Laserfiche WebLink
27. The first sentence under Topsoil Salvage Techniques-Year 2008 and Onward is vague and <br />open ended. Please delete the sentence. <br />28. Under Item 1, on page (d)-19, it is stated that minimal winter topsoil stripping will occur. <br />Please describe situations that might warrant topsoil stripping from November <br />through March, and specify that soil stripping and replacement operations will not be <br />conducted if surface soils are frozen or saturated. <br />29. Table 2.05.4(2)(d) Topsoil Stockpile Inventory lists Stockpiles A though K as located west <br />of 27 Rd., and Stockpiles 1 through 10 as East of 27 Road. This listing appears to be <br />reversed. Also, Stockpiles 3 and 4 are both identified as "Mixed" on the table and in text, <br />but on Map 2.04.9-2, Stockpile 4 is listed as "Lift A". Please clarify and amend the table, <br />map, and text as warranted. <br />30. The 2"d paragraph on page 2.05.4(2)(d)-23 references topsoil balances shown on Table <br />2.05.4(2)(d)-3. The reference should be to Table 2.05.4(2)(d)-4. Please amend the <br />reference. <br />31. The 2"d paragraph on page (d)-28 contains extraneous wording (have had topsoil <br />replacement for the areas which). Please delete the extraneous wording. <br />32. The narrative listing of prime farmland subsoil parameters to be tested, at the beginning of <br />the final paragraph on page (d)-28, does not entirely match up to the list of parameters <br />specified in Table 2.04.9-2, and Table 2.04.9-1 is erroneously referenced. Please delete the <br />entire first sentence of the paragraph, and insert "subsoil" in front of "sample" in the <br />sentence that follows, in the same paragraph. <br />33. The statement on page (d)-29, that "results of this testing revealed that the Bench 1 subsoil <br />was suitable for all tested criteria" does not appear to be accurate. Attachment 2.05.4(2)(d)- <br />l shows that one sample did exceed the conductivity standard by a small margin. Also, we <br />do not concur with the discussion in the Attachment 2.05.4(2)(d)-1 report, which indicates <br />that EC is generally run only as a screening tool, and that EC exceedances do not affect <br />suitability of the soil if SAR is not elevated. Elevated levels of conductivity (i.e. salinity) do <br />affect soil suitability, irrespective of individual ionic effects, by inhibiting the ability of <br />plants to extract water from the soil. Please amend the referenced wording in the <br />Attachment. <br />34. A further concern with EC and pH data reported in Attachment 2.05.4(2)(d)-1 and <br />Attachment 2.04.9-11, (which contain largely duplicate reports and data), is that the data <br />reported for these parameters from the second round of sampling taken from the 2.5 acre <br />grid, are based on 1:1 Soil:Water extract, rather than the standard, permit specified Saturated <br />Paste extract. Interestingly, in the first round of samples (Samples 101 through 106), lab <br />sheets are included which provide EC and pH levels based on both 1:1 and Saturated Paste <br />Extract. The 1:1 extract EC value for Sample 105 (Lab #44950) is 1.94; the Saturated Paste <br />extract value for the same sample is 4.09. This is the sample mentioned in Walsh report as <br />8 <br />