Laserfiche WebLink
~~''~ • • <br />~:~, <br />~° <br />~:';) 2.0 SAMPLING AND ANALYSIS METHODOLOGIES <br />21 <br />2.1 July Samnllna Program <br />M1l3 <br />yj Soil and overburden sampling was conducted by Cedar Creek Associates, Inc. (Cedar Creek) <br />personnel on July 15, 1994 at EFMC's Raton Creek Mines project site approximately 3 miles south of <br />"~ Trinidad, CO. Upon arrival at the project site, the disturbed area was first traversed to gain an <br />understanding of site conditions. The disturbed area was then divided into sampling units (similar to soil <br />mapping units) representing the dominant conditions occurring on site in terms of slope, aspect, backfill <br />and seedbed materials present, and type of disturbance. Based on this analysis, ten sites were selected <br />for sampling resulting in a sampling intensity of one sample site per 3.16 acres of disturbance. Table 1 <br />summarizes the characteristics each sample site was selected to represent. <br />=+J TABLE 1 <br />SAMPLE SITE CHARACTERISTICS <br />f~i <br />Sample Slope % Aspect Primary 13ackfill Primary Seedbed Disturbance <br />,Ft, Site # Material (to 48") Material Type <br />~u~ 1 -33 North Overburden Overburden Portal area <br />,, 2 -33 North Subsoil Subsoil Regraded slope <br />~; 3 <15 North Overburden/soil Overburden Substation pad <br /> 4 -33 South Overburden Overburden Coal pad <br />~' <br />:i_ 5 -Level -Level Overburden/road base Variable Road <br /> 6 -3 Southwest Apparently undisturbed Soil Borrow Source #1 <br /> 7 -33 West Overburden Overburden Backiilled highwall <br />~- ~ 8 -33 South Overburden Overburden Backfilled highwall <br />r^ 9 -33 South Overburden Soil Refuse pile <br />~~~ 10 -Level -Level Overburden Soil Refuse pile <br />i <br />/~ At each sampling site, surticial conditions were observed and notes were taken with respect to slope, <br />aspect, 'physiography', surface coarse fragment percentage, percent vegetation cover, and the type and <br />~ color of the material overlying the site. Estimates of depth to groundwater and existing erosion were also <br />~? <br />made. Sampling was then completed. At each sampling point, a pit was dug by a backhoe to a depth of <br />approximately 48 inches. The exposed 'profile" was then divided into six depth increments for sampling <br />.--~ purposes. Depth increments sampled for profiles RC-1 through RC-8, in inches, were 0-6, 6-12, 12-18, <br />18-24, 24-36, and 36-48. Surficial depth increments for profiles RC-9 and RC-10 were modified slightly in <br />I:;; <br />l~ 2 <br />