My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2012-04-04_PERMIT FILE - C1981008A (2)
DRMS
>
Day Forward
>
Permit File
>
Coal
>
C1981008
>
2012-04-04_PERMIT FILE - C1981008A (2)
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 4:55:52 PM
Creation date
4/24/2012 10:57:32 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1981008A
IBM Index Class Name
Permit File
Doc Date
4/4/2012
Doc Name
2011 Soil Sampling and Analysis Plan
Section_Exhibit Name
Section 2.04.9 Attachment 2.04.9-10
Media Type
D
Archive
Yes
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
21
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
AS-k , Key Agricultural Services, I nc. <br />114 Shady Lane - Macomb, IL 61455 • (309) 833 -1313 <br />With these identifications, the sampling changes that were made are as follows. <br />1) Backhoe pits on the large Sample Pile A were limited to two test pits due to the minimal <br />amount of rocks that were identified in those pits and the fact that no coarse fragments <br />were observed in the Geoprobe sampling. <br />2) Backhoe pits on Sample Pile C were limited to two test pits due to the minimal amount of <br />rocks that were identified in those pits, in the smaller mixed topsoil pile, and in the <br />topsoil of the soil test pits dug in the redistributed topsoil region (Test pits TP06, TP07, <br />and TP08). <br />3) Four backhoe pits were dug on Sample Pile B. All backhoe test pits indicated similar <br />minimal coarse fragment content and size. <br />4) Two backhoe pits were dug on Sample Pile C due to the relatively small size of the pile, <br />minimal coarse fragments identified in the Geoprobe sampling and consistency of the two <br />backhoe pits. <br />5) Soil samples were only obtained by horizon at the three test pits within the Substitute <br />Subsoil Redistribution Area. The redistributed material was extremely consistent (by <br />horizon) and it was determined that additional sampling, at predetermined depth <br />intervals, was not required to calculate the average root zone salinity. <br />6) Due to clay content and moisture content of cores, field splitting (as requested by OSM, <br />though not required by TR -61) was deemed to be impracticable. The whole sample was <br />collected by Key -Ag and will be submitted to the laboratory for drying, grinding, sieving <br />and splitting. A duplicate sample will then be submitted to a laboratory designated by <br />OSM. <br />7) Sampling of Sample Pile C was expanded from 4' samples to 5' samples to accommodate <br />the sampling probes. <br />8) Soil Samples were obtained from Sample Pile D using a backhoe to dig into the side of <br />the pit. The change was instituted due to the small size of the pile and safety concerns. <br />Three backhoe test pits were dug into the side and three separate samples were obtained <br />from each sampling locations. <br />9) Soil Samples were obtained from Sample Pile E using a backhoe. Samples were obtained <br />from three depths. This method was selected by all parties involved due to the limited <br />size and depth of Sample Pile E. The four soil test pits were used to determine estimated <br />rock content of this stockpile. <br />The above changes were considered and discussed thoroughly prior to being conducted and all <br />sampling was conducted under the direct supervision of a Certified Professional Soil Scientist <br />(CPSS) and a Certified Professional Agronomist (CPAg). All changes were agreed upon and <br />considered by experienced soil scientists including Aaron DeJoia (Key -Ag, CPSS and CPAg <br />Page 4 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.