WQ0033455_Regional Office Physical File Scan Up To 11/23/2020

Michael F. Easley
Governor William G. Ross, Jr., Secretary
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources Coleen H. Sullins, Director
Division of Water Quality

Asheville Regional Office

Aquifer Protection Section, 2090 U. S. Highway 70, Swannanoa, N.C. 28778 Telephone: [phone] Customer Service
Fax: [phone] 1-877-623-6748

AQUIFER PROTECTION SECTION
December 29, 2007

Nathaniel Thornburg
NCDENR
Aquifer Protection Section
2728 Capital Boulevard
Raleigh, NC 27604

RE: Application No. WQ0033455
Additional Information Request #2
The Cliffs at High Carolina
Wastewater Treatment and
Drip Irrigation System

Nathaniel,

A field review of the Cliffs at High Carolina project in Buncombe County was held on Monday
December 15, 2008. Rick Wooten (NC Geologic Survey), Brett Laverty (Aquifer Protection Section), Mark
Brooks (Brooks Engineering), Walker Ferguson (Brooks Engineering), and Walker Birdsong (S&ME, INC)
were in attendance. Our purpose was to review select drip irrigation zones on the east side of the project
that represent a potential landslide hazard. The irrigation zones assessed can be found within the
boundaries of study areas L, M, and N.

Prior to our field review, Factor of Safety Calculations for the stability of infinite slopes with
seepage was computed by S&ME, INC. for select irrigation zones in study areas A, F, L, and N. Although
the infinite slope equation was touted as “simplified” and “conservative”, the average values of 33
degrees for the friction angle and the assumed 100 psf for cohesion used in the calculations may not be
conservative. It is not unreasonable that the actual soil friction angles and cohesion values may be
somewhat lower in some areas, and thus lead to lower factors of safety. It was recommended that a
safety factor greater than 1.2 would be suitable for this project. Irrigation zones within study area N were
the only areas to have safety factors below 1.2, which indicates potential instability under fully saturated
conditions.

Rick Wooten and I are in general agreement that areas L & M on the east-side of the project
pose a low-risk for slope mobility based on our field review and the Factor of Safety Calculations provided
by S&ME. I also recommend that all other areas except study area N have met the conditions established
for issue 1 as stated in the additional information request letter of December 4, 2008. Irrigation zones
within study area N have not met conditions established for issue 1 and therefore should not be
considered for the phase 1 drip irrigation permit. Furthermore, field observations indicate the need for a
more detailed geotechnical analysis as outlined in the conditions established for issue 2. Supporting
evidence for further action within study area N includes the following:

• Anticipated irrigation rates within study area N is greater than 52,000 gallons per day, which is
the highest application rate across the entire project (Hydrogeological Assessment Report; Table
2)

• Slopes within study area N are often greater than 38% and have safety factors below 1.2.
Regional slope stability statistics compiled by the North Carolina Geologic Survey show some
landslide potential in slopes between 27% and 36%, whereas a bigger jump in landslide numbers
occurs on slopes between 36% and 47%.

• NC Geologic Survey slope stability mapping has identified study area N as lower to upper
threshold unstable and even highly unstable in select areas (see attached map).

• LIDAR mapping has identified past landslide deposits within the study area drainage (see
attached map).

• Colluvium is the “primary material of concern for landslides”. It is present throughout study area
N and in some cases directly underlain by highly fractured bedrock.

• Rick Wooten identified some of the underlying bedrock as Tonalite, which is an igneous rock
often associated with slide prone areas in this region.

• Shallow hillside depressions or “slide trigger areas” were observed within study area N.

• Numerous curved and bent trees indicating slope movement.

I understand that we may be covering new ground in asking for a detailed analysis of drip
irrigation fields and the instability of natural slopes. I am not sure that I fully understand all of the
factors that must be considered in such an investigation. Regardless, it is an issue the Asheville
Regional Office must consider in these high mountain communities. I do not know what the time
frame will be for the phase II drip irrigation field but I would like to encourage the Cliffs at High
Carolina to partner with APS and the Geologic Survey to resolve this issue. The more we understand
about this issue the more efficient we will be at handling future express review projects.

Sincerely,

Brett Laverty
Hydrogeologist II

Approximate
location
Study Area N
•
4pk„
Explanation
Cliffs Roads
Landslide Deposits
Slope Stability
Unstable ..
t �
Upper Threshold �'�.. f r
nLower Threshold
n Nominally-Stablek�
!..7 Moderately Stable -� #R . � '-1 35 000
iStable u+'
>AChrys4 _On
. F
0 '0.'25
0.5 0.75
1
1
Miles �•
,�r
Created: October 30, 2008

Cele r li g 35 Years
1973 2008
December 12, 2008
The Cliffs Communities
3598 Highway 11
Travelers Rest, South Carolina 29690
Attention: Mr. Donald H. Nickell, Jr., P.E.
Reference: DRIP FIELD EVALUATION
The Cliffs at High Carolina
Swannanoa, North Carolina
S&ME Project No. 1261-08-592
Ladies and Gentlemen:
This report is prepared to provide information in regard to a letter and attachments from
the Division of Water Quality dated December 4, 2008. It presents our findings and
geotechnical opinions regarding the effect the proposed drip fields at The Cliffs at High
Carolina will have on the stability of the terrain. Supporting data and calculations are
attached. This work was done in accordance with our proposal no. 08903.
From review of the letter from the Division of Water Quality, we understand there is
concern the proposed drip field areas are overlain by colluvial soils. When these soils
become saturated from the drip irrigation lines and rainfall, there is concern landslides
could occur.
We previously evaluated the proposed drip field areas and presented our opinions in a
letter dated November 14, 2008. This report supplements and supersedes that letter.
PROJECTION INFORMATION
We have discussed the project with Messrs. Walter Ferguson, LSS and Mark Brooks,
P.E. with Brooks Engineering Associates (BEA). Also, we have reviewed a topographic
site plan showing the drip field zones prepared by BEA.
We understand the drip lines will be laid on the ground with minimal disturbance of
existing vegetation. Up to 2 inches per week or about 100 inches per year of water could
be irrigated on the zones. This water is to be periodically and gradually released, and be
absorbed in the ground and evaporate.
S&ME, INC. / 301 Zima Park Drive / Spartanburg, SC 29301 / p 864,574.2360 1864.576.8730
One Marcus Drive, Suite 301 / Greenville, SC 29615 /p 864-232-8987 / www.smeinc.com

Drip Field Evaluation S&ME Project No. 1261-08-592
The Cliffs at High Carolina, Swannanoa, North Carolina December 12, 2008
It is our understanding 32 zones are to be used for the drip field irrigation. These zones
are numbered 1 through 34, with 4 and 11 omitted. Based on our measurements from the
topographic plan, the existing ground inclinations vary from about 13 percent (about 8
horizontal to 1 vertical) to 55 percent (1.8 H to 1V). The steepest zones are 30, 31, 33
and 34. These four zones are steeper than about 38 percent. A tabulation of the ground
inclinations of the zones is attached.
EVALUATION WORK
Our work included reviewing subsurface data from borings and test pits made in the area
and furnished to us by BEA. Also, we reviewed laboratory triaxial shear test data from
relatively undisturbed soil samples obtained from roadway work in,the area. (The results
of the laboratory analysis are attached.) In addition, a visual site reconnaissance was
made.
The attachments with the letter from the Division of Water Quality included a Factor of
Safety Calculation for the stability of infinite slopes with seepage. We have used this
calculation to compute factors of safety for the inclinations of the different zones. These
calculations were done both by computer spread sheets and by hand, and are attached.
ANALYSIS
The Factor of Safety Calculation incorporates the inclination of the existing ground
surface, the thickness of the colluvium (or assumed sliding layer), the saturated soil unit
weight, and strength properties of the soil — cohesion and angle of internal friction.
Basically, the equation, which is shown on the attached calculations, is based on the
saturated weight of soil forcing the soil mass to slide down the slope. This driving force
is resisted by the soil's cohesion, and friction resistance which is calculated by
multiplying the submerged soil's unit weight times the tangent of the soil's internal
friction angle.
The infinite slope calculation is simplified and a generally conservative approach to
evaluate the factor of safety of slopes. The equation does not account for any end
resistance. The calculation assumes the groundwater level rises to the ground surface,
which would not occur in the area of these zones. Also, the diagram with the equation
shows some of the force being resisted by tree roots. While tree roots will provide some
resistance, this was not considered in our calculations.
Based on previous laboratory testing of relatively intact soil samples taken from nearby
roadway construction in colluvial soils and our observation of cut slopes in colluvial
soils, we have estimated soil parameters. (Our laboratory tests were performed with the
soil being saturated.) This information indicates a saturated soil unit weight of about 108
pcf, a cohesion of 100 psf and an angle of internal friction of 33 degrees. (A higher unit
weight was used in some of the calculations for comparison.) While most of the
laboratory testing shows the cohesion to be low to near zero, it is our opinion a value of
100 psf is suitable for undisturbed colluvial soil. The colluvial soils typically contain
2

Drip Field Evaluation S&ME Project No. 1261-08-592
The Cliffs at High Carolina, Swannanoa, North Carolina December 12, 2008
some silt and clay. Also, observation of actual performance of cut slopes in colluvium
indicates the presence of significant cohesion.
Based on the furnished boring data taken from this area and our experience, the level of
rock varies from the ground surface to about 100 feet, and deeper. Rock is overlain by
residual soils that have a moderately high to very high consistency. In some areas these
residual soils are in turn overlain by colluvium.
Using experience, we agree with the Division of Water Quality letter in that the
colluvium is the primary material of concern for landslides. Residual soils would
typically not be expected to undergo slope failure unless altered by grading. As such, the
colluvium and an idealized interface with the residual soils or rock were used in the
calculations. In reality, there is typically a transition from residual soil to rock.
Colluvium can be present directly over rock, but is more commonly found as a surface
layer overlying residual soil. The actual depth of colluvium is difficult to determine from
borings and even test pits. Based on the furnished data and our observations, we have
used a depth of 6 feet.
RESULTS
We performed hand and computer analyses for the different zones and ground
inclinations. The calculations indicate the following safety factors:
H:V
DEGREES
20
5:1
11.3
2.2
25
4:1
14
1.8
33
3:1
18.4
1.4
36
2.75:1
19.9
1.3
40
2.5:1
21.8
1.1
50
2:1
26.6
0.9
For these conditions, a safety factor on the order of 1.2 to 1.3 would be considered
suitable. This appears to be a conservative consideration for the calculations used.
These soils have undergone very heavy and prolonged precipitation many times, notably
when the remnants of Hurricanes Francis and Ivan passed through the area in 2004.
These soils have been saturated and then received significantly more rainfall. In this
regard, the safety factors calculated above appear reasonable.
3

Drip Field Evaluation S&ME Project No. 1261-08-592
The Cliffs at High Carolina, Swannanoa, North Carolina December 12, 2008
OPINIONS
Based on the calculation results and our experience, all of the zones have a suitable factor
of safety against landslides, except Zones 30, 31, 33 and 34. These zones have calculated
ground inclinations of 38% (2.6:1), 42% (2.4:1), 47% (2.1:1) and 55% (1.8), respectively.
If these zones, particularly 30 and 31, have shallower colluvium or no colluvium, they
could also be suitable.
It is our opinion that, in general, zones with a ground slope of about 33 percent and flatter
should remain stable with the proposed drip fields. Zones in areas with steeper terrain
should be more closely evaluated on a case by case basis. This would require exploration
and analysis of the actual subsurface conditions in the specific zone.
LIMITATIONS OF REPORT
This report has been prepared in accordance with generally accepted geotechnical
engineering practice for specific application to this project. The findings and opinions in
this report are based on the applicable standards of our practice in this geographic area at
the time this report was prepared. No other warranty, express or implied, is made. This
report is intended to be used by The Cliffs Communities only in regard to landslide
potential in the proposed drip fields.
CLOSURE
We appreciate the opportunity to work with The Cliffs Communities. Should any
questions arise regarding the information in this report, please contact us.
Sincerely,
S&ME, Inc.
alk-r :'rdsorig,
Senior Engineer
��1»�urlt
,••t , CAP
",,
•
3 • SEAL
9379
•
14
0 $Ot'
rr1
z/08
WB/DG S:\GEOTECH\2008\6108592 r tiffs - High Carolina Drip FieldReportdoc
Daniel McGough, F.E.
Project Engineer
cc: Mr. Walker Ferguson, LSS — Brooks Engineering Associates
4

DRIP FIELD ZONE INCLINATIONS
THE CLIFFS AT HIGH CAROLINA
SWANNANOA, NORTH CAROLINA
1261-08-592
1
32'
100'
32
3.1:1
2
47'
155'
30
3.3:1
3
48'
203'
24
4.2:1
5
56'
216'
26
3.9:1
6
32'
120'
27
3.8:1
7
50'
280'
18
5.6:1
8
34'
168'
20
4.9:1
9
16'
62'
26
3.9:1
10
12'
50'
24
4.2:1
12
42'
220'
19
5.2:1
13
36'
170'
21
4.7:1
14
20'
156'
13
7.8:1
15
50'
246'
20
4.9:1
16
54'
258'
21
4.8:1
17
24'
209'
11
8.7:1
18
16'
62'
26
3.9:1
19
50'
210'
24
4.2:1
20
16'
93'
17
5.8:1
21
24'
103'
23
4.3:1
22
40'
140'
29
3.5:1
23
32'
120'
27
3.8:1
24
38'
144'
26
3.8:1
25
40'
130'
31
3.3:1
26
50'
171'
29
3.4:1
27
26'
85'
31
3.3:1
28
32'
119'
27
3.7:1
29
38'
150'
25
3.9:1
30
110'
288'
38
2.6:1
31
150'
354'
42
2.4:1
32
74'
250'
30
3.4:1
33
170'
365'
47
2.1:1
34
110'
200'
55
1.8:1

JOB NAME
SUBJECT
/I/) 1,1,e
S&ME
25
(I) Ae5s'ael 691::' -574'14/47:
o 116t V luivi 71-11-16:41(:ftg4)
2et„.1 deqc e
Fiwn 6,47w 54/,
t401
/ 5- I:
/0erCf
fT
<33
5/9-,2e /bey" y
OP
242,704 6 (2,614 2-47
) A /
/4/
/&e.rP'7,_
• 6.(tO
095'6? + &.-?-.)
FY 60%$/or4 ( 1/.
/15
/ (2
, a/Fo - 0,50
0,36? -4- (,
3433333,
COMPUTED BY
JOB NO ///eW 4(' :}1/4
SHEET NO
NO
DATE
CHECKED BY
(.3 0(7" ./,`/C 336'l '331
333,3 /S3'443 1
77-7 6)
„5?---YeM001
4263
C),
61.33
s

S&ME
JOB NAME
SUBJECT
7-o-y- ‘-r
0,4/0
0 , . 0 ‘'9
f
For 3(p, 'VA 25// /V"
)
COMPUTED BY
JOB NO
SHEET NO
DATE
CHECKED BY
'//e°
/7c) , 66
/=, , ./C3
o - 6 2, LI •P ebS
, :1°5 6-,

Infinite Slope Analysis
yytan 0
FS =
ys„, T COS 2 # tan /3 ys„, tan p
Input Parameters
gsai (pcf)
gw (pcf)
F (deg.)
c (psf)
b (deg.)
T (ft)
= 108
= 62.4
= 33
= 100
= 17.7
= 6
Calculated Factor of Safety
FS = 1.39
Zone 1
Assume groundwater has risen to the ground surface
Stabffity of Infinite Slopes with
We, 0 Soil Properties
Friction Angle,
Cohesion, c
Unit Weight, y
Sat. Unit Weight, y4,11
Factor of Safety Calculation (FS)
isaryw tang
FSs -?sat T cos2fS tanii *AM tanli
To. Soil Thickness
Dw = On* of
Groundwater
yw = Unit Weight
of Water
h Car
Vegetation
Root Cohesion
Root Anchoring
Evapotranspiration
Geo vey

Infinite Slope Analysis
Input Parameters
g„, (pcf) = 108
g, (pcf) = 62.4
F (deg.) = 33
c (psf) = 100
b (deg.) = 13.5
T (ft) =
Calculated Factor of Safety
FS = 1.82
Zone 3
Assume groundwater has risen to the ground surface
bility of Infinite Slopes with Sepa
Soil Properties
Frktion Angie,
Cohesion, c
Unit Weight y
Sat Unit Weight. ysei
igure Pr
Factor of Sal
c
FSs-
T cosni
SWIThickness
Ow= Depth of
Groundwater
Unit Weight
of Water
id by
h Car
Calculation
+ Yam."
?sat
Vegetation
Root Cohesion
Root Anchoring
Evapotranspiration
vey

Infinite Siope Analysis
FS =
c
ys„,T COS 2 la tan
nu, 7„, tan 0
y.„„ tan #
Input Parameters
gsat(Pcf) = 108
gw (pcf) = 62.4
F (deg.) = 33
c (psf) = 100
b (deg.) = 10.8
T (ft) =6
Calculated Factor of Safety
Zone 12
Assume groundwater has risen to the ground surface
FS = 2.28
Stability of Infinite Slopes with Sepage
Angle. 0 Solt Properties
Friction Angle,
Cohesion. c
Unit Weight
t. Unit Weight.
.1"= SoliThickness
Etet = Depth of
Groundwater
= Unit Weight
of Water
4gure Pr "ded by
Vegetation
Root Cohesion
Awl Anchoring
Evapotranspiration
h Car • Geo
vey

Infinite Slope Analysis
FS =
cos' 13 tan
-7 tan 0
tan io
Input Parameters
gsat (pcf)
g, (pcf)
F (deg.)
c (psf)
b (deg.)
T (ft)
= 108
= 62.4
= 33
= 100
. 16.2
= 6
Calculated Factor of Safety
FS = 1.52
Zone 22
Assume groundwater has risen to the ground surface
Way of infinite Slopes with Seepag
angle,D Soli Properties
Friction Angle,
Cohesion. c
Unit Weight, 'y
Sat Unit Weight,y
Factor of Satety Calculation (ES)
ysary,,y tan
FSs"issi T cos2I1 imp ysat tanli
T= Soil Thickness
Ow = Depth of
Groundwater
= Unit Weight
of Water
ure Fro ded by h Car
Vegetation
Root Cohesion
Root Anchoring
Evapotranspiration
vey

Infinite Slope Analysis
FS = ry,„ tan 0
r.„„T cos' fltanfl 7„ tan fi
Input Parameters
gnat (pcf)
9w (pcf)
F (deg.)
c (psf)
b (deg.)
T (ft)
= 108
= 62.4
= 33
= 100
= 20.8
= 6
Calculated Factor of Safety
FS = 1.19
Zone 30
Assume groundwater has risen to the ground surface
lity of Infinite Siopes wfth Seepage
Angie, It Soli Properties
Friction Angle, 0
Cohesion, c
Unit Weight y
t, Unit Weight, y‘,„I
T= $OH Mk:Wien
Dw = Depth of
Groundwater
Unit Weight
of Water
Factor ot Safety Calculation(FS)
c -Alaryw tand
FSs
?sat T cosli tan p tanii
Vegetation
Root Cohesion
Root Anchoring
Euapiranspiration
Figure Prs d by Car 'Geo iSvey

Infinite Siope Analysis
c.
y,„ FS = — y„. tan 0
y„T cos 2 /3 tan fi ys„, tan /3
Input Parameters
gsat (Pe) = 108
g, (pcf) = 62.4
F (deg.) = 33
c (psf) = 100
b (deg.) = 22.8
T (ft) = 6
Calculated Factor of Safety
FS = 1.08
Zone 31
Assume groundwater has risen to the ground surface
Stability of Infinite Slopes with
Angle. 11 sou Properties
Friction Angle, (0 Factor of Safety Calculation (FSs)
Cohesion, c
Unit Weight 1 FSs c yset--is,v time
T tan (at tanli
Sat Unit Weight, litaai
1-= Soli Thickness
OW= Depth of
Groundwater
Unit Weight
of Water
lZigure Pro ded by
Root Cotittekin
fleet Anchoring
Evapotranspiration
h Car eoI :vey

Infinite Slope Analysis
ys„, y„. tan
FS =
cos 2 # tan fi ytan /3
Input Parameters
gat(Pe) = 108
g, (pcf) = 62.4
F (deg.) = 33
c (psf) = 100
b (deg.) = 16.8
T (ft) = 6
Calculated Factor of Safety
Zone 32
Assume groundwater has risen to the ground surface
FS = 1.47
Stability of Infinite Slopes with SeepagE
Angle,I Soil Properties
Friction Angle, 0
Cohesion, c Factor of Safe
Unit Weight, y
Sat. Unit Weight,
Tr. Soli Thickness
Dw = Depth of
Groundwater
= Unit VVelght
of Water
igure Pro &dd by
h Car
Vegetation
Root Gaesion
Root Anchoring
Evapotranspiration
Geo ivey

Infinite Slope Analysis
= 7.„„ tan 0
FS
7„T cos' fi tan fi tan
Input Parameters
9sat (pcf) = 108
(pcf) = 62,4
F (deg.) = 33
c (psf) = 100
b (deg.) = 25.2
T (ft) = 6
Calculated Factor of Safety
FS = 0.98
Zone 33
Assume groundwater has risen to the ground surface
tability of Infinite Slopes with
Angle,13 Soil Properties
Friction Angle,
Cohesion, c Factor of Safety Calculation (FS3)
Unit Weight. y FSs ysar-0,, tano
Sat. Unit Weight, y yyst T cos20 Imp Wag tanti
T= Sol I Thickness
Dw=Depthof
Groundwater
yw = Unit Weight
of Water
V etation
Root Cohesion
Root Anchoring
Evapotranspiration
igure Pro ded byoth Car u vey

Infinite Slope Analysis
FS= +7„„_y„ tan
y,.,,T cos' /3 tan /.3 y„„ tan i
Input Parameters
gsat (pcf) = 108
gw (pcf) = 62.4
F (deg.) = 33
c (psf) = 100
b (deg.) = 28.6
T. (ft) = 6
Zone 34
Assume groundwater has risen to the ground surface
Stability of infinite Slopes with Seepage
gl► Solt Properties
Friction Angle,.
Cohesion, c
Unit Weight, y
Sit. Unit Weight,
Factor of Safety Calculation {FSs)
FSs = c y - trine
7saM T cos211 tanii ani3
T aoH `ihicki
Uni
of
ded by
kton
Cohesion
Root Anchoring
Evapotranspiration
h`Car. ' . Geo
Sxvey

0.9 1.8 2 7
Total Normal Stress, ksf
Effective Normal Stress, ksf
3.6 4 5 5.4
Specimen No. 1 2 3
m
c
Water Content, %
Dry Density, pcf
Saturation, %
Void Ratio
Diameter, in,
Height, in.
13.1 13.7 13.3
92.0 85.7 85.2
42.8 38.7 37.0
0.8189 0.9513 0.9638
2.875 2.869 2.855
5.628 5.664 5.621
Water Content, %Q
Dry Density, pcf
v Saturation, %
Void Ratio
Diameter, in.
Height, in.
28.7 33.5 35.5
94.6 88.2 85.8
100.0 100.0 100.0
0.7679 0.8979 0.9502
2.848 2.843 2.848
5.575 5.612 5.608
Axial Strain, %
Type of Test:
CU with Pore Pressures
Sample Type: Intact Tube Sample
Description: Brown Silty Fine Sand
Assumed Specific Gravity= 2.68
Remarks: All 3 Specimens failed with bulging.
Specimen 2 was not considered in
interpretation of results. ASTM D4767 &
Corp of Engr EM 110-2-1906 Appendix X
Strain rate, in./min.
Back Pressure, psi
Cell Pressure, psi
Fail. Stress, ksf
Total Pore Pr., ksf
Ult. Stress, ksf
Total Pore Pr., ksf
6i Failure, ksf
63 Failure, ksf
0.003
53.70
60.00
1.92
7.89
2.79
7.52
2.67
0.75
0.003
53.40
65.00
0.93
8.77
0.88
8.83
1.52
0,59
0.013
51.30
65.00
3.11
8.42
3.16
8.27
4.05
0.94
Client: Cliffs Communities
Project: Cliffs at High Carolina Tunnel Bypass
Location: TB-4/5, TB-4+32 ft, TB-5(B)
Sample Number: Log 6353, 6355, 6357 Depth: 6 ft
Proj. No.: 1413-07-019 Date Sampled: 7-24-08
TRIAXIAL SHEAR TEST REPORT
S & ME INC.
Tested By: LP, 7/28/08
Checked By: NRR, 8/6108

Shear Stress, ksf
Deviator Stress, ks
0
5 10 15
Axial Strain, %
Total Normal Stress, ksf
Effective Normal Stress, ksf
20
Specimen No.
1 2 3
Water Content,
Dry Density, pcf
Saturation, %
2 '-E Void Ratio
3 1 Diameter, in.
Height, in.
I Water Content, %
Dry Density, pcf
t I Saturation, °A
1-1
Void Ratio
Diameter, in.
Height, in.
13.1 20.0 19.3
92.0 86.8 89.0
42.8 57.9 58.7
0.8189 0.9282 0.8799
2.875 2.879 2.875
5.628 5.668 5.656
28.7 33.6 31.6
94.6 88.1 90.5
100.0 100.0 100.0
0.7679 0.8997 0.8481
2.848 2.865 2.859
5.575 5.640 5.624
Type of Test:
CU with Pore Pressures
Sample Type: Intact Tube Sample
Description: Brown Silty Fine Sand
Strain rate, in./min.
Back Pressure, psi
Cell Pressure, psi
Fail. Stress, ksf
Total Pore Pr., ksf
Ult. Stress, ksf
Total Pore Pr., ksf
61 Failure, ksf
a3 Failure, ksf
0.003
53.70
60.00
1.18
7.99
2.79
7.52
1.83
0.65
0.013
48.50
60.00
2.18
7.59
4.22
6.90
3.23
1.05
0.013
49.00
65.00
2.52
8.21
3.88
7.86
3.67
1.15
Assumed Specific Gravity- 2.68
Remarks: Specimen 1 and 3 failed with bulging,
specimen 2 with a shear plane. ASTM D4767
& Corp of Engr EM 110-2-1906 Appendix X
Uniform Strain Method
Tested By: LP, 7/28/08
Client: Cliffs Communities
Project: Cliffs at High Carolina Tunnel Bypass
Location: TB-4/5, TB-9, TB-9+40 f1
Sample Number: Log 6353, 6361, 6357 Depth: 6 ft
Proj. No.: 1413-07-019 Date Sampled: 7-24-08
TRIAXIAL SHEAR TEST REPORT
S & ME, INC.
Checked By: NRR, 8/6/08

Permit Rescission Form
Information to be filled out by Central Office:
Facility Name: The Cliffs at High Carolina
Permit Number: WQ0033455
Regional Office:Asheville
County: Buncombe
Date Rescission Requested: January 27, 2017
Permit Expiration: December 31, 2016
Received Original Request:
Form of Received Request:
X
Central Office
Letter
Information to be filled out by Region:
Please Check Appropriately:
Site Visit Performed
Regional Office
Signed Annual Fee Invoice
Other
Groundwater Concerns Addressed
Render Decision for Rescission of the Above Referenced Permit:
k
Approved
Denied
Note: If approved this permit will become inactive in the BIMS database and will not be billed through
the division billing system.
Complete if Approved:
Rescind Immediately
Reason for Approval iCe l(tSS never inSaI(J T /YO,WrI Lverri or`b
c (osort k db(q The rrw pro pi r4-7 0/.0noi S de nuT 141,nd +0
develop the pror,Q.r--y
Reason for Denial J
Signature of Certifier: , 44.J
Date Certified: 0717 /l 7