My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2012-02-15_REVISION - C1981008
DRMS
>
Day Forward
>
Revision
>
Coal
>
C1981008
>
2012-02-15_REVISION - C1981008
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 4:48:42 PM
Creation date
2/16/2012 1:10:35 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1981008
IBM Index Class Name
REVISION
Doc Date
2/15/2012
Doc Name
Letter Application & Public Notice
From
Greg Lewicki & Associates, PLLC
To
DRMS
Type & Sequence
TR62
Email Name
MLT
DAB
SB1
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.
/
15
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
• A -3 <br />• A -8 <br />• B -8 <br />• C -6 <br />Field Modifications to TR-61 <br />Key Agricultural Services, Inc. <br />114 Shady Lane • Macomb, IL 61455 • (309) 833 -1313 <br />locations had refusal prior to reaching the total depth of the stockpiles. Although some of the <br />boring locations were designated as refusal they were completed to adequate depth such that re- <br />drilling of the hole was not required according to TR-61. In general, refusal was within 1 to 2 <br />feet of the anticipated total depth of the soil stockpile. The following boring locations did not <br />achieve the full depth of the soil resource stockpiles but refusal was obtained at a depth greater <br />than 75% of the expected total depth of the soil resource stockpile <br />One soil boring had to be abandoned and reestablished during the collection process. For an <br />undetermined reason the boring became misaligned and the equipment could not continue the <br />boring to an appropriate depth. The boring was abandoned and a new hole was established and <br />completed within five feet of the original boring location. <br />As was stated in TR -61, field modifications were expected. Field modifications were made in <br />consultation and agreement of all parties that were present at the site. The participating parties <br />were representatives of Key -Ag, OSM, DRMS, NRCS, and representatives of the landowner, <br />Mike Morgan and Jo Ellen Turner. These changes were made in the field based on site - specific <br />conditions. <br />For clarity in explaining these changes, the soil resource stockpiles were labeled for sample <br />identification as follows (Figure 2.04.9 -4), all volumes are estimates based on recent surveys of <br />the individual soil resource stockpiles: <br />1) Large Lift A stockpile (209,339 CY) — Sample Pile A <br />2) Large Lift B stockpile (326,108 CY) — Sample Pile B <br />3) Large Mixed Topsoil stockpile (128,858 CY) — Sample Pile C <br />4) Small Mixed Topsoil stockpile (8,384 CY) — Sample Pile D <br />5) Small Lift A stockpile (9,032 CY) — Sample Pile E <br />Page 3 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.