 16 February 17, 2021
Jasmine Subdivision, Anchorage, Alaska
VICINITY ANALYSIS
Aquifer Recharge and Water-Supply Potential
Kikuchi (2013, Figure 12) estimates that groundwater recharge across Knik Arm from the Peters
Creek area averages 1.5 to 5.8 inches per year across a broad area. A conservative estimate is
that groundwater recharge at Jasmine averages approximately 3 to 4 inches per year. This
translates to an average of approximately 370 to 500 gallons per day being recharged per lot
considering 12 lots on the entire 20-acre parcel. This amount of water is comparable to the
Municipal requirement of 450 gpd for a 3-bedroom home. In addition to direct recharge of water
onto lots, however, this subdivision also likely receives groundwater inflow from upgradient
areas. In general, groundwater flows from upland and a small wetland area located to the south
of Jasmine Subdivision northward through this area. These data suggest that the potential supply
of water is sufficient to sustain aquifers with the quantity of water needed by well owners in the
subdivision and surrounding developments.
Review of Area Well Records
The MOA’s On-site files were searched for records from adjacent properties
(http://onsite.ci.anchorage.ak.us/WebLink/Browse.aspx?startid=1).
The WELTS well log database (http://www.navmaps.alaska.gov/welts/) maintained by the
ADNR was also examined for well logs. Table 1 summarizes well records that have been
identified.
Table 1. Summary of data for wells near Jasmine Subdivision.
Location Reported
Well depth
(feet)
Well
Log
Avai
lable
Reported yield
or flow rate and
year of measure-
ment (gpm)
Estimated
transmis-
sivity
(ft2/day)
Aquifer type Static water level
in feet below land
surface and year
of measurement
Skyline
View #1 Blk
5 Lot 2A
220 yes 22 1979 147
Bedrock 120 1979
Skyline
View #1 Blk
5 Lot 2B
116 yes 12 1973 150 Sand and
Gravel
80 1973
2.5 1992 8.8 40 1992
0.33 2004 4.6 97 2004
Skyline
View #1 Blk
5 Lot 4A
160 yes 8 1983 31 Bedrock 90 1983
2 2009 7.6 83 2009
6+ 2017 16+ 57 2017
Skyline
View #1 Blk
5 Lot 4B
285 yes 3.83 1980 5.1 Bedrock 85 1980
1.43 2015 1.7 63 2015
1.2+ 1999 1.4+ 62 1999
SueTawn
Estate Lot 9
(note three
old wells
were
abandoned
in 2006)
105 No Unk Unk Unk Unk 79 2006
240 yes Below
MOA
criterion
1985 low Bedrock 36 1985
307 yes 0.35 1985 0.33 Bedrock 22 1985
Unk no Unk Unk NR Unk Unk Unk
J. A. MUNTER CONSULTING, INC.
Evaluation of aquifers at Page 3 of 16 February 17, 2021
Jasmine Subdivision, Anchorage, Alaska
Location Reported
Well depth
(feet)
Well
Log
Avai
lable
Reported yield
or flow rate and
year of measure-
ment (gpm)
Estimated
transmis-
sivity
(ft2/day)
Aquifer type Static water level
in feet below land
surface and year
of measurement
SueTawn
Estate Lot 8
(note one
old well was
to be
abandoned
in 1995)
103 yes 8 1995 130 Gravel and
fractured
bedrock
84 1995
Unk no Unk Unk NR Unk Unk Unk
SueTawn
Estate Lot 7
50 yes 7 1982 81 Sand and
Gravel
27 1982
SueTawn
Estate Lot 6
192 yes 7 1991 13 Bedrock 41 1991
54 no NR NR 97 Unk 46 1990
177 yes 1 1978 1.5 Bedrock NR NR
245
(deepening
of 177 ft
well)
yes 0.5 1984 NR Greenstone NR NR
SueTawn
Estates Lot
5
120 yes 20 1982 45 Gravel 90.5 6
007
Subdivision
Tract B
64 yes 3 2007 38 Sand and
Gravel
43 2007
2.7 2018 63 43.5 2018
400 yes 0.1 1999 0.067 Bedrock,
green
0 1999
SueTawn
Estates Add.
No. 1 Lot 10
153 yes 12 1973 23 Fractured and
decomposed
rock
24 1973
Note 1: Estimated transmissivity (T) in ft2/day calculated by T= SC x 2000/7.48 where SC
(specific capacity) = yield (in gpm) /drawdown (in ft). Full drawdown is assumed where data
were lacking, resulting in conservative (i.e. low) estimates of T.
Note 2: NA means not applicable; NR means not reported
Note 3: Unk means unknown
Summary of Well Record Review
Eighteen wells were identified on surrounding properties. Nine wells reportedly tapped a
bedrock aquifer. One bedrock well was deepened, and one well tapped both bedrock and sand
and gravel aquifers. Four wells tapped gravel or sand and gravel aquifers and four wells tapped
unknown aquifers. The wells tapping sand and gravel aquifers were mostly drilled close to Little
Peters Creek in SueTawn Estates Subdivision (see Vicinity Map).
Non-lithified aquifers. Reported yields of wells tapping sand and gravel aquifers range from
0.33 to 20 gpm. The median reported well yield is 3 gpm. This is 9.6 times the minimum
J. A. MUNTER CONSULTING, INC.
Evaluation of aquifers at Page 4 of 16 February 17, 2021
Jasmine Subdivision, Anchorage, Alaska
required yield needed for a three-bedroom home using the Municipality criterion of 150
gpd/bedroom.
Reported static water levels range in depth from approximately 27 to 97 ft below land surface.
Well depths range from 50 ft to 120 ft below land surface. Calculated transmissivity values
range from 4.6 to 150 ft2/day. The median estimated value of transmissivity is approximately 54
ft2/day. This value is in the mid-range for a glacial sand and gravel aquifer of 5-10 foot
thickness (Freeze and Cherry, 1979, p. 29).
Bedrock aquifer. Several bedrock wells were not able to pass MOA water sufficiency criteria.
One well was deepened and one well was hydrofracked to increase well yield. Four lots had
multiple wells drilled. Reported yields of wells tapping bedrock aquifers range from 0.1 to 22
gpm. The median reported well yield is about 2 gpm. This is about 6 times the minimum
required yield needed for a three-bedroom home using the Municipality criterion of 150
gpd/bedroom.
An important feature of the bedrock wells, however, is that they show a high degree of
variability. In addition to the low-yield wells described above, two wells exhibit unusually high
yields for bedrock wells. The well on Lot 2A, Block 5 of Skyline View #1 tapped into a
fractured bedrock zone between 208 and 214 feet depth that reportedly yielded 20 gpm. The
estimated transmissivity of the aquifer at this location is more than 2000 times the lowest value
identified in Table 1. Similarly, a well at SueTawn Estates Add. No. 1 Lot 10, encountered an
aquifer yielding 12 gpm , most of which appears to be coming from "decomposed rock" between
138 and 153 feet deep. Both of these wells (located on opposite sides of Jasmine Subdivision,
may have encountered a portion of an ancient fault system with enhanced permeability and
yields to wells.
Reported static water levels in bedrock wells range in depth from approximately 0 to 90 ft below
land surface. Well depths range from 153 ft to 400 ft below land surface. Calculated
transmissivity values range from 0.067 to 147 ft2/day. The median estimated value of
transmissivity is approximately 2.7 ft2/day. This value is at the low end of the range for a
fractured 200-foot-thick metamorphic and igneous rock aquifer (Freeze and Cherry, 1979, p. 29).
Summary of Vicinity Analysis
Some wells in the vicinity tap sand and gravel aquifers, which appear to generally produce
sufficient amounts of water for domestic use. One well tapping a sand and gravel aquifer
reported a decline in yield from 12 to 2.5 to 0.33 gpm between 1973 and 2004. This is an
unusual occurrence, and the cause of the low reported yield is not known, however it seems
probably that the bottom of the well, which was drilled in 1973, is silted in and requires cleaning
in order to restore its yield.
Most wells in the vicinity of Jasmine Subdivision tap a heterogeneous fractured bedrock aquifer
of low permeability, although a few wells tap highly permeable fracture zones. Virtually all
water is considered to flow through secondary fractures, joints, faults, weathering cracks and
similar openings and practically no water through primary intergranular permeability. Some
wells in this area would likely have benefited from hydrofracking in order to achieve sufficient
J. A. MUNTER CONSULTING, INC.
Evaluation of aquifers at Page 5 of 16 February 17, 2021
Jasmine Subdivision, Anchorage, Alaska
yields to pass Municipal tests for a three bedroom home. Water-level data reported from well
logs and subsequent adequacy tests by engineers show no apparent long-term water-level decline
in the bedrock aquifer. This indicates that the bedrock aquifer is at least capable of meeting
existing water demands in the neighborhood, consistent with expectations derived from aquifer
recharge calculations described above.
SITE EVALUATION
Test-Well Drilling
Four test wells were drilled at the locations shown on Lots 1, 2, 10, and 11 on the attached
Proposed Jasmine Subdivision Aquifer Test Well Location Plan. Logs of the wells are provided
in the attachments. For this report, the well drilled on Lot 1 (303 ft deep) will be called Well 1,
the well drilled on Lot 2 (143 ft deep) will be called Well 2, the well drilled on Lot 10 (283 ft
deep) will be called Well 10, and the well drilled on Lot 11 (445 ft deep) will be called Well 11.
Wells 1 and 2 tap fractures at similar depths near the top of bedrock at depths between 43 to 46
feet below ground surface and Wells 10 and 11 tap deeper fractures. Well 1 was hydrofracked
and Well 10 and Well 11 were each hydrofracked twice. All test wells tap the bedrock aquifer
which is considered a confined aquifer.
Table 2 Test well drilling and hydrofracking results.
Location Well
depth
(feet
below
land
surface)
Depth to
Top of
bedrock
(feet
below
land
surface)
Reported yield Aquifer
type
Static water level in
feet below top of
casing and date of
measurement (top of
casing 2 feet above
land surface)
after
drilling
(gpm)
after
first
hydro-
fracking
(gpm)
after
second
hydro-
fracking
(gpm)
Lot 1,
Jasmine
303 41 0.3 1.14 NH Bedrock 25.15 3/19/20
Lot 2,
Jasmine
143 41 2 NH NH Bedrock 29.01 3/19/20
Lot 11,
Jasmine
443 12 0.3 0.42 1.1 Bedrock 6.02 6/15/20
Lot 10,
Jasmine
283 12 0.25 0.33 0.42 Bedrock 15.91 11/11/20
Note: NH means Not hydrofracked
Aquifer Testing
All wells were subjected to 4-hour aquifer tests with recovery measurements to assess basic well
and aquifer performance characteristics. Wells 2, 10, and 11 were subjected to 24-hour aquifer
tests. Well 1 responded affirmatively to pumping from Well 2 and, following Municipality of
Anchorage Aquifer Test Procedures, a 24-hour test was not performed on Well 1.
J. A. MUNTER CONSULTING, INC.
Evaluation of aquifers at Page 6 of 16 February 17, 2021
Jasmine Subdivision, Anchorage, Alaska
Data sheets and analysis summaries of 24-hour aquifer testing are attached and the results are
described below and are summarized in Table 3. All four wells are relatively low-yield wells
tapping a bedrock aquifer. In such wells, it difficult to maintain a low and constant rate of
pumping while trying to maximize the amount of drawdown in the pumped wells. Therefore, the
general procedure used during the tests was to draw the water level in the pumped well down to a
low-water shut-off switch, at which point the pumping temporarily stopped. After a few minutes
of water-level recovery, the pump starts again and the process is repeated. The average pumping
rate is determined by calculating the total number of gallons pumped as observed by readings of
the flow totalizer divided by the elapsed time between readings. Analysis of the data makes use
of the recovery of water levels after all pumping has stopped, which eliminates the influence of
the irregular variations in the pumping rate on drawdown during the pumping phase of the test.
Table 3 Results of aquifer testing.
Location Well
depth (feet
below
land
surface)
Aquifer
thick-
ness (b)
at time
of
testing
Calculated
Transmis-
sivity, T
(ft2/day)
Calculated
Storativity
(dimen-
sionless)
Calculated
hydraulic
conducti-
vity, T/b
(ft/day)
Initial rate of
recovery after
pumping stopped
(pumped wells only)
(gpm, assuming 1.4
gallons per foot of
water-level rise)
Lot 1,
Jasmine
303 260 4.8 0.000024 0.018 NC
Lot 2,
Jasmine
143 102 1.4 NC 0.014 1.3
Lot 11,
Jasmine
443 390 1.3 NC 0.0033 1.1
Lot 10,
Jasmine
283 241 0.133 NC 0.00055 0.42
Geometric Mean 0.00464
Note: NC means Not Calculable
Well 2. The average well production rate varied from 2 gpm to 1 gpm during the 24-hour
pumping phase of the test. A total of 1,958 gallons were pumped during the 1,440-minute
pumping portion of the test. Analysis of data from the pumped well resulted in a calculated
aquifer transmissivity of 1.4 ft2/day (see attachment). The water level in Well 11 did not respond
to the pumping in Well 2. The water level in Well 1 responded affirmatively to pumping from
Well 2 (see below). The value of transmissivity determined from data from the pumped well
(1.4 ft2/day) is near the median value determined from surrounding bedrock wells. The
calculated hydraulic conductivity from this test (see Table 3) is near the low end of values typical
of fractured igneous and metamorphic rocks (Freeze and Cherry, 1979, p. 29).
Well 1. Well 1 was hydrofracked prior to the 24-hr testing of Well 2. The well recovery rate
after hydrofracking and removal of injected water was 1.14 gpm (see attached). Using the
methods described in Note 1 of Table 1, this recovery rate suggests a transmissivity of
J. A. MUNTER CONSULTING, INC.
Evaluation of aquifers at Page 7 of 16 February 17, 2021
Jasmine Subdivision, Anchorage, Alaska
approximately 1.1 ft2/day, which generally confirms the results of the testing of Well 2 and the
productivity of Well 1.
Analysis of drawdown data from Well 1 yielded a calculated transmissivity of 4.8 ft2/day and a
storativity of 2.4E-5. The value of transmissivity is slightly higher than the values: 1) estimated
from the well recovery rate; 2) from the data from Well 2; and 3) the median value determined
from surrounding wells. The calculated value of storativity is near (but below) the low end of
the typical range of values for confined aquifers of 0.00005 (Freeze and Cherry, 1979, p. 60).
Well 11. Well 11 was hydrofracked twice prior to performing a 24-hour test. During the test,
the production rate varied from 10 to 1.1 gpm, resulting in pumpage of 2,502 gallons during the
1,440 minute pumping portion of the test. Wells 1 and 2 did not respond to the pumping. Based
on the data from the pumped well, the aquifer transmissivity was calculated to be 1.3 ft2/day (see
attachment). The calculated hydraulic conductivity from this test (see Table 3) is near the low
end of values typical of fractured igneous and metamorphic rocks (Freeze and Cherry, 1979, p.
29).
Well 10. Well 10 was hydrofracked twice prior to performing the 24-hour test. During the test,
the production rate varied from 10 to 0.55 gpm, resulting in pumpage of 1,113 gallons during the
1,493 pumping portion of the test. Wells 1, 11, and 2 did not respond to the pumping. Based on
the data from the pumped well, the aquifer transmissivity was calculated to be 0.133 ft2/day (see
attachment). The calculated hydraulic conductivity from this test (see Table 3) is in the mid-
range of values typical of "unfractured metamorphic and igneous rocks" (Freeze and Cherry,
1979, p. 29). This indicates that Well 10 encountered very low fracture densities.
POTENTIAL EFFECTS OF NEW PUMPING
Theis (1935) Methodology
An analysis of the effects of pumping new wells both on future neighboring wells within Jasmine
Subdivision and also on surrounding wells is described below using the method of Theis (1935).
The Theis method requires some simplifying assumptions as described below.
The Theis model was developed for flow of groundwater in porous media having continuous
interconnected pore spaces, such as a sand and gravel aquifer. Fractured rock aquifers, while
somewhat different, are commonly simulated as equivalent porous mediums, whereby it is
assumed that fractures are sufficiently interconnected to be treated as a continuum at the scale of
investigation.
The Theis method assumes that all wells tap the bedrock aquifer, the aquifer is infinite in lateral
extent without boundary conditions, is homogeneous and isotropic, and that recharge does not
occur within the simulation time period. While these assumptions are simplifications of actual
aquifer conditions, the Theis model is widely used and can provide an initial assessment of the
magnitude of the likely effects of pumping on pumped wells and nearby wells.
The Theis model calculates drawdown of water levels in an aquifer and requires five inputs: rate
of pumping from a well (Q), duration of pumping (t), distance from the pumped well (r), and the
J. A. MUNTER CONSULTING, INC.
Evaluation of aquifers at Page 8 of 16 February 17, 2021
Jasmine Subdivision, Anchorage, Alaska
aquifer parameters transmissivity (T), and storativity (S). Transmissivity is a measure of how
easily water moves through the aquifer and storativity is a measure of how much water is
released from storage by the aquifer with a reduction of the water level in the aquifer.
Transmissivity, in turn, is defined as the product of the aquifer hydraulic conductivity (or
permeability) that is applicable to a small cubic unit of the aquifer times the aquifer thickness.
In order to perform a Theis analysis, it is first necessary to determine a spatially uniform value of
transmissivity. Thus, a value of hydraulic conductivity was calculated for each test. As is
commonly done, the geometric mean of these values is then calculated. Finally, the geometric
mean hydraulic conductivity is then multiplied by a nominal aquifer thickness of 300 feet to
obtain transmissivity. The value of transmissivity determined by this method, based on the 24-
hour aquifer tests, is 1.39 ft2/day, A storativity of 0.000024 is assumed to be uniformly
distributed in the modeled area based on the value determined from the Well 2/Well 1 pair
during pumping of Well 2. It is not possible to calculate valid storativity values if no observation
well responds to pumping, as occurred during the testing at Wells 10 and 11.
Pumping is assumed to occur for 160 days, the approximate duration of wintertime conditions
with no recharge (generally, late October until early April). After 160 days of no surface
recharge, spring snowmelt recharge followed by summer and fall rains would be expected to
replenish the aquifer.
The assumptions of the Theis model will be discussed in more detail subsequently in this
evaluation.
Initial Theis Single-Well Simulation
Drawdown in a single pumping well is considered. A drawdown of 68 feet is calculated at the
pumping well after pumping for 160 days at a rate of 450 gpd. Most future wells are expected to
have more than this amount of available drawdown and should be able to sustain this amount of
pumping and drawdown. Well 2, though, for example, may need to be deepened if this amount
of drawdown were to occur.
Initial Theis Well-Pair Simulation
The effects of pumping a well on a neighboring well in J asmine Subdivision is investigated by
simulating the amount of drawdown at a distance of 50 feet, with all other parameters being the
same as above. This results in a calculation of 31 feet of drawdown in the neighboring well.
Combined with 68 feet of drawdown in the single well simulation, 99 feet of drawdown is
calculated. This is also less than the expected available drawdown in most future wells and both
wells should be able to sustain this amount of pumping and drawdown. Again, though, a well
such as Well 2 may need to be deepened if this amount of drawdown were to occur.
Initial Theis Neighborhood Analysis
A neighborhood analysis was conducted by examining the total amount of projected pumpage
from the aquifer of 5400 gpd (450 gpd times 12 lots). This analysis was performed by
considering the effects of pumping on a well located adjacent to Jasmine Subdivision on Lot 4A
of Block 5 of Skyline View #1 (see Vicinity Map). A review of the data in Table 1 suggests that
this well could be the most susceptible to interference from future pumping at Jasmine
Subdivision. To conduct the analysis, the distances from each proposed well location shown in
J. A. MUNTER CONSULTING, INC.
Evaluation of aquifers at Page 9 of 16 February 17, 2021
Jasmine Subdivision, Anchorage, Alaska
the Vicinity Map to the well on Lot 4A were determined and used to calculate drawdown using
the same aquifer parameters and pumping amounts and durations described above. The total
drawdown calculated for the well on Lot 4A is determined by adding all of the individual well
pair drawdowns using the principal of superposition. This analysis resulted in a total of 186 feet
of calculated drawdown in the well on Lot 4A. This is considerably more than the 80 or so feet
of available drawdown in the well and, if realized, would result in the well going dry.
Using a similar method, drawdown caused by all 12 wells in Jasmine Subdivision on Well 2
resulted in a calculated 256 feet of drawdown (including a calculation of 68 feet caused by its
own pumping). Since Well 2 is only 143 feet deep, this also exceeds the amount of available
drawdown in this well, although it is conceivable that the well could be deepened to
accommodate the drawdown.
Field Observations Related to Accuracy of the Initial Theis Simulations.
Several lines of reasoning supported by field observations suggest that the initial Theis analysis
is overly conservative and produces projections of drawdown in this area that are unrealistically
large.
1. Absence of long-term water-level declines in the bedrock aquifer. Data shown in Table 1
indicate that the bedrock aquifer in this area has not experienced long-term water-level declines
with the existing amount of development. The well on Lot 4A of Skyline View #1, Block 5, for
example, reportedly had the water level actually rise in two successive measurements since the
well was drilled. Also, the water levels in the four test wells described in this evaluation are all
relatively near the land surface, indicating that the aquifer has not experienced major water-level
declines to date. The Theis analysis described above for a single well indicates that, if the
analysis were accurate, at least several tens of feet of water-level declines would be evident. The
absence of such declines suggests that the model may not be accurate and that additional
development and groundwater usage in the area may be possible.
2. Absence of responses in monitoring wells located more than 100 feet from pumping well.
If all the assumptions in the initial Theis simulations are valid, then the model results indicate
that some drawdown should have been observed at Well 1 or Well 2 in response to the 24-hour
test at Well 10. Using a value of transmissivity of 0.54 ft2/day (intermediate in value between
the values determined at the well pairs) calculations show that drawdown should have been
observed in either Wells 1 or 2 ranging from 15 to 22 feet (Table 4). In fact, no drawdown was
observed in Wells 1 or 2 during the testing of Well 10. Similarly, no drawdown was observed in
Well 11 from the testing of Well 2, or in Wells 1 or 2 from the testing of Well 11.
These data, together with analysis of the well logs showing that fracture systems occur at
different depths in the wells, indicate that fracture systems between the wells (except for the
Well 1/Well 2 pair) are not closely interconnected at the scale of individual wells. Wells 1 and 2
are 57 feet apart and the other wells are all more than 100 feet apart. Thus, at distances of more
than about 100 feet, wells may tap separate fracture systems and projections of drawdown by the
initial Theis simulations may not be accurate.
J. A. MUNTER CONSULTING, INC.
Evaluation of aquifers at Page 10 of 16 February 17, 2021
Jasmine Subdivision, Anchorage, Alaska
Table 4 Results of simulation of pumping at Well 10 on surrounding test wells.
Location Well depth (feet below
land surface)
Distance from Well
10, r (feet)
Calculated drawdown
(feet)
Lot 1,
Jasmine
303 160 15
Lot 2,
Jasmine
143 120 22
Lot 11,
Jasmine
443 280 4.3
Lot 10,
Jasmine
283 Nil (r = radius of well
= 0.25 ft)
213
Notes:
Parameters used for simulation:
transmissivity (T) = 0.54 ft2/day
storativity (S) = 0.000024
time of pumping (t) = 1 day
pumping rate (Q) = 0.55 gpm
3. Absence of reports of well disturbances caused by testing or hydrofracking. There were
no known reports of any well issues in surrounding wells during any of the three 24-hour aquifer
tests at Jasmine Subdivision, nor from any of the hydrofracking operations. This is also an
indication that fracture systems are generally not closely interconnected in the area. The Theis
assumptions regarding a homogeneous aquifer therefore may not be valid and the resulting
calculations may be inaccurate.
4. Disparate static water levels in closely spaced wells. The static water level at Skyline View
#1 Block 5, Lot 4A is approximately 50 feet lower in elevation relative to mean sea level than
the static water level at Well 2, indicating that they likely tap separate fracture zones. The wells
are only approximately 225 feet apart.
Influence of the "Scale Effect" on Transmissivity
In an attempt to explain observations 1 through 4 above and improve the reliability and accuracy
of model calculations, the concept of the "scale effect" on aquifer transmissivity is evaluated for
this area. Of all the model parameters, aquifer transmissivity is one of the most important for
determining model results and is, in general, difficult to specify accurately. This discussion will
focus on aquifer hydraulic conductivity, K, which is directly proportional to transmissivity (K is
equal to transmissivity divided by aquifer thickness and is the parameter most often discussed in
the literature on this topic).
It has long been known that values of hydraulic conductivity determined on small aquifer sample
volumes, such as core samples from drill holes, are commonly much lower than values
determined for the same aquifer from single-well piezometer tests. Similarly, values determined
from piezometer tests are also likely to be lower than values determined from larger-scale aquifer
pumping tests such as were conducted for this project. Furhtermore, these falues are likely to be
J. A. MUNTER CONSULTING, INC.
Evaluation of aquifers at Page 11 of 16 February 17, 2021
Jasmine Subdivision, Anchorage, Alaska
lower than values from even larger-scale tracer tests, modeling studies, long-term multi-well
aquifer tests, water budget studies, or other means. This is termed the "scale effect".
Schulze-Makuch and others (1999) presented quantitative formulas for evaluating the scale
effect in a variety of different aquifer types, including heterogeneous fractured rock aquifers,
which is the type of aquifer at Jasmine Subdivision. They found that a formula could be used to
relate values of hydraulic conductivity determined at a local scale such as an aquifer test, up to
the scale that would be required for modeling such as a Theis analysis.
A determination of the approximate volume of the aquifer tested by the relevant test is central to
their analysis. For the three tests performed, assuming that the effective porosity of the aquifer is
approximately 1%, the calculated volume of aquifer volume tested is approximately 1000 m3.
Schulze-Makuch and others (1999) show that the scale effect causes an increase in hydraulic
conductivity of an aquifer up to an aquifer volume of approximately 10,000 m3, beyond which
hydraulic conductivity no longer increases with scale. An equation they provide suggests that
up-scaling hydraulic conductivity from 1000 m3 to 10,000 m3, should result in an increase of
hydraulic conductivity by a factor of approximately 8.1 times. This scaling factor is modest
compared to the range of bedrock aquifer transmissivities provided in Table 1 that exhibit a
factor of over 2000 times from the smallest to the largest.
This scaling phenomenon indicates that the aquifer tests performed do not provide reliable
representative values of transmissivity (or hydraulic conductivity) for the aquifer at Jasmine
Subdivision. In practice, this means that the wells drilled do not effectively tap all of the fracture
systems that are present in the larger aquifer volume. This helps to explain the observations that
fracture systems are not closely interconnected at the scale of individual wells located more than
100 feet apart. This also helps explain why hydrofracking works. Hydrofracking essentially
expands the volume of aquifer tapped by the well resulting in a higher effective transmissivity
and higher yields in hydrofracked wells.
In order to evaluate the scale effect further, the model was revised using a value of hydraulic
conductivity that is 8.1 times larger than that used for the initial Theis analysis, or 0.0376 ft/day.
The results of the original analysis and the revised analysis are presented in Table 5.
As can be seen in Table 5, much less drawdown is projected by the revised model than the initial
model. These drawdowns, although substantially less than those project by the initial model,
could still cause difficulty in the ability of wells to provide water because Wells 1 and 2, for
example, obtain portions of their yield from bedrock fractures near the bedrock surface (depths
less than 50 feet) and these fracture systems could be dewatered by a few tens of feet of water-
level decline. A potential remedy is to deepen and/or hydrofrack such wells.
J. A. MUNTER CONSULTING, INC.
Evaluation of aquifers at Page 12 of 16 February 17, 2021
Jasmine Subdivision, Anchorage, Alaska
Table 5. Results of initial and revised Theis simulations
Location Initial (T1) drawdown
(feet)
Revised (T2)
drawdown (feet)
Single well 68 9.2
Cumulative effects on the well at
Skyline View #1, Block 5, Lot 4A
186 34.1
Cumulative effects on the well at Lot 2,
Jasmine Subdivision
256 42.1
Notes:
Parameters used for simulation:
transmissivities:
T1 = 1.39 ft2/day (0.00464 ft/day x 300 ft aquifer thickness)
T2 = 11.3 ft2/day (0.0376 ft/day x 300 ft aquifer thickness)
storativity (S) = 0.000024
time of pumping (t) = 160 days
pumping rate (Q) = 450 gpd (0.3125 gpm)
Other limitations of the Theis Assumptions
1. Recharge. The assumption of no recharge for 160 days is not strictly valid because very little
of the water pumped by the well is actually consumed. Almost all water (except that
evapotranspirated by in-home plant watering, shower aerosols, and clothes drying, for example)
is returned to the ground through the septic system below seasonally-frozen soils. This water
(after treatment by the soil) reenters the groundwater system and functions like recharge to help
maintain water levels in the aquifer. An analysis of annual recharge to the area of Jasmine
Subdivision indicates that, on an annual average basis, recharge should be sufficient to sustain
demand from the aquifer (see p. 2 of this letter).
2. Actual water use. Water usage in residential areas is typically less than the 450 gpd that was
assumed for the initial and revised model simulations. In bedroom communities of Eagle River,
for example, Munter (1984) estimated that average household water use was about 400 gallons
per day. The MOA criteria of 450 gpd for a three-bedroom house is based on water usage of 75
gpd/person and double occupancy of each bedroom. In reality, the actual occupancy of most
three-bedroom homes probably averages four or fewer people, and using the MOA water usage
amount of 75 gpd/person, would result in 300 gpd or less of actual daily water usage. In the
Theis model, calculated drawdown is directly proportional to the simulated pumping rate. Since
300 gpd is a one third reduction from the 450 gpd value that was modeled, the drawdown values
shown in Table 5 could plausible also by reduced by one third.
3. Heterogeneity. Heterogeneity means that the aquifer is not uniform across the modeled area.
This is reflected in the earlier-described analysis that wells seem to be tapping separate fracture
systems (except the Well 1/Well 2 pair) and from the review of area well data provided in Table
1. This means that some wells are likely to respond less than projected to pumping and other
wells may respond more. A peculiarity of fractured rock aquifers is that wells that are more
distant from the pumping well may tap into the same fracture network as the pumped well,
resulting in more drawdown than might be observed in a well that is closer to the pumped well.
J. A. MUNTER CONSULTING, INC.
Evaluation of aquifers at Page 13 of 16 February 17, 2021
Jasmine Subdivision, Anchorage, Alaska
This heterogeneity complements the scale effect by providing a conceptual framework in which
single wells may have limited connectivity to the larger-scale fracture network in the broader
neighborhood.
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
Most new wells at Jasmine Subdivision would be expected to tap the bedrock aquifer, although a
few may tap an unlithified sand and gravel aquifer. Wells tapping a sand and gravel aquifer in
the area have generally been better producers than bedrock wells and would be expected to
provide sufficient water and not create adverse effects on surrounding wells.
Testing has shown that the bedrock aquifer productivity is sufficient to support on-site wells for
three-bedroom homes, although wells may need to be drilled deep (up to about 500 feet) and
may need to be hydrofracked, perhaps multiple times. Hydrofracking has been shown to be an
effective methodology for increasing the yield of marginal wells in this area, which is consistent
with findings in other areas where bedrock wells are common (New Hampshire Department of
Environmental Services, 2020).
Data shown in Table 1 indicate that the existing development has not resulted in a noticeable
decline in water levels in the area, indicating that the aquifer could support additional
development. This may be because pumping from wells and return of water through septic
systems is largely non-consumptive of groundwater and because the aquifer has a higher
transmissivity than was derived directly from the aquifer tests.
An initial groundwater model analysis using the Theis method based on geometric mean
hydraulic conductivity values determined from three aquifer tests indicated that development of
new wells at Jasmine Subdivision could result in drawdown of about 200 feet or more in wells,
exceeding available drawdown in some wells and necessitating well deepening or
hydrofracking. The initial model is concluded to be overly conservative because an analysis of
the scale effect indicates that existing aquifer test data results in an under-estimate of the value of
transmissivity that should be applied to a model of the entire neighborhood. Available
observations and site-specific hydrogeologic analysis support this interpretation. Specifically:
some surrounding wells tapped highly fractured and water-producing zones in bedrock
that may be the result of ancient regional-scale faulting that passes through the vicinity.
fracture systems tapped at the scale of individual wells have been shown to not be closely
interconnected based on well logs, water level data, and aquifer testing during which
drawdown did not occur in monitoring wells except in the closely spaced wells on Lots 1
and 2;
There are no known reports of adverse effects from aquifer testing and hydrofracking
activity from neighbors;
The model does not consider recharge for the simulation period of 160 days, whereas
some recharge likely occurs from septic systems because most water use in homes is non-
consumptive; and
J. A. MUNTER CONSULTING, INC.
Evaluation of aquifers at Page 14 of 16 February 17, 2021
Jasmine Subdivision, Anchorage, Alaska
A groundwater recharge analysis to the area of Jasmine Subdivision indicates that on an
annual average basis, there should be enough recharge to sustain projected demand from
the aquifer.
A revised model analysis using hydraulic conductivity values based on the "scale effect"
indicates that drawdowns in Jasmine Subdivision and neighboring wells are projected to be
approximately in the range of 30 to 40 feet, which is about one sixth as much as the initial
model. These simulations are considered to be more reliable than the initial model simulations
and appear to be more consistent with field observations and analyses. Under the conditions
simulated with the revised model, new Jasmine Subdivision and surrounding wells are concluded
to be likely to be able to reasonably acquire water for ongoing domestic usage, although some
wells may need to be deepened or hydrofracked or both.
Considering the details of wells constructed on 11 properties surrounding Jasmine Subdivision
(Table 1), 5 wells were found to be tapping sand and gravel aquifers. These wells generally have
higher yields than bedrock wells and are not considered to be at risk for experiencing the amount
of drawdown projected for bedrock wells by the model results. Two bedrock wells are high-
yield wells (12 and 22 gpm, respectively, and have 100 feet or more of water in them and are
also not considered to be at risk for experiencing water problems as a result of development of
Jasmine Subdivision. Of the four remaining wells, Their depths are 160 feet, 245 feet, 285 feet,
and 307 feet. Three deepest of these appear to have at least 200 feet of water in their casing
under static conditions would not appear to be adversely affected by the model-projected 30-40
feet of drawdown. The 160-ft deep well, is reported to have variously 70, 77, or 103 feet of water
in the casing and, with reported well yield or flow rate data of 8, 2, and 6+ gpm, may also
operate normally with 30 to 40 feet of drawdown. Thus, considering that: 1) existing
development has not resulted in observed water-level declines in the area; 2) residential water
use is considered non-consumptive and is available for general groundwater recharge (along with
adequate amounts of natural recharge); 3) some bedrock wells exhibit considerable well
productivity; 4) bedrock fracture systems appear to be not very well connected over distances of
100 to 300 feet; and 5) general model uncertainty, model results are not considered to be
predictive that adverse effects would occur in wells on surrounding properties. Based on all
available testing results and information, adequate water supplies are concluded to be available
for properties surrounding Jasmine Subdivision.
All four of the non high-yield bedrock wells surrounding Jasmine Subdivision were drilled in the
1980s. Low-yield bedrock wells commonly experience declining yield as they age as a result of
plugging of bedrock fractures from chemical or physical material deposition. For example, as
water levels are drawn down in a well as a result of normal well operation, borehole sides are
exposed to atmospheric oxygen and this tends to transform relatively soluble dissolved iron
common in groundwater (iron in the +2 oxidation state) into relatively insoluble iron oxy-
hydroxides, in which iron is in the +3 oxidation state. Periodic cleaning or chemical or physical
treatment of the well is usually needed to restore well yields in this situation.
J. A. MUNTER CONSULTING, INC.
Evaluation of aquifers at Page 15 of 16 February 17, 2021
Jasmine Subdivision, Anchorage, Alaska
CLOSING
Should you have any questions about this evaluation, please call me at 345-0165 or 727-6310.
Sincerely,
J. A. Munter Consulting, Inc.
James A. Munter, CPG, CGWP
Principal Hydrogeologist
Certified Ground Water Professional No. 119481
Alaska Licensed Professional Geologist No. 568
Attachments
Vicinity Map
Proposed Jasmine Subdivision Aquifer Test Well Location Plan
Test Well Logs - Jasmine (Wells 1, 2, 10, and 11)
Jasmine Frack Reports Lots 11, 1 and 10
Test pumping data (Wells 2, 10 and 11)
Aquifer analyses -Jasmine (Wells 2, 1, 10 and 11)
References Cited
Brunett, Jilann O. and Michael Lee, 1983, Hydrogeology for land-use planning: the
Peters Creek area, Municipality of Anchorage, Alaska, Water-Resources Investigations Report
82-4120.
Duffield, Glen M., 2007, AQTESOLVtm for Windowstm, Version 4.50 Professional,
HydroSOLVE, Inc., copyright 1996-2007.
Freeze R. A., and J. A. Cherry, 1979, Groundwater, Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ,
604 p.
Kikuchi, Colin P., 2013, Shallow Groundwater in the Matanuska-Susitna Valley, Alaska
- Conceptualization and Simulation of Flow. U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations
Report 2013–5049.
Municipality of Anchorage, undated, Aquifer Test Procedures. 1 p.
Munter, J.A., 1984, Ground-water occurrence in Eagle River: Alaska Division of
Geological & Geophysical Surveys Report of Investigation 84-21, 15 p.
https://doi.org/10.14509/2380
New Hampshire Department of Environmental Services, 2020, Environmental Fact
Sheet, Well development by hydro-fracturing, DWGB-1-3, 2 p. Accessed on 12/9/20 at:
https://www.des.nh.gov/sites/g/files/ehbemt341/files/documents/2020-01/dwgb-1-3.pdf
J. A. MUNTER CONSULTING, INC.
Evaluation of aquifers at Page 16 of 16 February 17, 2021
Jasmine Subdivision, Anchorage, Alaska
Papadopulos, I.S. and H.H. Cooper, 1967, Drawdown in a well of large diameter, Water
Resources Research, vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 241-244.
Schulz-Makuch, D., D. A. Carlson, D. S. Cherkauer, and P. Malik, 1999, Scale
dependency of hydraulic conductivity in heterogeneous media, Ground Water, Vol. 37, No. 6, pp
904-919. Accessed at http://seismo.berkeley.edu/~manga/cherk1.pdf, 12/4/2020.
Theis, C. V., 1935, The relation between the lowering of the piezometric surface and the
rate and duration of discharge of a well using groundwater storage: Trans. Amer. Geophys.
Union, 2, pp 519-524.
Yehle, L. A, and H. R. Schmoll, 1987, Surficial geologic map of the Anchorage B-7 NW
Quadrangle, Alaska, U. S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 87-168.
Zenone, Chester, Schmoll, H.R., and Dobrovolny, Ernest, 1974, Geology and ground
water for land use planning in the Eagle River-Chugiak area, Alaska: U.S. Geological Survey
Open-File Report 74-57, 25 p., 1 sheet.
Lot 11 Well Depth 445 Lot 1 Well Depth 305
Elapsed Time Depth to Gallons per Remarks
in Minutes Water Lot 2 Minute
Wheaton Water Well, Inc.
Lot 1 Monitoring for Lot
2
1190 N. Wasilla-Fishhook Road
Wasilla, AK 99654
Start Pumping- Used Flaw
(907)376-2041
logger depth at 46.45
Well Flow Test
Project:
Tray Davis Homes Date of Test: March 19 ,2020
Well Site:
Jasmine Sub. Casing: 47.5' of Steel Casing
Legal:
007 TRC Screen: N/A
Well Depth:
Date Level Taken: March 19 ,2020
Static Water Level:
29.01 Drilled By: Wheaton Water Well, Inc.
Date Drilled:
2/20/2020
30.95
tat 2 Well Depth
20
145
Lot 11 Well Depth 445 Lot 1 Well Depth 305
Elapsed Time Depth to Gallons per Remarks
in Minutes Water Lot 2 Minute
Lot it
Lot 1 Monitoring for Lot
2
10:45 am
Start Pumping- Used Flaw
logger depth at 14.12
logger depth at 46.45
0
29.01
0
Restnctor to regulate flow
739
25-15
1
30.35
2
1:45 8.07
7.39
25.15
2
30.95
2
20
7-4
25.15
3
31.39
2
4:00 8.03
7.45
25.17
4
31.74
2
35
7.45 -
25.19
5
32-1
2
8.1
25.2
6
32.43
2
50
8.1
25.22
7
32.75
2
8.53
25.22
8
33
2
65
9
25.23
9
33.39
2
9.5
25-25
10
33.69
2
9.73
25.29
15
3455
2
10.2
25.3
20
35.31
2
10.66
25.55
25
36-18
2
11
26.3
30
36.91
2
11.6
26.85
bu
38.86
2
1 hour
11.59
29.32
90
41.01
2
11.57
30.02
120
46.83
2
2 hours
11.58
31.8
150
52.35
1.9
11.59
33.65
180
57.17
1.9
3 hours
11.6
36.57
210
60.93
1.9
9.4
3&25
240
63.91
1.8
4 hours
7.78
39.9
300
69.81
1.7
5 hours
8.1
41.15
360
74.01
1.6
8.26
42.21
420
78.4
1.6
8.34
42-73
480
87.78
1.6
8.39
43.13
540
87.15
1.6
8.4
43.44
600
91.6
1.5
10 hours
8.39
43.71
660
96.11
1A
8.41
43.91
720
100.61
1.2
8.39
44.04
780
102.75
1
8.36
44.26
840
102.75
1
8.33
44.4
900
102.75
1
15 hours
8.3
44.52
960
102.75
1
8.26
44.62
1020
102.75
1
8.23
44.7
1080
102.75
1
8.2
44.78
1140
102.75
1
8.19
44.87
1200
102.75
1
20 hours
8.17
44.96
1260
102.75
1
8.16
45,04
1320
102.75
1
8.13
45.1
1380
102.75
1
8.11
45.15
1440
102J5
1
Stop Pumping -10:46 am
8.11
45.24
Total Gallons Pumped: 1958
Draw pawn/Recovery
3/20/2020
3/20/2020
0
102.7 Stopped Pumping
11:00 8.11
10:45 45.24
5
98
12:45 8.09
11:00 44.12
10
93.31
1:45 8.07
12:00 35.84
15
87.79
2:45 8.06
1:45 33.25
20
84.15
3:00 8.03
2:00 31.49
25
79.35
4:00 8.03
3:00 30.26
30
74.79
5:00 8.04
4:00 29.62
35
70.45
5:00 29.08
40
65.84
6:00 28.65
45
61.31
50
57.18
55
53.58
60
50.48
65
48.2
Total Gallons Pumped: 1958
Wheaton Water Well, Inc.
1190 N. Wasilla-Fishhook Road
Wasilla, AK 99654
(907)376-2041
WELL FLOW TEST
Project: TDH- Jasmin Lot 10 Date of Test: Nov. 11, 2020
Well Site: Jasmin Lot 10 Casing: 44' of 6" ID Steel
Well Depth: 285' Screen: N/A
Static Water Level: 15.91 Date Level Taken: Nov. 11, 2020
Date Drilled: 8/3/2020 Drilled By: Wheaton Water Well, Inc
Elapsed Time Depth To Gallons Per Remarks
In Minutes Water Minute 44027.6
0
15.91
0 Start Pumping- 9:57am
1
27.52
10.5
2
31.61
8.4
3
37.83
4
45.78
8.3
5
50.14
8.3
6
55.28
9.0
7
61.43
9.8
8
66.89
9.1
9
72.11
9.0
10
7698
9.2
15
110.24
9.0
20
131.78
9.5
25
152.25
8.5
30
174.81
8.2
Low Water protec kicked on @10:50 226.21'
Run Dry 44367.1
339.5 Gal pumped
444424.5 shut off at
11:23am pumped 57.4 gal in 33min 12 sec
Kicked on @11:48 meter 44422.3
44479.2 12:18pm 569 gal
3:12prn 44628.2
3:19pm 44625.6
3:46pm 44644.7 16.5 gallons
9:24am 45107.8 31.9 gallons
45128.3
45140.2 27min. 59 see 11.9 gallons
Average- 10:50 am- 10:12 am .55gpm
11-13
4
Draw Down/Recovery
10,50 219.21
11:00 216.23
11:10 213.25
11:20 210.27
11:30 207.34
11:40 204.43
11:50 201.64
12:00pm 198.97
12:10 196.39
12:20 193.78
12:30 191.21
12:40 188.70
12:50 186.39
1:00 183.95
1:10 181.63
1:20 180.73
1:30 179.86
1:40 178.78
1:50 177.70
2:00pm 176.64
2:10 175.58
3:00 170.51
4:00 164.84
5:00 159.49
6:00 154.25
7:00 149.34
11:OOpm 132.29
3:00am 114.12
7:00 100.84
11:00 90.44
3:00pm 80.98
7:00 pm 73.61
11:00pm 66.58
3:00am 6095
7:00 55.99
11:04 51.60
3:00prn 47.82
Stopped Pumping
Stopped Pumping
Wheaton Water Well, Inc.
1190 N. Wasilla-Fish hook Road
Wasilla, AK 99654
(907)376-2041
Well Flow Test
Project: Troy Davis Homes Date of Test: 6/15/2020
Well Site: Jasmine Lot 11 Casing:
Well Depth: 445 Screen:
Static Water Level: 6.02 Date Level Taken: 6/15/2020
Date Drilled: 2/6/2020 Drilled By: Wheaton Water Well
Elapsed Time Depth to Gallons per Remarks
in Minutes Water Minute
0
6.02
Start Pumping 9:00am-Totalizer 28232.5
1
10.7
10
2
17.34
10
* Unable to get 2nd pipe down hole
3
22.48
10
for water level probe.
4
27.56
10
5
32.27
10
6
36.59
10
7
41.32
10
8
45.15
10
9
49.05
10
10
53.02
10
15
67.18
10
20
85.29
9.5
25
104.62
9
31.5
123.78
7.3
63
207.47
6.25
1 hour
107
307.82 -Unable to track water level
4.2
121
336.94??- Lost Water Level
4
2 hours
143
(Reset timer on pump to automatically
3
155
come on every 15 min. }
3.8
166
4
176
4.4
188
4.2
3 hours
198
Ran Out
Pump Cavitated
Totalizer- 29346.5
199
1.1
480
1.1
540
1.1
600
1.1
10 hours
660
1.1
720
1.1
780
1.1
840
1.1
900
1.1
15 hours
960
1.1
1020
1.1
1080
1.1
1140
1.1
1200
1.1
20 hours
1260
1.1
1320
1.1
1380
1.1
1440
1.1 Stop Pumping- 9:15 am
6-16-20 Pump Off
9:15AM
150
164
182
195
212
256
258
307
333
378
424
523
6/17/2020
729
1418
1441
Draw Down/Recovery
6/17/2020 Loggers Removed
Lot 1- 1422- set at 45'
Lot 2- 1428- set at 50'
**Notes: Pump cavitated at 198 minutes after pumping 1114
gallons. Pump set at 422'.
Casing holds approx. 624 gallons. After cavitation production rate was
2.4 gpm @205 min.
422
301.12
287.08
273.2
257.04
242.16
248.52
230.39
216.93
200.28
179.71
165.94
148.12
67.93
24.21
22.94
20.3
25.71
Totalizer: 30734.6
Stopped Pumping
F -01M
D 64
i
s
p
a 48.
c
e
m
e
t 32.
f
t 16.
Data Set
1, 10. 100. 1000.
Time (min)
WELL TEST ANALYSIS
Date: 06118/20 Time: 14:52:26
PROJECT INFORMATION
Company: J A Munter Consulting Inc
Client: Jasmine Subd
Location: Well
Test Well: Well 2
Test Date: 3119120-3120120
Saturated Thickness: 143. ft
WELL DATA
1.0E+4
AQUIFER DATA
Anisotropy Ratio (Kz/Kr): 1.
Pumping Wells _ Observation Wells
Well Name _ X ft Y(ft) Well Name X (ft)
Well 2- 0 0 Well 2 0
Aquifer Model- Confined
T = 1.438 ft2/day
r(w) = 0,25 ft
SOLUTION
Solution Method: Papadopulos-Cooper
S = 0.3101
r(c) = 0.25 ft
30.
D 24.
i
s
p
I
a
18.
C
e
M
e
t 12.
l
f
t 6.
0."
II u
I 4, hi k 1h h14 n 4 I I I I I I I
10. 100. 1000
Time (min)
Data Set:
Date: 06/18/20
Company: J A Munter Consulting Inc
Client: Jasmine Subd
Location: Well
Test Well: Wel! 2
Test Date- 3119120-3120120
Saturated Thickness: 143. ft
WELL TEST ANALYSIS
Time: 16:10:37
PROJECT INFORMATION
AQUIFER DATA
1.0E+4
Anisotropy Ratio (Kz/Kr): 1.
WELL DATA
Pumping Wells Observation Wells
Well NameX ft Y ft Well Name X ft Y ft
Wel! 2 0 0 ❑ Wel! 1 0 57
SOLUTION
Aquifer Model: Confined Solution Method: Papadopulos-Cooper
T = 4.836 ft2/day S = 2.416E-5
r(w) = 0.25 ft r(c) = 0.25 ft
1000:
D
i
S
p
a
c
e
m 100.
e
n
t
1
f
t
}
FE]
Data Set- C-\...lwell 10 final.agtt
Date: 12/09/20
10. 100. 1000.
Time (min)
AQUIFER TEST
Company: J A Munter Consulting Inc_
Client: Troy Davis Homes
Project: Jasmine Subd.
Location: Well 10
Test Well: Well 10
Test Date: 11111120-11112120
Time: 16:09:44
PROJECT INFORMATION
1.0E+4
AQUIFER DATA
Saturated Thickness: 269. ft Anisotropy Ratio (Kz/Kr). 1.
WELL DATA
Pumping Wells Observation Wells
Well Name X ft Y ft Well NameX (ft)Y (ft}
Well 10 Well 10 0 0
SOLUTION
Aquifer Model: Confined Solution Method: Papadopulos-Cooper
T = 0.133 ft2/day S = 0.007934
r(w) = 1 ft rlcl = 0 95 ft
❑
❑
n
❑
❑
Ll
❑
❑
❑
Data Set- C-\...lwell 10 final.agtt
Date: 12/09/20
10. 100. 1000.
Time (min)
AQUIFER TEST
Company: J A Munter Consulting Inc_
Client: Troy Davis Homes
Project: Jasmine Subd.
Location: Well 10
Test Well: Well 10
Test Date: 11111120-11112120
Time: 16:09:44
PROJECT INFORMATION
1.0E+4
AQUIFER DATA
Saturated Thickness: 269. ft Anisotropy Ratio (Kz/Kr). 1.
WELL DATA
Pumping Wells Observation Wells
Well Name X ft Y ft Well NameX (ft)Y (ft}
Well 10 Well 10 0 0
SOLUTION
Aquifer Model: Confined Solution Method: Papadopulos-Cooper
T = 0.133 ft2/day S = 0.007934
r(w) = 1 ft rlcl = 0 95 ft
I
s
p
I
a
c
e
m
e
n
t
f
t
1000. _ ---T
. .
"T- __7 T-r--'-TTTF--
! F
L
100.
10.
10. 100. 1000
Time (min)
WELL TEST ANALYSIS
Data Set- G -X ... \Well 11 test final analysis acit
Date- 12/09/20 Time: 1617-03
PROJECT INFORMATION
Company: J A Munter Consulting Inc
Client: Jasmine Subd
Location: Well 11
Test Well: Well 11
Test Date: 6/15/20-6/16/20
Saturated Thickness- 443. ft
1.OE+4
AQUIFER DATA
Anisotropy Ratio (Kz/Kr)- 1.
Pumping Wells Observation Wells
Well Name X (ft) Y Well - I Name- A) ...... Y (ft)
Well. -1 1 0 0 WeIH1 0 0
SOLUTION
Aquifer Model: Confined Solution Method: Papaclopulos-Coope
T = 1.279 ft2/day S = 5.664E-12
r(w) = 0.25 ft r(c) = 0.25 ft
PARKS CREEK CIRCLE JA
S
M
I
N
E
R
O
A
D
SCALE: 1" = 250'
VICINITY MAP
1"=250'
FEET
0 250 500
SUMAC DRIVE
MOUNTAIN ASH DR
Name:
Address:
City:
Well Site:
Additional:
Well Depth:
Below Ground:
Above Ground:
Gal/Min:
Static Level:
Casing:
Liner Pipe:
Screened:
Perforated:
Grouted:
Depth:
Develop. Method:
Use of Well:
Drilling Method:
Misc:
Wheaton Water Well, Inc.
1190 N. Wasilla-Fishhook Road
Wasilla, AK 99654
Troy Davis Homes
1689 S Knik Goose Bay Rd. #400
Wasilla State:
AK
007TRC G:1059
Jasmine Subdivision
305 ft.
From:
2o:
303 ft.
2
25
2 ft.
25
32
1/3 gpm
32
43
43
45
45
107
107
126
45` of 6 in. x .25 in. steel"
126
262262
268
N/A
268
270
270
279
N/A
279
305
N/A
Grouted
20'+
Air
Residential
Rota ry
well chlorinated to 50 ppm
Zip Code: 99654
Lot/Block: 1
Formation:
stick up
gravel/dirt/wet
gravel/dirt/water
gravel/silt
bedrock/grey/little water
fracture wet @46'/ Fracture 87' 1/3 gpm
green bedrock/ fracture 177' 1/8gpm
grey bedrock
green bedrock
shale/grey bedrock
coal
green bedrock
Other:
flowrateto be determined at Aquafir Test
Date Drilled: 2/17/2020 Driller: Brandon Moore
Wheaton Water Well, Inca
1190 N. Wasilla-Fishhook Road
Wasilla, AK 99654
(907)376-2041
Name:
Troy Davis Homes
Address:
1689 S Knik Goose Bay Rd. #400
City:
Wasilla State:
AK
Zip Code: 99654
Well Site:
007TRC G:1059
Lot/Block: 2
Additional:
Jasmine Subdivision
Well Depth:
145 ft.
From:
To:
Formation:
0
2
stick up
Below Ground:
143 ft.
2
32
dirt/gravel
Above Ground:
2 ft.
32
43
water/gravel/dirt
Gal /Min:
2 9P m
43
132
green bedrock
132
145
green bedrock
Static Level:
Casing:
47' 6" of 6 in. x .25 in. steel"
Liner Pipe:
N/A
Screened:
N/A
Perforated:
43-45'
Grouted:
Grouted
Depth:
20'+
Develop. Method:
Air
Use of Well:
Residential
Drilling Method:
Rotary
Misc:
well chlorinated to 50 ppm
Other:
flowrate to be determined at Aquafir Test
Date Drilled:
2/20/2020 Driller:
Brandon Moore
Wheaton Water Well, Inc.
1190 N. Wasilla-Fish hook Road
Wasilla, AK 99654
(907)376-2041
Name:
Troy Davis Homes
Address:
1689 S Knik Goose Bay Rd. #400
City:
Wasilla
State:
AK
Zip Code: 99654
Well Site:
Jasmine
Lot/Block: 10
Additional:
Well Depth:
285 ft
From:
To:
Formation:
0
6
silt/gravel
Below Ground:
283 ft.
6
12
cobble/boulders
Above Ground:
2 ft.
12
14
damp gravel/silt
Gal/Min:
0.25
14
51
bed rock grey
51
86
bedrock white soft
Static Level:
1-7 { `''
86
131
grey hard rock
131
228
sandstone
44ft. of 6 in. x .25 in. steel 8"
228
245
hard grey rock
Casing:
Hole to 41' for surface seal
245
285
hard grey white rock
Liner Pipe:
N/A
Screened:
N/A
Perforated:
N/A
Grouted:
Yes
Depth:
N/A
Develop. Method:
Air
Use of Well:
Residential
Drilling Method:
Rotary
Misc:
Other:
Date Drilled:
8/3/2020
Driller:
Ben Mattson
SELLS
. _
Lot 10 Jasmine Hydrof'racking
Aug. -Oct. 2020
Well was drilled to a depth of 285. Production gate off drill rig showed..25 gpm. Well
was (racked, then pumped to remove injected water. After injected water was removed,
well recovery rate was tested at .33 gpm. Well was fracked a second time then pumped to
remove injected water. After second frack well recovery rate was tested at .42 gpm.
11901N. Wasilla-Fishhook Road Wasilla. AK 99654
907-376-2041 RiN: 907-376-2030
office whe tonwellsxorn www.wlleatonwells.coin
Wheaton Water Well, Inc.
1190 N. Wasilla-Fishhook Road
Wasilla, AK 99654
(907)376-2041
Name:
Troy Davis Homes
Address:
1689 S Knik Goose Bay Rd. #400
City:
Wasilla State:
AK
Zip Code: 99654
Well Site:
007TRC G:1059
Lot/Block: 11
Additional:
Jasmine Subdivision
Well Depth:
445 ft.
From:
To:
Formation:
0
2
stick up
Below Ground:
443 ft.
2
14
sand/silt
Above Ground:
2 ft.
14
125
Bedrock Grey
Gal/Min:
125
132
coal
132
205
bedrock grey/fracture wet
Static Level:
205
247
grey bedrock/fracture 1/8 gpm
247
274
grey bedrock
Casing:
„ „
15.6 of 6 in. x .25 in. steel
274
276
coal
276
285
grey bedrock/fracture 1/8 gpm
Liner Pipe:
N/A
285
288
coal
288
302
grey bedrock/fracture
Screened:
N/A
317
317
coal
410
grey bedrock
Perforated:
N/A
410
420
white bedrock
420
445
grey bedrock
Bentonite- using 4"pvc
Grouted:
liner & shale packer
Depth:
16'-55'
Develop. Method:
Air
Use of Well:
Residential
Drilling Method:
Rotary
Mlsc:
well chlorinated to 50 ppm
Other:
flowrate to be determined at Aquafir Test
Date Drilled:
2/6/2020 Driller:
Brandon Moore
WELLS
,Jasmine Hydrofracking 2020
Lot 11
Well drilled to 445'. Production rate checked by bucket off rig showed a production rate
of approximately .30 gpm. Well was fracked, then pumped to remove ir►jected water.
After injected water was removed, the well recovery rate was tested at .42 gpm. At
hydrologist recommendation well was fracked again. After injected water was removed
the well tested at 1.1 gpm for the 24 hour subdivision flow test. Work completed on
611612020.
Lot 1
Well drilled to 305'. Production rate checked by bucket off rig showed a production rate
of approximately .30 gpm. Well was fracked, then pumped to remove injected water.
After injected water was removed, the well recovery rate was tested at 1.14 gpm. Work
completed on 3/13/202.
1190 N. Wasilla-Fishhook Road Wasilla. AK 99654
907-376-2041 Fax: 907-376-2030
office wheatonwells_com www.wlieatonlwells.com