64  Group Check In 09FEB2026

Date: February 9, 2026

64.1 Attendees

  • Randy Riddle
  • Nic Jelinski
  • Nora Pearson
  • Patty Burns

64.2 Taxonomy Documentation and Working Group Updates

64.2.2 Epipedon Work (Separate from Artesol Proposal)

  • Epipedon work is essentially complete
  • Being handled through 14th Edition Working Group led by Andrew. Nic is also member
  • Documentation available on regular taxonomy SharePoint or Box site managed by Andrew’s group
  • Will be integrated through the 14th edition group process

64.2.3 Working Group Structure

  • Two separate Box folders:
    • Andrew’s 14th Keys group (formerly 13th Edition Working Group) for general taxonomy work
    • Randy’s Artesol-specific working group
  • Epipedons handled through regular taxonomy committee, separate from both groups
  • Everything accessible on Box (not SharePoint)

64.2.4 Timeline and Next Steps

  • Artesol proposal will go to 14th Edition Working Group for comment
  • Funding for current work runs out in June
  • Nic will share documentation with Patty and Adam
  • Team reminded that Artesol documentation subject to change
  • Nic has access to working group folders and will share latest documentation with Patty and Adam
  • Patty does not currently have direct access to Randy’s working group folder

64.3 Artifact and Anthropic Classification Criteria

64.3.1 High Artifacts Definition Discussion

  • Randy asked about artifact cutoff criteria being used for high artifacts determination
  • Team reviewed Adam’s documented criteria (from key/documentation)
  • Currently, “Highly artifactual” includes:
    • Anthropic epipedon
    • Soils meeting criteria for HAHT (human-altered and transported) material class other than Spolic
  • Spolic material is “clean” material (15% threshold referenced)
  • Coding system: “ART” designation in Adam’s code indicates highly artifactual

64.3.2 Questions About Spolic Classification

  • Discussion about Spolic material definition
  • Clean material classification mentioned
  • 15% threshold discussed but not fully resolved in this meeting

64.3.3 Particle Size Considerations

  • Randy raised question about particle size family placement when HTM present
  • Particle size typically calculated weighted by thickness for family-level classification
  • Different approaches needed for series-level mapping
  • Question of where to “draw the line” between HTM and natural material
  • Adam has been working on these calculations and documentation

64.3.4 Anthrodensic Features

  • Randy questioned mappability of anthrodensic features
  • Raised good questions about how these features can be mapped in practice
  • Discussion to continue in next meeting with full team

64.4 GIS and Raster Modeling Work

64.4.1 Lead Prediction Modeling (Nora)

  • Working on covariates for lead prediction models. This will be supplemental information for soil survey
  • Same covariates and modeling approach will eventually be used for raster soil survey work
  • Progress represents preparatory work for main raster mapping effort

64.4.2 GIS Collaboration

  • Adam and Joe have been meeting and working together on GIS aspects
  • Suggestion to form GIS subgroup so those not involved don’t need to attend technical discussions

64.4.3 Next Steps for GIS Work

  • Nora will discuss with Joe in tomorrow’s meeting
  • May form subgroup for GIS/modeling discussions
  • Joe to bring Nora up to speed on work done with Adam
  • Small group may coordinate on covariate needs and modeling approach

64.5 Key Development Work

64.5.1 Concept Key Editing (Adam - not present but discussed)

  • Adam working on editing concept key based on Randy and Patty feedback
  • Also working on classifications. Progress on key development ongoing

64.6 Administrative Notes

64.6.1 Topics for Tomorrow’s Full Team Meeting

  • Discuss concept key in detail with full group
  • Address anthrodensic feature mappability questions
  • Follow up on particle size classification approach
  • Discuss GIS/modeling progress if time permits
  • Review any additional questions from Randy’s review of documentation

64.7 Action Items

  • Nic: Share latest Artesol proposal documentation (Version 47) with Patty and Adam
  • Nora: Discuss GIS covariate work and modeling status with Joe at tomorrow’s meeting
  • Nora: Propose GIS subgroup formation for technical discussions
  • Joe: Brief Nora on GIS work completed with Adam
  • Team: Review Randy’s questions about artifact criteria, anthrodensic features, and particle size calculations before tomorrow’s meeting
  • Team: Prepare to discuss concept key with full group tomorrow