2015-02-26_INSPECTION - C1981028

Home Browse Search

mine elevations based on the Appendix Q -1 map, the CEC reported post mine elevations based on the SL7 application Figure 2 Map and the elevations collected in the field. Of the 35 GPS points collected in the field, the Division believes five points collected are not representative of the post mine topography. For Area 32, elevation point 1 was found to be 10.79 feet lower than reported elevations. Elevation point 2 was found to be 242.51 feet lower than the reported elevation. Elevation data for points 1 and 2 are significantly different from the reported elevations, more so than the other points measured in the field and the Division believes they are not representative of the post mine elevations. Elevation point 10 was found to be 4.94 feet higher than the reported elevation, which is not as significant a difference when compared to the other elevation data points collected. However, elevation data point 10 gives the appearance that the slope goes slightly uphill from points 9 to 10. Based on my visual observations, the land goes slightly downhill from points 9 to 10. Regarding Area 31, elevation point 11, was found to be 4.14 feet higher than the reported elevation. Elevation point 19 was found to be 3.94 feet higher than the reported elevation. While these differences are not as significant, they give the appearance that the aspect of the slopes on the far west side and far east side of Area 31 that does not coincide with either the approved post mine topography or the reported post mine topography. However, when walking the transect for Area 31, I began on the west side and initially walked up a gradual hill from point 11 to a location between points 13 and 14 and then downhill from there to point 19. These observations are consistent with the reported elevations and are inconsistent with the elevations collected in the field. The cross section generated for Area 31 from the measures elevations gives the appearance of a downhill slopes from point 11 to point 18 to a small rise in elevation to point 19. This cross section of the measured elevations for Area 31 does not coincide with my visual observations in the field due to the error found at points 11 and 19. For Area 32, I walked an east to west transect from elevations points 1 to 10. I walked up a gentle hill from points 1 to point 6 and then downhill to point 10. When evaluating and generating the cross section for Area 32, elevation point 2 was removed from the data as a result of the significant error of the elevation measured discussed above. Without taking into account elevation points 1 and 2, the measured elevations ranged from -.24 feet lower to 4.94 feet higher than the reported elevations. On average, the measured elevations were 1.60 feet higher than the reported elevations. For Area 31, I began on the west side of the area at point 11 and walked east to point 19. Initially, I walked up a gradual hill from point 11 to and location between points 13 and 14 and then downhill from there to point 19. These observations are consistent with the reported elevation. Including elevation points 11 and 19, the measured elevations was found to be -2.69 feet lower to 4.14 feet higher than the reported elevations. On average, the measured elevations were .16 feet higher than the reported elevations. For Area 30, I walked from east to west from elevations points 20 to 28. From my visual observations, I walked up a gentle hill from points 20 to 26 and then downhill to point 28. The measured elevations ranged from 2.29 feet lower to 5.82 feet higher than the reported elevations and on average were 1.20 feet higher. A small drainage is located on the west side of the bond release area. This drainage runs downhill from the south end of the bond release parcels to the north. Four elevation points were collected within the drainage. The measured elevations ranged from 1.23 feet lower to 1.28 feet higher than the reported elevations and were on average .18 feet lower. In conclusion, based on the visual observations made in the field, the shape of the post mine topography coincides with the reported post mine topography. Excluding elevation data points 1 and 2 discuss above, the measured elevations are very similar to the elevations reported in the SL7 bond release application ranging from 2.69 feet lower to 5.82 feet higher and on average only .81 feet higher than reported.