2016-08-08_PERMIT FILE - C1981019A (19)

Home Browse Search

INTRODUCTION The soils data representing the soil series were compared to the suitability criteria provided on Table 2.04.9-5. Based on these comparisons, soil horizons that exceeded the criteria provided on the table were identified and were considered unsuitable as a plant growth medium for reclamation. The salvage depth for each series was from the surface to the top of the first unsuitable horizon. Fourteen map units were identified within the disturbed area associated with the South Taylor mining area. A summary of the limitations and estimated depth of suitable soil is provided in Table 2.04.9-6, Summary of Soil Limitations and Salvage Depths — South Taylor Mine Area. The volume of topsoil available for salvage was determined for each topsoil stripping block as shown on Map 28B and are presented in Table 2.04.9-7. Soil physicochemical data from the 18 CCC soil profiles are provided in Table 2.04.9-8 for a total of 60 soil samples. Descriptions of the soil map units identified in the South Taylor mining area by Consol are presented in Exhibit 9, Item 6. The South Taylor mining area contains deep soils in mostly gently to moderately sloping locations. These soils generally have favorable textures for reclamation. Soils on steep slopes tend to be shallow and excessively channery or cobbly. The physicochemical soil data were compared with the topsoil and substitute topsoil suitability criteria shown on Table 2.04.9-5. A summary of the limitations of each soil profile by horizon and the estimated average salvage depth for each soil map unit is shown on Table 2.04.9-6. Topsoil salvage and handling for the South Taylor mining area are shown on Map 28B, Topsoil Handling — South Taylor. There appears to be few chemical limitations for salvage and use of soils for reclamation with the exception of clay content. The pH for the samples collected by Consol ranged from 6.5 to 8.6 with the suitability range of 5.5 to 8.5. Only two samples exceeded this suitability criterion. The highest specific conductivity reading was 1.3 mmhos/cm which is well below the level of concern (4.00). The highest SAR (sodium adsorption ratio) measured was 2.8 (values less than 11 are generally suitable). Soluble selenium levels were all below the detection level of 0.05 ppm, well below the 0.1 ppm level of concern. All samples had boron levels of 2.51 ppm or less. Levels of 5.00 ppm or greater are considered unsuitable. The saturation percent of all soils analyzed were within the acceptable range of 25% to 85%. Only two samples had a sand content of less than 15% and only one sample had clay content greater than 40%. The main limitation for soil suitability was the percentage of coarse fragments. The coarse fragments for each soil profile were obtained from the soil description tables in the CCC soil inventory report (CCC 1984). Soils were considered suitable to the depth where coarse fragments were no greater than 35%. Some soils were found to be suitable throughout the horizon (Silas, Lamphier, Burnette, Inchau, Rhone) and most were suitable on surface horizon. Only Waybe was found have excessive coarse fragments at the surface (60% coarse fragments from 0-3 inches). Each soil horizon was determined to be suitable or unsuitable. The weighted average depth of suitable soil was then calculated for each map unit based on the suitable depth of each soil series multiplied by the percentage of the map unit which it comprises. The weighted average depth of salvageable soil calculations are summarized in Table 2.04.9-6A. Following the development in any one five-year mine area the amount of soil salvage will be assessed to determine the need for assessing potential substitute soil sources. Order H Soil Survey — Lower Wilson Mining Area South Taylor/Lower Wilson — Rule 2, Page 32 Revision Date: 11/19/15 Revision No.: PR -04