HomeMy WebLinkAbout03634~---~---------------~r , -:I'·-~ ·· n ~.,..,..,., , ,, -..,,,-,,
'\.4,jllii!ji~o.Q-b'l .. ,a 0· :::;ii;: •. I'\ >IO;u '"''/ • . .
r
GARFIELD COUNTY BUILDIN&.AND SANITATION DEPARTMENT
109 8th Street Suite 303
Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81801
Phone (303) 945·8212
' ' .. ~· )I .. t· Permit N:; 3634 ·~ ·
AHeasor's Parcel No. .
j ' ! This does not constitute • a building or use permit. "I
Legal Description of Assessor's Parcel No.--------------------------------
I SYSTEM DESIGN
i
I
J
' ' t
'
_____ Septic Tank Capacity (gallon) ______ •Other
_____ Percolation Rate (minutes/Inch) Number of Bedrooms (or other) ____ _
Required Absorption Area~ See Attached i IJ <f'-.
Special Setback Requirements:
Date Inspector--------------------------
FINAL SYSTEM INSPECTION AND APPROVAL (as installed) __ .....
l Call for Inspection (24 hours notice) Before Covering Installation
j System lnstaller--"&-"'w"'-'11.-'--'._,_<.:.._ _______________________________ _
i
I
'
Septic Tank CapacltY'-'-'"-'5'--"0'---------------------------------
Septic Tank Manufacturer or Trade Name -'-"-"~<,/f"'-'-"'.--"-"''--------------------------
Septic Tank Access? 8" of surface
Absorption Area ~~
•
Absorption Area Type and/or Manufacturer or Trade Name _.,~4"4'-i~L..,L{,_~;,.· "',4Z""''°""2~,:;""2""----------------
' i
j
I
I
' ' ' ~: :·
t
! ,
I
!
I
~
~. i;
I
Adequate compliance with County and State regulatlons/requirements_,_;:..,,../'-"~"""0'-----------------'11r\:,i,\,
I
' •
l
I
1
'
Other----------------------71--;--t'---~-~-------------I
Date / ~ •· ! 9' -O 2-. Inspector ~· !.kdZ ~·
RETAIN WITH RECEIPT RECORDS AT CONS;~ZSITE t
•CONDITIONS: !
1. All installation must complywlth
0
8U requirements of the Colorado State Board of Health lndlvldual Sewage Disposal Systems Chapter
25, Article 10 C.R.S. 1973, Revised 1984. •
2. This permit Is valid only for connection to structures which have fully complied with County zoning and building requirements. Con·
nection to or use with any dwelling or structures not approved by the Building and Zoning office shall automatically be a violation or a I
requirement of the permit and cause for both legal action and revocation of the permit.
3. Any person who constructs, alters, or Installs an Individual sewage disposal system In a manner which Involves a knowing and material
variation from the terms or specifications contained In the appllcation of permit commits a Class I, Petty Offense ($500.00 fine - 6 •
months In jail or both). I
White. APPLICANT Yellow. DEPARTMENT I
I
. .
INDIVIDUAL SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM APPLI<;'.ATION
OWNER 'SP! /-.l~\ 0\{l...c)L \<.o~S
ADDREss o'd..15 ~().B(_ LAt~ ~ \ , c ... ~ 1 c.o g1c,o\ PHONE Cq u ci · -1 g
CONTRACTOR Mxc,\.\Af;.J . Sf.kt.Tl±. t. '\Q09~tt\J4'1A-Co4x-vtr6('kc)& I
ADDRESS ¢53.\.\NZ.l)E.1 Caj? !2{). ~I CD ~((po;)... PHONE (9?0) 8'7(p--;.).~~
PERMITREQUESTFOR f.'jJ NEWINSTALLATION ( )ALTERATION ( )REPAIR
Attach separate sheets or report showing entire area with respect to surrounding areas, topography of area, habitable
building, location of potable water wells, soil percolation test holes, soil profiles in test holes (See page 4).
LOCATION OF PROPOSED FACILITY:
NearwhatCityofTown G..l€£.\woo() /~ooDe.<-£ SizeofLot 3C\,°t'-( l<"\W£s i
Legal Description or Address L.Q\"" \C\ / \\-OM.€... b'"\E>\A.() 'f-Or~
WASTES TYPE: (H' DWELLING ( ) TRANSIENT USE
( ) COMMERCIAL OR INDUSTRIAL ( ) NON-DOMESTIC WASTES
( ) OTHER-DESCRIBE _______________ _
BUILDING OR SER VICE TYPE:__,0£......:....::>::..:'._,,\:>::..=C..=-<@1\"'-'"\-""~=--"~""'~=0..\:"'-""t..-=-%o.-~:.....v..-.:....:'::..:.'~.::...>q._....\:\U-""""'-':=iof-____ _
\
Number of Bedrooms-~~------------Number of Persons --'9.-><-=----
( ) Garbage Grinder ( V'.I Automatic Washer
SQURCE AND TYPE OF WATER SUPPLY: ( 1-JWELL
( v)"'Dishwasher
( ) SPRING ( ) STREAM OR CREEK
If supplied by Commwtity Water, give name of supplier: _______________ _
DISTANCE TO NEAREST COMMUNITY SEWER SYSTEM:__:_:\O"'-'-N&,.£=""""'S..__ ______ _
Was an effort made to connect to the Commwtity System?_....u:""'--------------
A site Ian ls re uired t be submitted that indi ates the followin MINIMUM distances·
Leach Field to Well: 100 feet V IDO So~ q=,.
Septic Tank to Well: 50 feet v
Leach Field to Irrigation Ditches, Stream or Water Course: 50 feet v
Septic System to Property Lines: 10 feet v
YOUR INDIVIDUAL SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM PERMIT WILL NOT BE ISSUED WITHOUT
A SITE PLAN.
GRQUND CONDITIONS:
Depth to first Ground Water Table _ __.::(,oo...::....::"---T~-~..:....:....--'--------------
Percent Ground Slope M.c~ <\c ~fQtJ...ec S4~ ( Z % V?S'\ ~c ~)
2
•
. .
TYPE OF INDIVIDUAL SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM PROPOSED:
. ( 0 SEPTIC TANK ( ) AERATION PLANT ( ) VAULT
( ) VAULT PRIVY ( ) COMPOSTING TOILET ( ) RECYCLING, POTABLE USE
( ) PIT PRIVY ( ) INCINERATION TOILET ( ) RECYCLING, OTHER USE
( ) CHEMICAL TOILET ( ) OTHER -DESCRIBE
FINAL DISPOSAL BY:
( v( ABSORPTION TRENCH, BED OR PIT ( ) EV APOTRANSPIRATION
( ) UNDERGROUND DISPERSAL ( ) SAND FILTER
( ) ABOVE GROUND DISPERSAL ( ) WASTEWATER POND
( v? OTHER -DESCRIBE 11rr& ~tt"\ J:JJ,f;\..-~oQ. 9'f q§M._
WILL EFFLUENT BE DISCHARGED DIRECTLY INTO WATERS OF THE STATE? /\lo ~~~-----
PERCOLATION TEST RESULTS: (To be completed by Registered Professional Engineer, ifthe Engineer does the
Percolation Test)
Minutes t+Q per inch in hole No. 1 Minutes lf.O per inch in hole NO. 3
Minutes ?>U per inch in hole No. 2 Minutes er inch in hole NO.
Name, address and telephone ofRPE who made soil absorption tests: _______ ~-------
'Joro"' -z ~. ~~ ~, 5c?P C.O..@f G> G1 8/W>1 Cfffi-l'IBS
Name, addless and telephone cifRPE responsible for design of the system: _____________ _
Applicant acknowledges that the completeness of the application is conditional upon such further mandatory and
additional tests and reports as may be required by the local health department to be made and furnished by the applicant
or by the local health department for purposed of the evaluation of the application; and the issuance of the permit is
subject to such terms and conditions as deemed necessary to insure compliance with rules and regulations made,
information and reports submitted herewith and required to be submitted by the applicant are or will be represented to
be true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief and are designed to be relied on by the local department of
health in evaluating the same for purposes of issuing the permit applied for herein. I further understand that any
falsification or misrepresentation may result in the denial of the application or revocation of any permit granted based
upon said application and in legal action for perjury as provided by law.
Signed &') , ~
PLEASE DRAW AN ACCURATE MAP TO YOUR PROPER TYi !
3
('.'\
':! y2
"' <J . . . ... ,-, · ,
~ .•' ..
c.:;c54c!>tech
June 20, 2001
Sam Neth
3215 Hager Lane, #1
Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601
. Hepwot'th-Pawlak Geotechnical, Inc.
5020 County Road 154
Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601
Phone: 970-945· 7988
Fax: 970·945-8454
hpgeo@hpgeotech.com
Job No. 101 365
Subject: Subsoil Study for Foundation Design and Percolation Test, Proposed
Residence, Lot 19, Homestead Estates, Garfield County, Colorado.
Dear Mr. Neth:
As requested, Hepworth-Pawlak Geotechnical, Inc. performed a subsoil study and
percolation test for foundation and septic disposal designs at the subject site. The study
was conducted in accordance with our agreement for geotechnical engineering services
to you dated May 11, 2001. The data obtained and our recommendations based on the
proposed construction and subsurface conditions encountered are presented in this
report.
Proposed Construction: The proposed residence will be a single story wood frame
structure over a walkout basement level located on the site as shown on Fig. 1. Ground
floors are proposed to be slab-on-grade. Cut depths are expected to range between
about 3 to 8 feet. Foundation loadings for this type of construction are assumed to be
relatively light and typical of the proposed type of construction. The septic disposal
system is proposed to be located about 30 feet to the south-southeast of the residence.
If building conditions or foundation loadings are significantly different from those
described above, we should be notified to re-evaluate the recommendations presented in
this report.
Site Conditions: The site was vacant at the time of our field work. A road bad been
cut into the building site. Some rough grading bad been done to level the building and
septic disposal areas. A two-tiered boulder retaining wall with steps about 4 feet in
height bad been constructed on the southeast side of the proposed septic disposal area.
The natural terrain bas a moderate to strong slope down to the south. Vegetation
consists of scattered aspen trees, sagebrush, grass and weeds. Basalt boulders are
exposed on the ground surface in the building area.
Subsurface Conditions: The subsurface conditions at the site were evaluated by
excavating two exploratory pits in the building area and one profile pit in the septic
disposal area at the approximate locations shown on Fig. 1. The logs of the pits are
presented on Fig. 2. The subsoils encountered, below about 1 foot of topsoil, consist of
- - - - - - - - - - - - - ------------------ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - --- ------
Sam Neth
June 20, 2001
Page2
..
basalt boulders up to 6 feet in size in a sandy clay matrix to the pit depths of 3 to 5Vi
feet. About 2Yi feet of on-site fill and 1 Vi feet of topsoil was exposed in the profile pit
overlying the natural soils. Digging the pits through the large basalt rock with a rubber
tired backhoe was difficult due to the size and hardness of the rock, and digging refusal
was encountered in the deposit. Results of swell-consolidation testing performed on
relatively undisturbed samples of the clay matrix, presented on Fig. 3, indicate low
compressibility under existing moisture conditions and light loading and a moderate
expansion potential when wetted. Atterberg limits testing indicated the clay matrix has
high plasticity. No free water was observed in the pits at the time of excavation and the
soils were moist to very moist.
Foundation Recommendations: Considering the subsoil conditions encountered in the
exploratory pits and the nature of the proposed construction, we recommend spread
footings placed on the undisturbed natural rocky soils designed for an allowable soil
bearing pressure of 2,500 psf for support of the proposed residence. The matrix soils
tend to be expansive after wetting and there could be some post-construction foundation
movement if the bearing materials become wetted. The expansion potential of the
subgrade should be evaluated at the time of construction. We expect that the large rock
content of the subsoils will essentially mitigate the expansion potential but clay pockets
may need to be subexcavated. Footings should be a minimum width of 16 inches for
continuous walls and 2 feet for columns. Loose disturbed and predominantly clay soils
encountered at the foundation bearing level within the excavation should be removed
and the footing bearing level extended down to the undisturbed natural rocky soils.
Voids created by the removal of large rocks should be backfill with compacted sand and
gravel, such as road base, or with concrete. Due to the size of the boulders, excavation
may be difficult and require large excavating equipment and chipping or splitting.
Exterior footings should be provided with adequate cover above their bearing elevations
for frost protection. Placement of footings at least 36 inches below the exterior grade is
typically used in this area. Continuous foundation walls should be reinforced top and
bottom to span local anomalies such as by assuming an unsupported length of at least 12
feet. Foundation walls acting as retaining structures should be designed to resist a
lateral earth pressure based on an equivalent fluid unit weight of at least 50 pcf for
predominantly granular on-site soils or imported granular fill as backfill. The on-site
mainly clay matrix soils should not be used as backfill.
Floor Slabs: The natural on-site soils, exclusive of topsoil and predominantly clay, are
suitable to support lightly loaded slab-on-grade construction. Clay pockets may need to
H-P GEOTECH
-------- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Sam Neth
June 20, 2001
Page3
..
be subexcavated and replaced with granular structural fill. The expansion potential of
the subgrade should be evaluated at the time of construction. To reduce the effects of
some differential movement, floor slabs should be separated from all bearing walls and
columns with expansion joints which allow unrestrained vertical movement. Floor slab
control joints should be used to reduce damage due to shrinkage cracking. The
requirements for joint spacing and slab reinforcement should be established by the
designer based on experience and the intended slab use. A minimum 4 inch layer of
free-draining gravel should be placed beneath basement level slabs to facilitate drainage.
This material should consist of minus 2 inch aggregate with less than 50 % passing the
No. 4 sieve and less than 2% passing the No. 200 sieve.
All fill materials for support of floor slabs should be compacted to at least 95 % of
maximum standard Proctor density at a moisture content near optimum. Required fill
should consist of the imported granular soils devoid of vegetation, topsoil and oversized
rock.
Underdraln System: Although free water was not encountered during our exploration,
it has been our experience in the area and where clayey soils are present that local
perched groundwater can develop during times of heavy precipitation or seasonal
runoff. Frozen ground during spring runoff can create a perched condition. We
recommend below-grade construction, such as retaining walls and basement areas, be
protected from wetting and hydrostatic pressure buildup by an underdrain system.
The drains should consist of drainpipe placed in the bottom of the wall backfill
surrounded above the invert level with free-draining granular material. The drain
should be placed at each level of excavation and at least 1 foot below lowest adjacent
finish grade and sloped at a minimum 1 % to a suitable gravity outlet. Free-draining
granular material used in the underdrain system should contain less than 2 % passing the
No. 200 sieve, less than 50% passing the No. 4 sieve and have a maximum size of
2 inches. The drain gravel backfill should be at least 1 ~ feet deep.
Surface Drainage: The following drainage precautions should be observed during
construction and maintained at all times after the residence has been completed:
1) Inundation of the foundation excavations and underslab areas should be
avoided during construction. Drying could increase the expansion
potential of the clay matrix soils.
2) Exterior backfill should be adjusted to near optimum moisture and
H-P GEOTECH
Sam Neth
June 20, 2001
Page4
compacted to at least 95 % of the maximum standard Proctor density in
pavement and slab areas and to at least 90% of the maximum standard
Proctor density in landscape areas. Free-draining wall backfill should be
capped with about 2 feet of the on-site, finer graded soils to reduce
surface water infiltration.
3) The ground surface surrounding the exterior of the building should be
sloped to drain away from the foundation in all directions. We
recommend a minimum slope of 12 inches in the first 10 feet in unpaved
areas and a minimum slope of 3 inches in the first 10 feet in pavement
and walkway areas.
4) Roof downspouts and drains should discharge well beyond the limits of
all backfill.
5) Landscaping which requires regular heavy irrigation, such as sod, should
be located at least 5 feet from the building.
Percolation Testing: Percolation tests were conducted on June 5, 2001 to evaluate the
feasibility of an infiltration septic disposal system at the site. One profile pit and three
percolation holes were dug at the locations shown on Fig. 1. The test holes (nominal 12
inch diameter by 12 inch deep) were hand dug at the bottom of shallow backhoe pits
and were soaked with water one day prior to testing. The soils exposed in the
percolation holes are similar to the natural soils exposed in the Profile Pit shown on
Fig. 2 and consist of basalt boulders in a sandy clay matrix. The percolation test results
are presented in Table II. The percolation test results indicate an infiltration rate
between 40 and 80 minutes per inch with an average of 53 minutes per inch. Based on
the subsurface conditions encountered and the percolation test results, the tested area
should be suitable for a conventional infiltration septic disposal system. We
recommend the infiltration area be oversized due to the variable and relatively slow
percolation rate. Additional percolation testing and deepening of the Profile Pit should
be performed at the time of construction.
Limitations: This study has been conducted in accordance with generally accepted
geotechnical engineering principles and practices in this area at this time. We make no
warranty either expressed or implied. The conclusions and recommendations submitted
in this report are based upon the data obtained from the exploratory pits excavated at the
locations indicated on Fig. 1, the proposed type of construction and our experience in
the area. Our fmdings include interpolation and extrapolation of the subsurface
conditions identified at the exploratory pits and variations in the subsurface conditions
H-P GEOTECH
Sam Neth
June 20, 2001
Pages
---- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
may not become evident until excavation is performed. If conditions encountered
during construction appear different from those described in this report, we should be
notified at once so re-evaluation of the recommendations may be made.
This report has been prepared for the exclusive use by our client for design purposes.
We are not responsible for technical interpretations by others of our information. As
the project evolves, we should provide continued consultation and field services during
construction to review and monitor the implementation of our recommendations, and to
verify that the recommendations have been appropriately interpreted. Significant design
changes may require additional analysis or modifications to the recommendations
presented herein. We recommend on-site observation of excavations and foundation
bearing strata and testing of structural fill by a representative of the geotechnical
engineer.
If you have any questions or if we may be of further assistance, please let us know.
Sincerely,
Reviewed by:
Steven L. Pawlak, P.E.
JZA/ksw
attachments
cc: Kurtz and Associates -Attn: Brian Kurtz
H-P GEOTECH
•'
•PIT 1
PROPOSED
SEPTIC DISPOSAL
SYSTEM
\__
PROPOSEO DRIVEWAY
( r-----
APPROXIMA lE SCALE
,. -30'
EXISTING
BOULDER
RETAINING
WALLS
101 365 HEPWORTH-PAWLAK
GEOTECHNICAL, INC.
LOCATION OF EXPLORATORY PITS
AND PERCOLATION TEST HOLES Fig. 1
PIT 1 PIT 2 PROFILE PIT
0 0
5 5
10 10
LEGEND:
~ FILL; sandy cloy with organics, moist, dork brown.
§ TOPSOIL; sandy cloy, organic, firm, moist, dork brown.
~ BASALT BOULDERS (GC); In a sandy cloy matrix, boulders up to about 6 feet In size. dense, moist ~ to very moist, reddish brown, highly plastic matrix.
~ 2" Diameter hand driven llner sample.
T Practical backhoe refusal.
NOTES:
1. Exploratory pits were excavated on .A.ine 4, 2001 with a backhoe.
3. Elevations of exploratory pits were not measured and logs of exploratory pits ore drown to depth.
4. The exploratory pit locations should be considered accurate only to the degree lmplled
by the method used. ·
5. The lines between materials shown on the exploratory pit logs represent the approximate boundaries
between moterlol typee and transitions may be gradual.
6. No free water was encountered In the pits ot the time of excavating. Fluctuations In water level may
occur with time.
7. Laboratory Tsstlng Rssults:
WC • Water Content ( X )
DD • Dry Density ( pcf )
-200 • Percent passing No. 200 sieve
LL • Liquid Limit ( X )
Pl • Plasticity Index ( " )
101 365 HEPWORTH-PAWLAK
GEOTECHNICAL, INC. LOGS OF EXPLORATORY PITS Fig. 2
.
Moisture Content • 29.3 percent
Dry Density -91 pcf
Sample of: Sandy Cloy Motrlx
From: Pit 1 at 5 F'eet
2
M
g.
1ii 1 -....
! ........
~ "' 0 ~ I '\ g \ 1
,_ .... ... ~ ~o \ f 1
Expansion ...
~ upon \
2 wetting
.
b
3
0.1 1.0 10 100
APPLIED PRESSURE -ksf
M Moisture Content • 38. 7 percent
~ Dry Density -84 pcf
c 1 Somple of: Sandy Clay Matrix " ! From: Pit 2 at 2.5 Feet
I 0
i -r-.........
[',_ i-... r-. r-...... 1 '
' '\ " a. ) s \
2 \
Expansion
upon
wetting
0.1 1.0 10 100
APPLIED PRESSURE -kaf
101 365 HEPWORTH-PAWLAK SWELL CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS Fig. 3
GEOTECHNICAL, INC.
•.
HEPWORTH-PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL, INC.
TABLE I JOB NO. 101 365
SUMMARY OF LABORATORY TEST RESULTS
SAMPLE LOCATlON NATUllAI. NATUllAI. GRADATION PERCENT ATTERERG LIMITS UNCOflf'WED
PIT DEPTH MOISlUllE DOY GRAVB. SAND PASSINO UOUID PLASTIC COWRESSIYE SOIL OR ·-CONnNT DENSITY .... "" NO. 2IJO lMT -ShENGfff BEDROCK TYPE
"" -SIEVE ,,., ,,., tl'Sl'J
1 2 36.9 84 29 76 56 Clayey Sand Matrix
5 29.3 91 Sandy Clay Matrix
.
2 2.5 38.7 84 Sandy· Clay Matrix
.
HEPWORTH-PAWLAK GEOTECHNICAL, INC.
TABLE II
PERCOLATION TEST RESULTS JOB NO. 101 365
HOLE NO. HOLE DEPTH LENGTH OF WATER DEPTH WATER DEPTH DROP IN AVERAGE
(INCHES) INTERVAL AT START OF AT END OF WATER PERCOLATION
(MIN) INTERVAL INTERVAL LEVEL RATE
CINCHES) (INCHES) CINCHES) CMIN./INCH)
P-1 32 10 9% 8 y., 1 y,
'· 8 y., 7 y, %
7 y, 7 y., y.,
7 y., 7 y.,
7 6% y.,
6% 6 y, y.,
6 y, 6 y., y., 40
P-2 .36 10 11 % 11 Va y.,
' . 11 Va 10 7/e y.,
10 7/e 10 6/s y.,
10% 10 y, Va
10 y, 10% Va
10% 10 y., Va 80
P-3 .26 10 8 y., 7% 1
7 y., 6% y,
6% 6 y., y,.
6 y., 6% y,
6% 6 y, y.,
6 y, 6 y., y.,
6 y., 6 y., 40
Note: Percolation test holes were hand dug in the bottom of backhoe pits and soaked on June
4, 2001. Percolation tests were conducted on June 5, 2001. The average percolation
rates were based on the last three readings of each test.
{ 6 0
) :=:_tJ
,,..----~~-"--'--'-'---"--'--~-------------------~----~-- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
leading the way in septic and stormwaler chamber systems
How we size the Equalizer 36™ Chamber I~ £ol9rcpo . . ';' ~. . ~
Equalizer 36™ Chamber Specifications:
Chamber Height = 1 fl
Chamber Width = 1.83 fl
Chamber Weight = 25 lbs.
Chamber Capacity = 63 gal.
Open Bottom Area = 1.5 sqfl/lf
Open Sidewall Area = 2.16 sqfl/lf
Invert Height= 9.9"
' ·• ; ~:· : . .'
Speclllcaflons as recognized by Colorado Guidelines for trench configuration:
Bottom Area = 1.5 sqft/lf + .5 (sizing factor) x 8.33 If = 24.99 sqtt
Sidewall Area= 9.9" .. 6.0" = 3.9" x 1.28 (sidewinder effect)= 4.99 = 5
5" x 2 (sides) = 10'' x 8.33 If= 6.94 sqft
Bottom+ Sidewall= 24.99 sqfl + 6.94 sqft = 31.93 sqfl per EQ36™
Bed appllcaflons are recognized In this manner:
Bollom Area = 1.50 sqfl/lf + .6 (sizing factor) x 8.33 If = 20.8 sqtt per EQ36™
~\2.~q ~oo '0C\rr 7EJL ~~'~fv'....
'l~u-\l.p.\L cf-sz..tJW-iJ\E.'.> 1:>esi... -;i.:J.~
1750 W 2450 S • Ogden. UT 84401 • (801) 621-6972 • Fax (801) 621-2947
Corporale OfficB
4 Business Park Road • P.O. Box 768 • Old Saybrook. CT 06475 • (203)-388-6639 • Fax (203) 388-6810