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