Laserfiche WebLink
RN07 <br />Page 7 <br />5/30/18 <br /> <br />should be updated. (Rule 2.04.7(1) (a)(i), requiring the applicant to provide the depth below the surface and <br />the horizontal extent of the potentiometric surface of each aquifer above, within and, if potentially impacted, <br />below the lowest coal seam to be mined). <br /> <br />Response: - The referenced baseline characterization for the Wolf Creek mining activities focuses on the suitability <br />characteristics of the Wolf Creek Coal Seam and associated overlying interburden (Wadge Coal Seam and Wadge <br />Overburden were previously characterized). The referenced figures and supporting text discussion are intended to <br />characterize pre-mining baseline hydrologic conditions, and as such, it would be inappropriate to modify this <br />information to reflect an “intermediate” condition representing a postmining or interim-mining condition. The <br />information currently provided in the Permit addresses all applicable requirements of Rule 2.04.7(1). <br /> <br />Resolved <br /> <br />21. In accordance with Rule 2.04.7(1)(a)(iv), ownership, uses and location information for all existing wells, <br />springs and other developed ground water resources must be included in the permit application package. <br />Please address the following issues: <br />a. Wells within the Permit Boundary are referenced to be listed in revised Table 9 for <br />groundwater. Page 2.04-39 references an updated Table 9 from TR13-83 in 2014. The Table <br />9 that the Division currently has in the Permit is from TR99-32, in 2009. Please provide the <br />referenced updated Table 9. <br />b. Wells located within or adjacent to the permit area are referenced to Exhibit 6B, last updated in 2001. <br />This list should be updated to ensure current data is represented. <br /> <br />Response: - The most current version of Table 9 is provided with these responses for replacement in the PAP. The <br />referenced exhibit has been reviewed and updated, as appropriate. If updates were necessary, the updated materials <br />accompany these responses for insertion/replacement in the PAP. <br /> <br />Resolved <br /> <br />2.04.9 Baseline Soils Information <br />22. Rule 2.04.9(1)(b) requires a soils analysis for representative samples of each soil horizon for each soil type <br />for areas to be disturbed by surface operations and facilities. The Division reviewed the information contained <br />in Permit Section 2.04.9, Tables 21, 22 and 23, Exhibit 15 and 16. Using Map 23c, it appears the areas affected <br />by surface disturbance fall within the following soil mapping units depicted on Map 17: 35F, 101, 66F, 34E, <br />35D, 2VD, 56A, 35E, D10, ML, 2, 2C, X8D, 2F, 69C, C10, 68D, 68C, 46E and 102. Table 23 only provides <br />the required information from Rule 2.04.9(1)(b) for the D10 (Binco series) and areas reclaimed in 1976 and <br />1980. For all soil mapping units listed above, does TC have results of a soils analysis with the information <br />required by Rule 2.04.9(1)(b)? If so, please provide this information. <br /> <br />Response: - Large areas within the Foidel Creek Mine Permit Area were previously disturbed by surface mining <br />activities and were subsequently and successfully reclaimed, achieving full Phase III bond release. In addition, the <br />baseline soils description of the PAP provides specific information for each soil type (Exhibit 16, Soil Mapping <br />Unit Descriptions), including identification and discussion of any notable engineering or agrarian limitations. The <br />purpose of the referenced requirement for soils analysis is to identify any suitability limitations of the soils to be <br />disturbed relative to their use as a revegetation planting medium. The combination of previous site experience, <br />where the disturbed soils have been successfully used in reclamation, the information provided by the detailed soil <br />unit descriptions, and several site-specific soils investigations conducted by qualified soil scientists (as described