My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2018-09-07_REVISION - C1981010 (2)
DRMS
>
Day Forward
>
Revision
>
Coal
>
C1981010
>
2018-09-07_REVISION - C1981010 (2)
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/10/2018 12:45:54 PM
Creation date
9/10/2018 9:19:24 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1981010
IBM Index Class Name
Revision
Doc Date
9/7/2018
Doc Name
Adequacy Review
From
Trapper Mining Inc
To
DRMS
Type & Sequence
PR9
Email Name
RAR
Media Type
D
Archive
No
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
11
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
7 Please describe to what extent if any, Grouse and Sage systems will receive <br />water from disturbances associated with haul road construction or other pre <br />mining activity associated with N pit development. <br />Trapper Response to Comment 7: Minimal runoff associated with the haulroad stripping and <br />construction area will flow to the Grouse sediment ponds. Sage ponds may not be affected at all and neither <br />system will receive mine water. Their classification as sediment control structures is adequate for any <br />disturbance areas reporting to them. <br />DRMS reviewed the as build designs for the following ponds: Please see <br />associated comments and questions under Rule 2.05.3 (4) below. <br />Johnson #6 <br />Johnson #10 <br />No Name #2 <br />Johnson #7 <br />Middle Pyeatt #1 <br />No Name #4 <br />Johnson #8 <br />Middle Pyeatt #2 <br />No Name #5 <br />Johnson #9 <br />Middle Pyeatt #3 <br />Ute Pond <br />And associated revised pages, 4-184, 4-24; tables: 4.8-7, 4.8.8b, 4.8-11; and <br />maps. DRMS possesses the following questions regarding tables: <br />Table 4.8-7 pages 2 and 3: <br />DRMS noted that the diameter measurements were omitted for East Pyeatt #1 <br />and East Pyeatt #3 ponds. Having clarified this change on the phone with Mr. <br />Roberts stating that the drop outlets/decant systems had been removed from <br />these ponds; DRMS finds that acceptable. <br />TMI states that elevations are based on current topographic information <br />obtained from aerial photographs. DRMS understands that TMI performs <br />detailed elevation measurements utilizing drone technology on an annual basis <br />at Trapper mine. <br />DRMS notes differences in stage height for Horse 1 and East Middle Flume ponds. <br />8 Please discuss these differences with a short explanation of how the <br />new measurement was arrived at. <br />Trapper Response to Comment 8: Enclosed please find revised Tables 4.8-6 and 4.8-7. A thorough review <br />of all the numbers in these tables demonstrated that a few calculation errors had been made over the years <br />and were corrected. <br />9 DRMS notes negative freeboard values for Middle Pyeatt #1 and #3 ponds. As <br />the Middle Pyeatt system is projected to take runoff and possibly mine water <br />from the development of N pit please discuss this situation. <br />Trapper Response to Comment 9: Please note response to Comment 8. <br />Rule: 2.04.10 (1) - (5) Vegetation Information <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.