Laserfiche WebLink
12 adequacy issues have been resolved, TC will have to request continued extension of the decision <br />due date until the LBA is approved. <br />Response: TC understands this consideration, is pursuing parallel approval processes for the LBA and <br />the required mining and reclamation approvals and will coordinate with all parties relative to approval and <br />timing requirements. <br />5. The proposed revised text (p.2.04.11) does not appear to line up with currently approved pages and <br />appears to be missing information necessary for the review of PR12. Please provide updates to the <br />section WOLF CREEK RESERVES including: <br />a. The updated status of the pooled water <br />b. The updated plan to manage the pooled water, including any updates to relevant exhibits <br />c. Updated text relative to MSHA approval to undermine the PR12 proposed panels, including if that <br />approval is for development, long wall, and/or retreat mining, as well as any exhibits that may <br />need to be updated or submitted to provide this documentation. <br />Response: The referenced text and related exhibits have been reviewed and updated, as appropriate. The <br />updated Mine Plan Map shows the current areas of pooled mine water, and the text has been updated to <br />reflect both mine dewatering activities to date and planned future activities. The referenced MSHA <br />approval (Exhibit 53 from PR14-10) was necessary because initial development for the WC9-East <br />Longwall Panel ran under the extreme southern edge of the northern mine pool. Similar MSHA approvals <br />will not be required for the planned future mining, because under current plans (as outlined in the previous <br />response), the pooled water will be drained prior to any undermining. Copies of updated documentation <br />accompany these responses for replacement in the PAP. <br />6. The proposed revised text (p.2.05-181.11) includes anew exhibit, Exhibit 7K, addressing an inventory <br />of structures and renewable resource lands. This exhibit was not included with the PR -12 application. <br />Please provide the Division with Exhibit 7K for further evaluation of adequacy. <br />Response: The referenced text notes that "...structures and renewable resources are shown on Map <br />WC23B, and potential subsidence impacts are addressed in Exhibit 7K, Wolf Creek Subsidence <br />Evaluation...". Map WC23B has been updated to show any structures and renewable resources in the <br />proposed additional mining areas. Exhibit 7K is an existing exhibit (submitted and reviewed as part of <br />the PR 14-10 submittal) which does not require updating. <br />7. The proposed revised text states that the worst possible impacts from subsidence in the PR -12 area are <br />evaluated and addressed in Exhibit 7K. Please provide the Division with Exhibit 7K for further <br />evaluation of adequacy <br />Response: Exhibit 7K was previously provided and reviewed with the PRI 4-10 and PRI 5-11 submittals. <br />The subsidence considerations evaluated and addressed in this exhibit remain valid for the proposed LBA <br />area. <br />8. The text on pages 2.05-181.11 through 2.05-181.14 references Map 23B. The text also references <br />Map 23WC and Map 23WCB. Are these the same map? Please update the text on these pages to <br />reflect a consistent naming of the map(s) and provide the division updates to Maps 23WC and 23WCB <br />to the division. <br />a. Please ensure panels are labelled in these maps <br />