NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. Environmental and Socio-Economic Assessment Norma Transmission Pipeline Project February 2013/8660
APPENDIX 3
SOIL SURVEY AND RECLAMATION SUITABILITY EVALUATION OF THE PROPOSED NOVA GAS TRANSMISSION LTD. NORMA TRANSMISSION PIPELINE PROJECT
Page A3-1
SOIL SURVEY AND RECLAMATION SUITABILITY EVALUATION of the PROPOSED NOVA GAS TRANSMISSION LTD. NORMA TRANSMISSION PIPELINE
Prepared for:
TERA ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS
On behalf of:
NOVA GAS TRANSMISSION LTD.
Prepared by:
MENTIGA PEDOLOGY CONSULTANTS LTD.
A.G. Twardy, M.Sc., P.Ag. B. Chernipeski, B.Sc., P.Ag.
February 2013
11037B.1
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0 INTRODUCTION ...... 1 2.0 THE STUDY AREA ...... 3 2.1 Location and Extent ...... 3 2.2 Bedrock Geology ...... 3 2.3 Surficial Materials and Landform ...... 3 2.4 General Soil Patterns ...... 4 2.5 Present Land Use ...... 4 3.0 SOILS ...... 6 3.1 Soil Investigation Methods ...... 6 3.2 Soil Units ...... 7 3.2.1 Angus Ridge (AGS) Soils ...... 8 3.2.2 Haight (HGT) Soils...... 9 3.2.3 Mundare (MDR) Soils ...... 10 3.2.4 Ukalta (UKT) Soils ...... 11 3.2.5 Miscellaneous Land Units ...... 12 3.3 Soil Suitability for Reclamation ...... 13 3.4 Evaluation of the Soils for Alternate Soil Handling ...... 15 3.5 Soil Nutrient Analysis ...... 16 3.6 Soil Erosion Hazard ...... 17 3.7 Soil Compaction ...... 18 4.0 MATERIAL HANDLING RECOMMENDATIONS ...... 19 5.0 REFERENCES ...... 21
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1 Regional Location………………………………………………………..5
LIST OF TABLES
1. Key to the Soils...... 13 2. Extent of Various Soils Along the Proposed Route...... 13 3. Soil Characteristics of Sampled Soils...... 15 4. Suitability Ratings of the Soils for Reclamation...... 15 5. Evaluation of the Soils for Alternate Soil Handling...... 16 6. Wind and Water Soil Erosion Hazard Ratings of Map Units Along the Proposed Route*…………………...... 18 7. Soil Characteristics and their Implications to Pipelining...... 20
APPENDICES
A Summary of Soil Inspection Sites ...... 22 B Guidelines for Reclamation Ratings ...... 25 C Guidelines for Alternative Soil Handling Procedures During Pipeline Construction (After: Apesc, June 1996) ...... 28 D Guidelines for Wind and Water Soil Erosion Hazard Ratings ...... 32 E Laboratory Results ...... 34 F Soils Legend ...... 37
______Pedology Consultants Ltd.______Mentiga i 1.0 INTRODUCTION
NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. (NGTL), a wholly owned subsidiary of TransCanada PipeLines Limited, is applying to the National Energy Board (NEB) under Section 58 of the NEB Act for authorization to construct, own and operate the Norma Transmission Pipeline (the Project). The Project will include the installation of approximately 3.4 km of 508 mm (20 inch) O.D. pipeline which will traverse private lands in the White Area of Alberta. The proposed pipeline will extend west from the existing Bens Lake Compressor Station in NE 5-54-14 W4M to a proposed tie-in location with the ATCO Pipelines (ATCO) Norma Transmission Pipeline in SE 1-54-15 W4M. The purpose of the proposed pipeline is to connect NGTL’s Pipeline System to the proposed ATCO Pipelines Norma Transmission Pipeline, which will serve to carry sweet natural gas into the Fort Saskatchewan area. The proposed pipeline is required to meet the growing gas requirements of the Fort Saskatchewan and Edmonton areas as the demand for natural gas in those areas increases.
The proposed pipeline will be installed within a new 15 m wide right-of-way with an additional 20 m of temporary workspace (TWS) required during construction resulting in a construction right-of-way width of up to 35 m. Additional TWS will be taken at crossings, sidebends and tie-ins. NGTL will also acquire TWS on both ends of the proposed route for Project construction needs such as highway access, and laydown areas for equipment and materials. Design, construction and operation of the Project will be in compliance with all applicable codes, standards and regulations.
Subject to regulatory approval, construction is scheduled to commence in August 2013 with a target completion date of October 2013. The Project is anticipated to be constructed during non-frozen conditions. Clean-up will be completed immediately following construction in September/October 2013 and final reclamation will be completed in spring/summer 2014. The pipeline is scheduled to be in-service by November 2013.
Mentiga Pedology Consultants Ltd. was commissioned by TERA Environmental Consultants on behalf of NGTL to conduct a soil survey along the proposed pipeline right-of-way. The objectives of the survey were to map the soil resources to provide baseline data; to map present land use; to evaluate the suitability of the soils for reclamation; and to provide material handling recommendations.
Soil investigations and mapping were conducted on October 3, 2012 on Environmental Alignment Sheets at a scale of 1:10,000 (Appendix 2 of the Environmental and Socio-Economic Assessment). The soils and landscapes were described in terms of landform, surficial materials, slope, texture, stoniness, topsoil thickness, drainage conditions, profile morphology and soil chemistry. The distribution and extent of the various soils along the proposed route are shown on the
______Pedology Consultants Ltd.______Mentiga 1 accompanying Environmental Alignment Sheets at a scale of 1:10,000. Average depth of topsoil, topography and present land use are also indicated on the Environmental Alignment Sheets. The soil-landscape units delineated on the Environmental Alignment Sheets are described briefly in the map legend and in detail in the report. The suitability of the soils for reclamation, according to the guidelines of the Alberta Soils Advisory Committee (1987), have been evaluated. The soils were also evaluated for alternate material handling according to the guidelines of the Alberta Pipeline Environmental Steering Committee (1996) and the salt contamination assessment and remediation guidelines of Alberta Environment (2001). Material handling recommendations are also provided.
______Pedology Consultants Ltd.______Mentiga 2 2.0 THE STUDY AREA
2.1 Location and Extent
The proposed pipeline will extend west from the existing Bens Lake Compressor Station in NE 5-54-14 W4M to a proposed tie-in location with the ATCO Norma Transmission Pipeline in SE 1-54-15 W4M, a distance of approximately 3.4 km (See Figure 1). The soil survey was conducted along the entire proposed route.
2.2 Bedrock Geology
According to Hamilton et.al. (1999), the proposed route is underlain by the Belly River Group. The Belly River Group consists of gray to greenish gray, thick bedded, feldspathic sandstone; gray clayey siltstone; gray and green mudstone; and concretionary ironstone beds. The Belly River Group is considered nonmarine.
The underlying beds of the Belly River Group were not encountered within 1.7 m of the surface at any of the sites investigated.
2.3 Surficial Materials and Landform
A variety of surficial deposits occur along the proposed route. Till, deep glaciofluvial sands, and glaciofluvial sands overlying till were all identified along the proposed route.
Glaciofluvial sands occupy about 80% of the proposed route. About 26% of the sands are deep (>1.7 m thick) and are loamy sand textured. The remaining 54% are sandy loam textured and have finer textured till at 34-120 cm below the surface. The sands are non-saline and non-sodic and occur on gently undulating to undulating landscapes.
Loam to clay loam textured till that is slightly to moderately stony occurs in the western and extreme eastern portions of the proposed route on gently undulating to undulating landscapes. Till deposits occupy the remaining 20% of the proposed route. The till is generally non-saline and non-sodic.
______Pedology Consultants Ltd.______Mentiga 3 2.4 General Soil Patterns
Well to rapidly drained Orthic Black Chernozems developed on deep glaciofluvial sands and glaciofluvial sandy textured veneers overlying loam to clay loam textured till are the dominant soils occupying about 78% of the proposed route. Well to moderately well drained Orthic and Eluviated Black Chernozems developed on loam to clay loam textured till occupy about 18% of the proposed route and occur in the extreme western and eastern portions of the proposed route. Topsoil thickness in these soils varies from 23-64 cm but most of the soil profiles examined along the proposed route have 23-50 cm of topsoil. Colour differentiation between topsoils and upper subsoils is excellent in these soils.
Poorly drained level to depressional areas are characterized by Orthic and Rego Humic Gleysols developed on clay loam to clay textured till or glaciolacustrine material. Topsoil thickness in these soils is about 35 cm and topsoils are easily distinguished from subsoils by colour. The poorly drained Gleysolic soils are generally non-saline and non-sodic and are of minor extent occupying about 3% of the proposed route. They only occur in the extreme eastern portion of the proposed route. Gleysolic soils are highly susceptible to soil compaction and rutting because of their poor drainage.
More detailed descriptions of the soils along the proposed route are provided in Section 3.2.
2.5 Present Land Use
Most of the proposed route occurs on cultivated land. Cultivated land occupies about 89% of the proposed route. Tame pasture occurs along the unnamed tributary to Vermilion River in SW 5-54-14 W4M and occupies approximately 2% of the proposed route. The remaining 9% consists of treed land.
Present land use is shown on the accompanying Environmental Alignment Sheets. The extent of the present land use categories is as follows:
Land Use Category km % of Proposed Route
Cultivated land 3.01 89 Tame pasture 0.08 2 Treed land 0.31 9 Total 3.4 km 100.0%
______Pedology Consultants Ltd.______Mentiga 4 R 17 W4M R 16 W4M R 15 W4M R 14 W4M R 13 W4M R 12 W4M R 11 W4M SMOKY LAKE 7 7
5 COUNTY 5
T SADDLE LAKE T 125
45 ¯ N UV UV645
Andrew o r
t
!. Whitford h
S
Whitford a
645 s UV k 6
6 Lake Shalka a 5 5
857
t T UV T !. Lake c h
e rd Creek w tfo h i Willingdon a W 860 n UV29 UV R iv er Brosseau !. !. Soda Duvernay Lake 5 !. 5 5 5
857 T 855 UV Hairy T UV 36 Hill UV45 UV Watt ") Two Lake Kaleland Hills ") Norma Vermillion Park Lake !. L A 4 4
M C 5 5 COUNTY OF o T T O
t N TWO HILLS NO. 21 BENS LAKE COMPRESSOR STATION t o T n
C NE 5-54-14 W4M C O COUNTY OF r U KP 3.4 e 36 N !. MINBURN NO. 27 e UV k T ^_ ^_ Y KP 0 ") Plain ATCO TIE-IN Warwick 15 Lake UV SE 1-54-15 W4M Mundare 3 3 5 5
T er T iv 16 R UV n io Royal il m r e Park Fitzallen ") ") V UV631 Akasu UV16A UV855 Lake 2 2 Vegreville 5 5
T T Beaverhill Lake Heritage Rangeland 16 Natural Area UV Lavoy
M !.
I
N
C O B eek
U 857 LAMONT U Cr UV A L B E R T A
i R
N e N COU T
Beaverhill NTY w
Y
N k
O s
Lake O a F 1 1
BEAVER .
5 5
2 W T T COUNTY 7 Map Area Ran!.furly SK Edmonton ! 0 0 5 5
T BC Calgary T !
R 17 W4M R 16 W4M R 15 W4M R 14 W4M R 13 W4M R 12 W4M
^_ Proposed Tie-In UV892 Highway City/Town FIGURE 1 ") Unincorporated Community Road Municipal Boundary REGIONAL LOCATION
!. Hamlet Watercourse Aboriginal Lands FOR THE PROPOSED NOVA GAS TRANSMISSION LTD. Proposed Pipeline Route Waterbody Park/Protected Area NORMA TRANSMISSION PIPELINE UTM Zone 12N Hillshade: TERA Environmental Consultants, derived from Natural Resources Canada 2008; Roads: Natural Resources Canada 2012; Hydrography: IHS Inc. 2004; Hamlet, City/Town, Municipal Boundary: AltaLIS 2012; Unincorporated SCALE: 1:300,000 February 2013 8660 Community: Natural Resources Canada 2003; Proposed Pipeline: Nova Gas Transmission Ltd. 2012; Tie-in: TERA Environmental Consultants 2012; Alberta Township System: AltaLIS 2009; Park/Protected Area: Alberta Tourism, Parks km and Recreation 2012; Aboriginal Lands: Government of Canada 2012. 0 2 4 6 Although there is no reason to believe that there are any errors associated with the data used to generate this product Mapped By: RG Checked By: TM or in the product itself, users of these data are advised that errors in the data may be present. (All Locations Approximate) t8660_Figure1_Regional_Overview_Rev06
3.0 SOILS
3.1 Soil Investigation Methods
Soil mapping is based on the philosophy of pedology – that soils are natural bodies that reflect the influence of their environment. Point observations of soils are extrapolated to areas by using principles of geomorphology and surficial geology, combined with vegetation pattern indicators. Since soil is a continuum, and adjacent soils seldom have sharp boundaries, Soil Units are defined as having a certain range of properties. These Soil Units are delineated on the basis of parent geologic material and landform, soil profile and soil moisture conditions. The soil and land attributes recognized in mapping are important for various land uses.
The soils have been classified and described according to the criteria established by the Soil Classification Working Group (1998). This system classifies soils in their natural state, and thus indicates relationships between soils and their environment. During field investigations, soil properties examined include: depth and thickness of horizons, colour, texture, structure, consistence, and any other pertinent details. Site characteristics such as parent materials, landform, topography, drainage and surface stoniness are also described using established procedures. Soil names were correlated with the Alberta Soil Names file, Generation 3 (Alberta Soil Series Working Group 2006) and with the reconnaissance soil survey in the general area (Bowser et. al. 1962). Soil mapping was conducted on Environmental Alignment Sheets at a scale of 1:10,000.
The proposed route was traversed on October 3, 2012 and the soils were inspected at 12 sites. The location of the investigation sites are shown on the accompanying Environmental Alignment Sheets and inspection data are summarized in Appendix A. The usual procedure was to excavate the upper 30-40 cm with a shovel and then auger to a depth of 1.7 m with a ranger drill mounted on a 1-ton, 4 x 4 truck, and describe the morphological characteristics of the soil. Landscape features and present land use were also described at each investigation site. Areas not accessible to the drill truck (wet areas and bush areas) were investigated with a hand auger to a maximum depth of 1.2 m.
The soils were sampled for laboratory analyses at two sites. Only the lower subsoils were sampled at the two sites. Soil analyses were carried out by IEH Services Canada Laboratories in Brooks, Alberta using standard methods (McKeague 1978) as listed on the following page:
______Pedology Consultants Ltd.______Mentiga 6
Analysis Extraction Determination Reference pH (water) Saturated Paste Electrodes Page 68 Electrical Conductivity Saturated Extract Conductivity Bridge Page 70
Soluble Salts and SAR Saturated Extract Atoms. Ab. – Tech. II Page 68-70 (Ca, Mg, Na)
%Saturation Saturated Paste %H2O added Page 69
Electrical conductivity (EC), saturation percentage (Sat%), sodium adsorption ration (SAR) and soil reaction (pH) were determined on the two subsoil samples collected.
The areas delineated on the Environmental Alignment Sheets are called Map Delineations. The label of a Map Delineation identifies a Soil Unit in the numerator and the Topographic Class in the denominator. Also indicated in the numerator (in parenthesis) is the average depth or range in depth of the topsoil, in cm. For example, the notation:
AGS(20) 3
identifies an area of well to moderately well drained Orthic and Eluviated Black Chernozems developed on loam to clay loam textured till (Angus Ridge soils) on Topographic Class 3 (2-5% slopes). The average depth of topsoil in the Map Unit is 20 cm.
3.2 Soil Units
The Soil Units identified along the proposed route are described on the following pages. A key to the soils is presented in Table 1. The extent of the various soils is shown in Table 2. Laboratory analyses of sampled soils are provided in Table 3 and Appendix E.
______Pedology Consultants Ltd.______Mentiga 7 3.2.1 Angus Ridge (AGS) Soils
EXTENT: 0.58 km or 17% of the proposed route
SOIL CLASSIFICATION: Orthic and Eluviated Black Chernozems
PARENT MATERIAL: Loam to clay loam textured till
DRAINAGE: Well to moderately well
SURFACE STONINESS: Slight to moderately stony (S1-2)
TOPOGRAPHY: Gently undulating to undulating (0.5-5% slopes)
TYPICAL PROFILE DESCRIPTION: Site 109
Depth Horizon (cm) Colour Texture Structure Consistence
Ap 0-30 black L m.f.gran. friable
Bm 30-105 yellowish brown CL m.f.sbk. firm
Ck 105-170 light olive brown CL massive firm
COMMENTS:
Angus Ridge soils occur in the extreme western and eastern portions of the proposed route. Topsoil thickness varies from 30-50 cm. Colour differentiation between the topsoil and subsoil is excellent. Topsoil thickness within a map unit can sometimes be highly variable. It is not uncommon to have as much as 10 cm differentiation in topsoil depth over a few metres especially along fence lines where topsoil drift frequently occurs. These soils are generally non-saline and non-sodic to the 1.7 m depth.
______Pedology Consultants Ltd.______Mentiga 8 3.2.2 Haight (HGT) Soils
EXTENT: 0.11 km or 3.2% of the proposed route
SOIL CLASSIFICATION: Orthic and Rego Humic Gleysols
PARENT MATERIAL: Clay loam to clay textured glaciolacustrine or till
DRAINAGE: Poorly
SURFACE STONINESS: Stone-free to slightly stony (S0-1)
TOPOGRAPHY: Depressional and level to gently undulating (0-2% slopes)
TYPICAL PROFILE DESCRIPTION: Site inferred
Depth Horizon (cm) Colour Texture Structure Consistence
Ap 0-33 black L m.m.gran. friable to firm
Bg 45-65 mottled yellowish brown CL-C w.f.sbk. firm and sticky
Cg 65-160 mottled brown to CL-C massive firm and sticky dark brown
COMMENTS:
Haight soils are of minor extent. They only occur in a poorly drained level to depressional area in the extreme western portion of the proposed route. Topsoil thickness is about 35 cm. Colour differentiation between topsoils and subsoils is good. These soils are generally non-saline and non-sodic to the 1.7 m depth. Haight soils are poorly drained and fine textured. These features result in these soils being highly susceptible to soil compaction and rutting. Unstable walls may also be a problem in excessively wet areas.
______Pedology Consultants Ltd.______Mentiga 9 3.2.3 Mundare (MDR) Soils
EXTENT: 0.88 km or 25.6% of the proposed route
SOIL CLASSIFICATION: Orthic Black Chernozem
PARENT MATERIAL: Loamy sand textured glaciofluvial
DRAINAGE: Well to rapidly
SURFACE STONINESS: Stone-free (S0)
TOPOGRAPHY: Gently undulating to undulating (0.5-5% slopes)
TYPICAL PROFILE DESCRIPTION: Site 110
Depth Horizon (cm) Colour Texture Structure Consistence
Ap 0-25 black LS-SL single grain loose
Bm 25-80 dark yellowish brown LS single grain loose
C 80-170 light olive brown LS single grain loose
COMMENTS:
Mundare soils occur in the central and extreme eastern portions of the proposed route. Topsoil thickness varies from 23-64 cm but most profiles have 25-30 cm of topsoil. Colour differentiation between topsoils and subsoils is excellent. Mundare soils are characterized by loamy sand textured glaciofluvial material to a depth of at least 1.7 m. These soils, because of their loose consistence and very coarse texture, lack cohesion properties which will result in unstable trench walls when vertically ditched. Mundare soils are non-saline and non-sodic to the 1.7 m depth.
______Pedology Consultants Ltd.______Mentiga 10 3.2.4 Ukalta (UKT) Soils
EXTENT: 1.77 km or 51.8% of the proposed route
SOIL CLASSIFICATION: Orthic Black Chernozem
PARENT MATERIAL: Sandy loam textured glaciofluvial veneer overlying loam to clay loam textured till
DRAINAGE: Well to moderately well
SURFACE STONINESS: Stone-free to slightly stony (S0-1)
TOPOGRAPHY: Gently undulating to undulating (0.5-5% slopes)
TYPICAL PROFILE DESCRIPTION: Site 115
Depth Horizon (cm) Colour Texture Structure Consistence
Ap 0-29 black SL single grain very friable
Bm 29-70 yellowish brown SL single grain very friable
IIBt 70-90 dark yellowish brown L-CL m.m.sbk. firm
IICk 90-170 olive brown L-CL massive firm
COMMENTS:
Ukalta soils are the dominant soils along the proposed route. These soils occur sporadically throughout the proposed route but are more common in the central and eastern portions. Ukalta soils are characterized by 34-120 cm of sandy loam textured glaciofluvial material overlying loam to clay loam textured till. Topsoil thickness varies from 29-50 cm and can be quite variable within a map unit. There is excellent colour differentiation between topsoils and subsoils.
______Pedology Consultants Ltd.______Mentiga 11 The upper glaciofluvial material, when thick (>60 cm thick after topsoil removal), may be susceptible to unstable trench walls when vertically ditched because of the sandy loam texture. Sometimes a thin, gravelly layer (5-10 cm thick) occurs at the contact to the underlying finer textured till. Ukalta soils are generally non-saline but the underlying till may be weakly saline and sodic.
______Pedology Consultants Ltd.______Mentiga 12 3.2.5 Miscellaneous Land Units
During the course of the soil survey, two miscellaneous land units, namely; Rough Broken Slopes (RB) and Stream Channels (SC) were identified.
The approach slope on the east side of the unnamed tributary to the Vermilion River is identified by the Rough Broken Land Unit (RB). The approach slope is highly susceptible to soil erosion and slumping when the protective vegetation is removed. Special procedures for erosion control are required on this moderate slope (diversion berms). It is important that a vegetative cover is established as quickly as possible to prevent soil erosion. Topsoil depth is about 20 cm. Rough Broken Slopes occupy 0.04 km or 1.3% of the proposed route.
Undifferentiated Regosolic and Gleysolic soils developed on recent fluvial sediments are identified by the Stream Channel Land Unit (SC). These drainage channels vary widely in drainage, texture, and soluble salt content. Most areas are poorly drained. Topsoil thickness is highly variable but most areas probably have 15-25 cm of topsoil. One Stream Channel occurs along the drain in the eastern portion of the proposed route in SW 05-54-14 W4M where it occupies 0.04 km or 1.1% of the proposed route.
______Pedology Consultants Ltd.______Mentiga 13 Table 1. Key to the Soils.
Soil Soil Soil Parent Texture Drainage Symbol Name Classification Material Class Class
AGS Angus Ridge Orthic Black Chernozem till loam to clay loam well to Eluviated Black Chernozem moderately well
HGT Haight Orthic Humic Gleysol till or glaciolacustrine clay loam to clay poorly Rego Humic Gleysol
MDR Mundare Orthic Black Chernozem glaciofluvial loamy sand well to rapidly
UKT Ukalta Orthic Black Chernozem glaciofluvial veneer sandy loam well to overlying till overlying loam to moderately well clay loam
Miscellaneous Land Units
RB Rough Broken Moderate slopes along drainage courses
SC Stream Channel Undifferentiated Regosolic and Gleysolic soils developed on recent fluvial sediments
Table 2. Extent of Various Soils Along the Proposed Route.
Soil Symbol Soil Name km Percent
AGS Angus Ridge 0.58 17.0 HGT Haight 0.11 3.2 MDR Mundare 0.88 25.6 UKT Ukatla 1.77 51.8 Miscellaneous Land Units: RB Rough Broken 0.04 1.3 SC Stream Channel 0.041 1.1 Total 3.4 km 100.0%
3.3 Soil Suitability for Reclamation
The criteria used to rate soil suitability are those proposed by the Soil Quality Criteria Subcommittee of the Alberta Soils Advisory Committee (1987). These guidelines, reproduced in Appendix B, provide a subjective evaluation (Good, Fair, Poor, Unsuitable) of suitability based on interpretation of physical and chemical properties of the soils. The ratings are based on general predictions of soil performance and do not consider varying requirements of individual plant species or special management input. Ratings have been assigned to the soils using their physical characteristics and results from laboratory analyses for those soils sampled while for those soils that were not sampled, ratings are based on field observations. Laboratory results and soil suitability
______Pedology Consultants Ltd.______Mentiga 14 ratings of sampled soils are presented in Table 3. Suitability ratings of the soils for reclamation is presented in Table 4.
Topsoils of most soils along the proposed route are rated as Fair-Good (F-G) quality material for reclamation. Sometimes the soil reaction (pH) is less than desirable or optimum. Topsoils of Angus Ridge, Haight and Ukalta soils all have desirable textures and are rated as Fair-Good (F-G) quality material. Topsoils of Mundare soils are coarse textured and are considered Fair-Poor (F-P) quality material for reclamation due to their loamy sand surface texture.
Considerable variation in suitability occurs in the subsoils of the soils along the proposed route. Subsoils of Angus Ridge soils are rated as Fair (F) quality material due mainly to a moderately fine texture limitation while subsoils of Haight soils are clay loam to clay textured and considered Fair- Poor (F-P) quality material for reclamation due to a fine texture limitation. The upper subsoil of Ukalta soils is rated as Fair-Good (F-G) quality material while the underlying clay loam textured till is considered Fair (F) quality material. Subsoils of Mundare soils are loamy sand textured and are rated as Poor (P) quality material due to a coarse texture limitation.
______Pedology Consultants Ltd.______Mentiga 15 Table 3. Soil Characteristics of Sampled Soils.
Reclamation Organic Suitability Soil Depth pH EC Sat Carbon Field Rating and Site Unit Horizon (cm) (H2O) (dS/m) (%) SAR (%) Texture Limitations*
114 Ukalta IICk 70-170 6.7 0.3 41 0.4 - clay loam F(6) (UKT)
118 Ukalta IICk 70-170 7.8 0.8 43 0.9 - clay loam F(1,6) (UKT)
* Limitations Ratings (After ASAC, 1987) 1 – pH 2 – EC G – Good 3 – SAR F – Fair 4 – Sat% P – Poor 5 – Stoniness U – Unsuitable 6 – Texture 7 – Consistence 8 – Organic Carbon
Table 4. Suitability Ratings of the Soils for Reclamation. Suitability Ratings Soil Soil Soil Parent Symbol Name Classification Material Topsoil* Subsoil
AGS Angus Ridge Orthic and Eluviated till F-G(30-50) F Black Chernozems
HGT Haight Orthic Humic Gleysol till or glaciolacustrine F-G(35) F-P Rego Humic Gleysol
MDR Mundare Orthic Black Chernozem glaciofluvial F-P(23-64) P
UKT Ukalta Gleyed Black Chernozem glaciofluvial F-G(29-50) F-G/F overlying till
* Range in depth of topsoil in parentheses (cm) Suitability Ratings: G - Good F - Fair P - Poor U - Unsuitable
3.4 Evaluation of the Soils for Alternate Soil Handling
The criteria used to determine if a Soil Unit should be subjected to an alternate soil handling procedure are those proposed by the APESC (1996). These guidelines, reproduced in Appendix C, provide a decision on whether a particular soil type should be subjected to an alternate soil handling procedure to maintain soil capability. An alternate soil handling procedure consists of either over- stripping the topsoil or a three-lift procedure. In a three-lift soil handling procedure the soil is removed and replaced as three separate layers, namely; topsoil, upper subsoil and lower subsoil. Soil characteristics that are important in determining an alternate soil handling procedure include topsoil thickness, upper subsoil thickness, the presence or absence of a Bnt horizon, stone or gravel content, the presence or absence of sodic bedrock, texture, salinity, sodicity and the map unit length. The
______Pedology Consultants Ltd.______Mentiga 16 minimum map unit length is generally considered 100 m. Evaluation of all the soils encountered along the proposed route for an alternate soil handling procedure is presented in Table 5. The salt contamination assessment guidelines of Alberta Environment (2001) were also used in the evaluation.
No soils along the proposed route have been identified as requiring an alternate soil handling procedure to maintain soil capability.
Table 5. Evaluation of the Soils for Alternate Soil Handling.
Soil Soil Soil Parent Topsoil Depth Alternate Symbol Name Classification Material Range (cm) Handling
AGS Angus Ridge Orthic and Eluviated till 30-50 No Black Chernozems
HGT Haight Orthic and Rego glaciolacustrine 35 No Humic Gleysols or till
MDR Mundare Orthic Black Chernozem glaciofluvial 23-64 No
UKT Ukalta Orthic Black Chernozem glaciofluvial 29-50 No overlying till
3.5 Soil Nutrient Analysis
Although no surface samples were specifically collected for nutrient analysis and fertilizer recommendations for new grass on the Project, surface samples were collected for nutrient analysis and fertilizer recommendations on the Project located just to the west (Mentiga Pedology Consultants, 2012). Laboratory analysis in that Project indicates that hay fields and pasture lands are deficient in nitrogen and phosphorous. Adequate amounts of potassium and sulphur occur in the soils sampled. IEH Services Canada Laboratories in Brooks, Alberta recommends 110 lbs of nitrogen and 45 lbs of phosphorous per acre to obtain average yields of new grass.
3.6 Soil Erosion Hazard
Soil erosion hazard is the expected rapidity and amount of soil loss, by water and/or wind that may be expected in an area following removal of the protective vegetation cover and failure to implement the proper erosion control measures.
The rate of erosion depends on several factors: the amount, intensity, and seasonal distribution of rainfall; the steepness and length of slopes; the absence or presence of channels of concentration; the type of vegetation cover; and the nature of the soil. Infiltration capacity and
______Pedology Consultants Ltd.______Mentiga 17 structure stability are two significant soil characteristics influencing water erosion while particle size, durability of surface cloudiness, rock fragments, organic matter and lime content are important soil characteristics influencing wind erosion. According to Coote and Pettapiece (1989), wind is not considered a major erosion agent along the proposed route. They map the area along the proposed route as having a Low wind erosion risk. Water (spring snow melt and summer rainfall storm intensities and duration) is also considered an erosion agent but due to the relatively flat terrain over most of the proposed route, water is not considered a serious erosion agent either.
The soil mapping units along the proposed route were rated for wind and water soil erosion hazard according to the guidelines in Appendix D. Ratings of all the map units encountered along the proposed route are provided in Table 6.
Soils with loam surface textures are rated as having a Moderate (M) wind erosion hazard when the vegetation is disturbed. This includes all the Angus Ridge and Haight soils. Soils with sandy surface textures are rated as having a High (H) wind erosion hazard. This includes all of the Mundare and Ukalta soils which make up about 80% of the proposed route. Therefore wind erosion of soil particles can be a major concern. Mitigation measures may have to be implemented when constructing the pipeline. Mitigation measures may include stabilizing topsoil windrows and stockpiles using either water or a suitable tackifier as directed by the Environmental Inspector(s). Refer to the Soil Erosion Contingency Plan (Appendix 1E of the Environmental Protection Plan) for additional measures.
All soils occurring on less than 10% slopes are rated as having a Slight (S) water erosion hazard. Since slopes seldom exceed 5%, water erosion of soil particles should not be a major concern. Only the Rough Broken Slope along a drainage course in the eastern portion of the proposed route is rated as having a High (H) water erosion hazard. Special procedures for erosion control (diversion berms) may be required on the Rough Broken Slope.
______Pedology Consultants Ltd.______Mentiga 18 Table 6. Wind and Water Soil Erosion Hazard Ratings of Map Units Along the Proposed Route* Map Unit Wind Erosion Hazard** Water Erosion Hazard** AGS(30)/2-3 M S AGS(50)/2-3 M S
HGT(35)/1 M S
MDR(25-30)/2-3 H S MDR(65)/3 H S
UKT(30)/2-3 H S UKT(35-40)/2-3 H S UKT(35)/3 H S UKT(50)/3 H S
Miscellaneous Land Units:
RB(20)/5 H H
SC H S-M
* According to guidelines provided in Appendix D ** S – Slight M – Moderate H – High
3.7 Soil Compaction
All soils are susceptible to soil compaction and rutting if unfavourable moisture conditions prevail at the time of construction. However, some soils are more prone to soil compaction than others, because of their physical characteristics (texture) and drainage.
Only poorly drained Haight soils which are confined to the extreme western portion of the proposed route, are highly susceptible to soil compaction and rutting. In general less than 5% of the soils along the proposed pipeline route are poorly drained and susceptible to soil compaction and rutting.
______Pedology Consultants Ltd.______Mentiga 19 4.0 MATERIAL HANDLING RECOMMENDATIONS
Topsoil salvage is intended to ensure that quality of agricultural land is maintained. The total depth of topsoil, up to a maximum depth of 50 cm, should be salvaged. Topsoil is a better growth medium than the underlying subsoil. Topsoils are easily distinguished from subsoils by colour and the average depth of topsoil is indicated on the Environmental Alignment Sheets in the Map Unit designation.
In general, a successful reclamation program can be achieved by salvaging the topsoil materials on cultivated lands, tame pasture and treed lands. Topsoil should be salvaged over the ditch-line and spoil-side areas on all cultivated lands. Topsoil only needs to be salvaged over the ditch-line (blade-width) on all tame pasture and treed lands. Full right-of-way stripping is also an acceptable technique during non-frozen conditions to minimize the potential for topsoil/subsoil mixing.
Unstable trench walls will be a concern in sandy textured soil areas (Mundare and some of the Ukalta soils). These soils occupy about 80% of the proposed route but the Ukalta soils that have less than 60 cm of sandy textured material remaining after the topsoil has been removed may not have unstable trench walls. Topsoil should be salvaged over a wide enough area in these soil areas to prevent loss of topsoil, if trench instability occurs. These same soils are also highly susceptible to wind erosion when the protective surface vegetation is disturbed. Wind erosion mitigative measures may have to be implemented when constructing the pipeline. If there is potential for wind erosion, consider straw crimping or applying water and/or tackifier to reduce erosion.
No soils along the proposed route have been identified as requiring an alternate soil handling procedure to maintain soil capability. Soil characteristics and their implications to pipelining are provided in Table 7.
______Pedology Consultants Ltd.______Mentiga 20 Table 7. Soil Characteristics and their Implications to Pipelining.
Colour Topsoil Differentiation Susceptible Erosion Depth between 5 to Soil Susceptible Soil Soil Soil Parent Texture Drainage Range Topsoil Hazards Compaction To Trench Recommendations Comments or Other Symbol Name Classification1 Material2 Class3 Class4 (cm) and Subsoil Wind Water and Rutting Instability Concerns
AGS Angus Ridge Orthic and T L-CL W-MW 30-50 Excellent M S - - - Eluviated Black Chernozems
HGT Haight Orthic and GL or T CL-C P 35 Good M S Yes - Prior to topsoil replacement, rip - susceptible to unstable Rego Humic compacted subsoils on the trench walls in Gleysol construction right-of-way with a excessively wet areas multi-shank ripper or breaking disc to depth of 30 cm or the depth of compaction, whichever is deeper. As trenching proceeds, identify areas of potential trench wall instability that may affect unstripped topsoil areas. Strip a wider area if the trench walls slough into the ditch and the potential for mixing of topsoil and subsoil exists. Back slope trench wall until stable.
MDR Mundare Orthic Black GF LS W-R 23-64 Excellent H S - Yes Stabilize topsoil windrows and - Chernozem stockpiles using either water or a suitable tackifier as directed by the Environmental Inspector(s).
UKT Ukalta Orthic Black GF/T SL/L-CL W-MW 29-50 Excellent H S - Yes* Stabilize topsoil windrows and - surface stoniness may be Chernozem stockpiles using either water or increased due to a suitable tackifier as directed underlying till by the Environmental Inspector(s). * Susceptible to trench instability when sandy textured material is greater than 60 cm thick after topsoil removal. 1. Soil Classification according to the Soil Classification Working Group (1998).
2. Parent Material 3. Texture Classes 4. Drainage Classes 5. Erosion Hazards GF - glaciofluvial C - clay R - rapidly S - slight GL - glaciolacustrine CL - clay loam W - well M - moderate T - till L - loam MW - moderately well H - high LS - loamy sand I - imperfectly SL - sandy loam P - poorly
______Pedology Consultants Ltd.______Mentiga 21 5.0 REFERENCES
Alberta Environment. 2001. Salt Contamination Assessment and Reclamation Guidelines. Environmental Sciences Division, Environmental Services. Pub. No. T/606.
Alberta Soils Advisory Committee (ASAC). 1987. Soil Quality Criteria Relative to Disturbance and Reclamation. Prepared by the Soil Quality Criteria Working Group. Alberta Agriculture.
Alberta Soil Series Working Group. 2006. Alberta Soil Names Generation 3 Users’ Handbook. Land Resource Unit, Research Branch. Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada.
Alberta Pipeline Environmental Steering Committee (APESC). 1996. Guidelines for Alternate Soil Handling Procedures During Pipeline Construction. Prepared for Soil Handling Sub-Committee of the APESC. Prepared by W.W. Pettapiece and M.W. Dell. June, 1996.
Bowser, W.E., A.A. Kjearsgaard, T.W. Peters and R.E. Wells. 1962. Soil Survey of Edmonton Sheet (83-H). Alberta Soil Survey Report No. 21. Edmonton, AB.
Coote, D.R. and W.W.Pettapiece. 1989. Wind Erosion Risk. Canada-Alberta Soil Inventory, Land Resource Research Centre, Research Branch, Agriculture Canada. Contribution No. 87-08.
Hamilton, W.N., Price, M.C. and Langenberg, C.W. (Compilers). 1999. Geological Map of Alberta. Alberta Geological Survey, Alberta Energy and Utilities Board. Map No. 236, Scale 1:1,000,000.
McKeague, J.A. 1978. Manual on Soil Sampling and Method of Analysis. 2nd ed., Can. Soc. Soil Sci.
Mentiga Pedology Consultants Ltd. 2012. Soil Survey and Reclamation Suitability Evaluation of the Proposed ATCO Norma Extension Pipeline Project. Prepared for TERA Environmental Consultants on behalf of ATCO Pipelines. File # 11037A.1.
Soil Classification Working Group. 1998. The Canadian System of Soil Classification. 3rd ed. Agriculture and Food Canada.
______Pedology Consultants Ltd.______Mentiga 21
APPENDIX A
SUMMARY OF SOIL INVESTIGATION SITES
______Pedology Consultants Ltd.______Mentiga 22 KEY TO SITE INSPECTION LIST
SOIL UNITS:
AGS - Angus Ridge HGT - Haight MDR - Mundare UKT - Ukalta
MISCELLANEOUS LAND UNITS:
RB - Rough Broken SC - Stream Channel
SOIL CLASSIFICATION:
O.BLC - Orthic Black Chernozem
PARENT MATERIAL:
GF - glaciofluvial GL - glaciolacustrine T - till
TOPOGRAPHY CLASSES:
1 - 0 - 0.5% level 2 - >0.5 - 2% nearly level 3 - >2 - 5% very gentle slopes 4 - >5 - 10% gentle slopes 5 - >10 - 15% moderate slopes
DRAINAGE CLASSES:
R - rapidly W - well MW - moderately well I - imperfectly P - poorly
SURFACE STONINESS CLASSES:
S0 - nonstony (stones > 25 m apart) S1 - slightly stony (stones 8-25 m apart) S2 - moderately stony (stones 1-8 m apart) S3 - very stony (stones 0.5-1 m apart)
PRESENT LAND USE:
C - cultivated T - treed
______Pedology Consultants Ltd.______Mentiga 23 SITE INSPECTION LIST Depth of Surface Present Soil Parent Topsoil Dominant Texture Topographic Drainage Stoniness Land Site Unit Classification Material (cm) Topsoil/Subsoil Class Class Class Use Comments 109 AGS O.BLC T 30 L/CL 2-3 W-MW S1 C 110 MDR O.BLC GF 25 LS/LS 3 R S0 C 111 MDR O.BLC GF 23 LS/LS 2-3 R S0 C 112 MDR O.BLC GF 31 LS/LS 2-3 R S0-1 C 113 UKT O.BLC GF/T 34 SL/(L/L-CL) 2-3 W-MW S0-1 C till at 34 cm 114 UKT O.BLC GF/T 42 L/(SL/CL) 2-3 W-MW S0-1 C till at 57 cm 115 UKT O.BLC GF/T 29 SL-L/(SL-L/CL) 2-3 W-MW S0-1 C till at 70 cm 116 UKT O.BLC GF/T 50 L-SL/(L-SL/CL) 2-3 W-MW S0-1 C till at 70 cm 117 UKT O.BLC GF/T 34 L-SL/(L-SL/CL) 3 W S0-1 C till at 120 cm 118 UKT O.BLC GF/T 37 L-SL/(L-SL/CL) 3 W S0-1 C till at 70 cm 119 MDR O.BLC GF 64 LS/LS 3 W-R S0 C 120 AGS O.BLC T 50 L/L 2-3 MW S0-1 C
______Pedology Consultants Ltd.______Mentiga 24
APPENDIX B
GUIDELINES FOR RECLAMATION RATINGS
______Pedology Consultants Ltd.______Mentiga 25
Criteria for Evaluating Suitability of Topsoil Material for Revegetation in the Plains Region.
Rating/Property Good(G) Fair (F) Poor (P) Unsuitable (U)
Reaction (pH) 6.5-7.5 5.5-6.4 & 4.5-5.4 & <4.5 and >9.0 7.6-8.4 8.5-9.0
Salinity (E.C.) <2 2-4 4-8 >8 (dS/m)
Sodicity (SAR) <4 4-8 8-12 >12*
Saturation (%) 30-60 20-30 15-20, <15 and >120 60-80 80-120
Stoniness Class S0, S1 S2 S3, S4 S5
Texture FSL, VFSL, CL, SCL, LS, SiC, L, SL, SiL SiCL C**, S, HC***
Moist Very friable Loose Firm, Extremely firm Consistence Friable Very firm
Organic Carbon (%) >2 1-2 <1
CaCO3 <2 2-20 20-70 >70 Equivalent (%)
* Materials characterized by an SAR of 12 to 20 may be rated as Poor if texture is sandy loam or coarser and saturation % is less than 100.
** C – may be upgraded to Fair or Good in some arid areas
*** HC – may be upgraded to Fair or Good in some arid areas
Source: Soil Quality Criteria Relative to Disturbance and Reclamation; Alberta Soils Advisory Committee (1987).
______Pedology Consultants Ltd.______Mentiga 26
Criteria for Evaluating Suitability of Subsoil Material for Revegetation in the Plains Region.
Rating/Property Good(G) Fair (F) Poor (P) Unsuitable (U)
Reaction (pH) 6.5-7.5 5.5-6.4 & 4.5-5.4 & <4.5 and >9.0 7.6-8.5 8.6-9.0
Salinity (E.C.) <3 3-5 5-10 >10 (dS/m)
Sodicity (SAR) <4 4-8 8-12 >12*
Saturation (%) 30-60 20-30, 15-20, <15 and >120 60-80 80-120
Stone Content <3 3-25 25-50 >50 (% Volume)
Texture FSL, VFSL, CL, SCL, S, LS, SiC, Bedrock L, SiL, SL SiCL C, HC
Moist Consistence Very friable Loose, Very firm Extremely firm Friable Firm
Gypsum The suitability criteria for sodicity (SAR) may be altered by the presence of high levels of either lime (CaCO3) or gypsum (CaSO4) in excess of other soluble salts. CaCO3 Equivalent (%)
* Materials characterized by an SAR of 12 to 20 may be rated as Poor if texture is sandy loam or coarser and saturation % is less than 100.
Source: Soil Quality Criteria Relative to Disturbance and Reclamation; Alberta Soils Advisory Committee (1987).
______Pedology Consultants Ltd.______Mentiga 27
APPENDIX C
GUIDELINES FOR ALTERNATIVE SOIL HANDLING PROCEDURES DURING PIPELINE CONSTRUCTION
(After: APESC, June 1996)
______Pedology Consultants Ltd.______Mentiga 28
CRITERIA FOR ALTERNATIVE SOIL HANDLING PROCEDURES
The criteria in this section are not presented in any order of priority. Also, there is a soil handling procedure decision flow chart at the end of this section which may be helpful in applying the criteria.
Soil Handling Unit
The soil handling unit is the soil map unit. All units identified on a map with a particular symbol (soil map unit delineation) should be handled in the same manner.
Soil Handling Unit Length
A soil handling unit length is equivalent to one soil map unit delineation at a map scale of 1:10,000. Except for situation where there are strongly contrasting soils or topographic features (e.g. bedrock ridge, stream channels, pot holes) the soil handling length would normally be a minimum of 100 m. The minimum soil handling length and the minimum soil map unit size are assumed to be equal.
Soil Sampling Criteria for Problem Soil Management
Sufficient soil sampling (based on professional judgment) should be completed to determine if the map unit delineation should be considered for alternative soil handling. If problem soils are anticipated, there should be at least one sample every 400 m.
Additional soil investigations or sampling may be required at a later time to better define a problem soil area identified by the pedologist in the initial survey. If an alternative soil handling candidate map unit delineation is less than or equal to 400 m in length and there are no soil chemistry data for that unit, the entire map unit delineation should be considered for alternative soil handling.
Further soil investigations or sampling is suggested as necessary to reduce the length of alternative handling procedures as requested or suggested by the field pedologist.
Topsoil Thickness Criteria
For topsoil stripping, the average topsoil thickness in a map unit delineation must be between 10 cm and 35 cm, and must be of “better quality” than the upper subsoil. Actual stripping depths can be modified during construction by on-site inspection. Again, special situations might suggest consideration of <10 cm.
Upper Subsoil Thickness Criteria
The average thickness of the upper subsoil of the soil map must be greater than 15 cm before separate subsoil lift handling is considered.
Maximum aggregate thickness of topsoil and upper subsoil to be separately handled is 50 cm. Therefore, the maximum amount of upper subsoil to be separately salvaged is 40 cm. This limit is set to allow for better planning of right-of-way width requirements.
Actual stripping depths can be modified during construction by on-site inspection.
______Pedology Consultants Ltd.______Mentiga 29
Stone or Gravel Content (Coarse Fragments) Criteria
Alternate soil handling procedures will be considered when the upper subsoil is non-gravelly or non- stony material and:
i) the lower subsoil (50 cm to trench depth) has a coarse fragment (>2 mm in diameter) content of >35% if gravelly and >20% if cobbly (See Agriculture Canada 1987 for details). ii) consolidated bedrock is encountered that would break into hard fragments with trenching.
Sodic Bedrock Criteria
Alternate soil handling procedures will be considered when the upper subsoil has an electrical conductivity (EC) of less than 8 dS/m and the lower subsoil includes sodic bedrock which, by definition, has a SAR greater than 15.
Subsoil Salinity
As a general guide for identifying problem areas and to avoid those areas with a minor amount of lower subsoil that meets the chemistry criteria identified in Section 5.9, alternative soil handling procedures should be considered when: lower subsoil with an EC of greater than 10 dS/m occupies 50% or more by depth of the material below 50 cm to trench depth. These numbers should not be taken as definitive but rather to alert the assessor of potential problems. Also, this criterion should not be dealt with in isolation from other characteristics such as the presence of Bn or Bnt horizons.
Salinity Criteria for Three-Lift
Three-lift procedures should be considered when the upper subsoil has an EC of less than 8 dS/m and the following conditions for salinity are met:
i) pre-construction EC of the upper subsoil must be less than 8dS/m, ii) Threshold EC of lower subsoil must be exceeded (see table), and iii) critical difference EC (lower subsoil minus upper subsoil) must be greater than or equal to 4 dS/m
Soil Zone Upper Subsoil Lower Subsoil Critical Difference EC (dS/m) Threshold EC (dS/m) EC (dS/m) Brown <8 >5 >4 Dark Brown <8 >6 >4 Others <8 >8 >4
______Pedology Consultants Ltd.______Mentiga 30
______Pedology Consultants Ltd.______Mentiga 31
APPENDIX D
GUIDELINES FOR WIND AND WATER SOIL EROSION HAZARD RATINGS
______Pedology Consultants Ltd.______Mentiga 32
Criteria for Evaluating Wind Soil Erosion Hazard in the Vegreville Area*
Rating Characteristics
Slightly to None All soils with SiCL or CL surface textures and containing at least (S) 3 percent organic matter.
Moderate All soils with L or SiL surface textures and containing at least 3 (M) percent organic matter
High All soils with LS, S or SL surface textures and containing at least (H) 3 percent organic matter
Criteria for Evaluating Water Soil Erosion Hazard in the Vegreville Area*
Rating Characteristics
Slightly to None All soils with SiL and SiCL surface textures occurring on less (S) than 5 percent slopes. All soils with L and SL surface textures occurring on less than 9 percent slopes. Little erosion can be expected with minimal disturbance. All poorly and very poorly drained soils on level and enclosed depressional positions of the landscape. No erosion can be expected; however, additions will occur if the surrounding upland is disbursed.
Moderate All soils with SiL and SiCL surface textures occurring on 5 to 9 (M) percent slopes. All soils with L and SL surface textures occurring on 9 to 15 percent slopes. Rill erosion and some gullying can be expected.
High All soils with SiL and SiCL surface textures occurring on greater (H) than 9 percent slopes. All soils with L and SL surface textures occurring on greater than 15 percent slopes. Extensive gullying can be expected when the protective vegetation is removed.
* These guidelines were developed by Al Twardy and are based on review of local literature, review of U.S.A. guidelines and practical experience.
______Pedology Consultants Ltd.______Mentiga 33
APPENDIX E
LABORATORY RESULTS
______Pedology Consultants Ltd.______Mentiga 34 ______Pedology Consultants Ltd.______Mentiga 35
______Pedology Consultants Ltd.______Mentiga 36
APPENDIX F
SOILS LEGEND
______Pedology Consultants Ltd.______Mentiga 37
SOILS LEGEND
Soil Soil Soil Parent Texture Drainage Symbol Name Classification Material Class Class
AGS Angus Ridge Orthic Black Chernozem till loam to clay loam well to Eluviated Black Chernozem moderately well
HGT Haight Orthic Humic Gleysol till or glaciolacustrine clay loam to clay poorly Rego Humic Gleysol
MDR Mundare Orthic Black Chernozem glaciofluvial loamy sand well to rapidly
UKT Ukalta Orthic Black Chernozem glaciofluvial veneer sandy loam well to overlying till overlying loam to moderately well clay loam
Miscellaneous Land Units
RB Rough Broken Moderate slopes along drainage courses
SC Stream Channel Undifferentiated Regosolic and Gleysolic soils developed on recent fluvial sediments
NOTATIONS: TOPOGRAPHY CLASSES: PRESENT LAND USE:
1 - 0 - 0.5% level cultivated 2 - > 0.5 - 2% nearly level treed 3 - > 2 - 5% very gentle slopes tame pasture 4 - > 5 - 10% gentle slopes 5 - > 10 - 15% moderate slopes
______Pedology Consultants Ltd.______Mentiga 38