2017-02-03_PERMIT FILE - C1980004 (25)

Home Browse Search

analysis (Mathews, 2006b). The results of the laboratory analysis were reported on June 18, 2010, and are included with this report. A 10% duplicate analysis was conducted for quality assurance/quality control (QA/QC) purposes, and the results are on file at IML. As stated in the Introduction section, some samples were also analyzed for standard overburden parameters. At the request of J.E. Stover, two sample sites, MC1 and MC2, renumbered MC21 and MC22, were selected as representative for the proposed coal mine waste disposal area and a composite sample of the 2 to 8 foot depth was obtained from each sample site, MC1 C and MC2C, renumbered MC21 C and MC22C respectively. Standard overburden laboratory analysis of these samples was completed by IML and the parameters, based on discussion and selectionfrom a list supplied by JE Stover on May 28, included: pH; saturation percent; electrical conductivity (EC); calcium (Ca), magnesium (Mg), and sodium (Na) (saturated paste extract, meq/L); calculation of sodium adsorption ratio (SAR); Nitrate Nitrogen; Selenium (Se) and Boron (B) (hot-water soluble, ppm); Arsenic (As), Cadmium (Cd), Copper (Cu), Iron (Fe), Manganese (Mg), Molybdenum (Mo), Lead (Pb), and Zinc (Zn) (all ppm by AB -DTPA); total carbon %; TOC%; total Mercury (Hg) (mg/Kg); and Acid -Base Accounting including Total Sulfur %, Total Sulfur AB (t/1000t), Neutralization Potential (t/1000t), and Total Sulfur Acid -Base Potential (ABP) (t/1000t). Lithologic classification was considered the soil substratum texture and these results are provided with the soils laboratory results. Concerning soils mapping, initial mapping units were identified using the Natural Resources and Conservation Service (NRCS) Order 3 soil survey map (Alstatt, 2003), recent air photo images, and the USGS 7.5' topographic quadrangle map (Howard Quadrangle). The previous soil boundaries were used during initial field reconnaissance and observation, but were later changed. The entire area was traversed by vehicle on dirt two -tracks where possible, and then elsewhere on foot. Soil map unit boundaries were delineated by observing surface conditions, vegetation, slope gradient and aspect, geology, and most importantly soil profiles exposed using a sharpshooter and bucket auger. Dominant soils were fully described and sampled at representative sites primarily in the proposed affected areas. The location of all soil sample sites was determined by GPS and is shown on the project soil map. The results of the soils field mapping, profile descriptions, and laboratory analysis were used to evaluate topsoil suitability and generate soil salvage recommendations. The evaluation generally followed parameters and threshold values contained in Table 1-2 "Criteria to establish suitability of topsoil (or topsoil substitutes)" of Guideline No.1 "Topsoil and Overburden" (WDEQ, 1996). Unsuitability threshold values include: pH <5.0 or > 9.0, EC >12; SAR >15, or SAR >12 for soils with greater than 40% clay; Boron >5.0 ppm; coarse fragment content >35%; saturation percent <25% or >80% (marginal rated); Selenium >0.8 ppm (marginal rated); and sand, clay, or silty clay texture (marginal rated) (WDEQ, 1996). -3-