My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2005-11-15_REPORT - C1982057 (5)
DRMS
>
Day Forward
>
Report
>
Coal
>
C1982057
>
2005-11-15_REPORT - C1982057 (5)
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 3:16:17 PM
Creation date
11/14/2011 12:41:38 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1982057
IBM Index Class Name
Report
Doc Date
11/15/2005
Doc Name
2004 Annual Reclamation Report
From
Seneca Coal Company
To
DMG
Permit Index Doc Type
Annual Reclamation Report
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.
/
55
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
• 5. Yoast Mine Spoil Sampling (December 2004) — 4 randomly distributed locations at <br />the Yoast Mine were sampled for regraded spoil. Mr. Roy Karo of Seneca Coal <br />Company collected the samples. They were subsequently sent to CSU for analysis. <br />The samples were numbered YSTRS -03 -01 through YSTRS- 03 -04. The attached <br />map shows all sample locations. <br />2.0 Methods <br />Each area to be sampled was delineated on a Seneca photobase map. All sample <br />locations were randomly distributed across each area. All locations were sampled by tile <br />spade and soil auger. A composite sample of the appropriate depth interval was collected <br />at each location. Samples were screened in the field over a No. 10 (2mm) screen to <br />remove hard rocks. Sample depth was noted for each location as well as other <br />information if pertinent. Soil backhoe pits were located and dug by Seneca. In addition <br />to soil sampling, a complete soil profile description was completed at each backhoe pit <br />location. Soils description followed standard Natural Resources Conservation Service <br />(MRCS) field methods (Schoenberger et.al., 2002). Digital photographs were taken of <br />each pit and adjacent landscape. All soil and spoil laboratory data was reviewed and <br />approved by CSU Laboratory Director Mr. Jim Self. Jim Nyenhuis also reviewed the <br />data and requested several reruns for confirmation purposes. <br />All soil and spoil samples were analyzed by CSU. The soil fertility parameters included: <br />• pH; electrical conductivity (EC); organic matter percent (Walkley -Black method); time <br />estimate; texture estimate; and several nutrients and micronutrients (ppm by AB -DTPA <br />Extract) including nitrate nitrogen (NO3 -N), phosphorus (P), potassium (K), zinc (Zn), <br />iron (Fe), manganese (Mn), and copper (Cu). <br />Overburden spoil parameters included: pH; electrical conductivity (EC); particle size <br />(percent sand, silt, and clay by hydrometer), boron (B), acid -base potential (A:B <br />potential), saturation percent; the same nutrients and micronutrients as for soil; and <br />sodium adsorption ratio (SAR) which is calculation requiring meq/L, of calcium (Ca), <br />magnesium (Mg), sodium (Na), and potassium (K). <br />All field and laboratory data was evaluated for suitability based on standard threshold <br />values for significant parameters, primarily EC, SAR, AB potential, and B (WDEQ, <br />1994). <br />3.0 Results <br />Soil and Overburden Spoil Laboratory Results <br />Four sets of laboratory data are attached to this report. Set 1 was reported on August 13, <br />2004 and includes the 25 topsoils sampled in June from 2W as well as 2 samples from the <br />2W topsoil backhoe pit #1; and the 25 topsoils sampled in June from Yoast as well as 6 <br />• samples from Yoast topsoil backhoe pits #1 and 2. Set 2 was reported on August 27, <br />2004 and includes the 25 regraded spoils sampled in June from 2W. Set 3 was reported <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.