Rothermich. of the Nancy, who is back in the audience, and Bernie Maza took most samples that were taken, sometimes _together and sometimes with another team member. (REECo 34). mislabeled. We had a horror of losing a specimen or getting one The first thing we did was to make out an ID tag which went into a little ziplock baggy. The baggies went into the bottom of the large plastic bag in which the specimen was collected. (REECo 35). There was a question raised about site identification. We're taking a polaroid picture there, and -- I'm sorry, that's a 35-m. 10 We took 35 mm from three different positions taken with the idea that the ll person looking at the picture would be guided in getting back to where the 12 sample site had actually been. 13 where the holes were actually made for future reference in terms of later 14 assessments of the suitability of the microsite. 15 (REECo 36). We also took a polaroid picture of the site We start down in the sampling. This is a 0-5 cm core 16 cutter. 17 (REECo 37). 18 these were actually collected by standing with your heels on the edge of 19 the cookie cutter which is a very precarious place to stand. 20 faster if you can drive the cutter into position. 21 that you pound equally on both sides of the handle so that your cutter is 22 driven vertically. You can see relative size compared to the We drove the core cutters down with a hammer. gloved hand. At one time It goes a lot You need to be careful . 23 (REECo 38). 24 number of locations. 25 its EML sent us a steel driver which was very useful in a The gloves become very much appreciated along about .3:30 on the afternoon of the first day of hammering. The midsize cutter 26 (REECo 39) and the long one (REECo 40). 27 normal procedure would be to take the 0-5 cm core, then the 5-10 cm incre- 28 ment, and finally, with this cutter, the 10-15 cm increment in all of those 114 This one goes down to 15 cms. The