My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2012-08-24_GENERAL DOCUMENTS - C1981008 (2)
DRMS
>
Day Forward
>
General Documents
>
Coal
>
C1981008
>
2012-08-24_GENERAL DOCUMENTS - C1981008 (2)
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 5:05:50 PM
Creation date
2/13/2014 9:01:19 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1981008
IBM Index Class Name
General Documents
Doc Date
8/24/2012
Doc Name
DRMS Memo
From
Jared Ebert
To
Marcia Talvitie
Permit Index Doc Type
General Correspondence
Email Name
DAB
Media Type
D
Archive
No
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
28
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Natural Resource Conservation Service and the available baseline soil data. The additional sampling <br />effort does provide a more representative picture of the Morgan property as well as demonstrate the <br />highly variable nature of soil. As indicated in the analysis of the 2011 sampling results of the undisturbed <br />area of the Morgan property, based on the additional data obtained it may be possible that portions of the <br />Morgan property may not have originally qualified as prime farmland due to the high EC levels found <br />within the undisturbed soils, but again this could be influenced by the management of the property during <br />the growing season. There does not appear to be a significant difference between the average measures <br />found between the soil samples taken in the undisturbed areas /pre - mining samples and the samples taken <br />from the stockpiles for the parameters listed in the approved soil suitability criteria. The exception to this <br />would be the electrical conductivity measures. There are some differences between other constituents <br />measured (Ca, Mg, Na for example)in the chemical reports provided for each of the sampling efforts, <br />however a more detailed lab analysis by a soil scientist is necessary to interpret these results and how they <br />affect soil quality. <br />In conclusion, it appears the salvaged soil was not significantly contaminated or degraded with the <br />possible exception of electrical conductivity based on the approved soil suitability parameters. The <br />additional soil information obtained from the 2011 sampling of the undisturbed area may have refined the <br />soil stripping plan to some degree however significant changes in the plan would have been unlikely. As <br />discussed above the suitability criteria for electrical conductivity and exchangeable sodium could be <br />altered for the Lift B and Bench 1 material, due to the prime farnland classification requirements and not <br />because of the 2011 sampling effort. The soil stockpile sampling effort will be very helpful for future <br />planning and reclamation. With this information, the reclamation plan can be altered to manage the <br />replaced growth medium to optimize production. <br />Page 10 of 10 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.