Laserfiche WebLink
Mr. Graham Roberts <br /> Page 3 of 5 <br /> 26 July 2020 <br /> 3. When does Trapper expect to begin stripping the JPit West and East Pits?Please update <br /> Map MIOB showing the correct timeline for acreages to be stripped, and reclaimed in the <br /> various JPit pits. <br /> Trapper Response: Trapper is currently stripping the approved J Pit West area. Trapper will not <br /> be stripping or mining J Pit East at this time. The current M10B map as submitted with PR- <br /> 10 depicts the worst case bonding scenario and bond calculation for PR10. The timeframes as <br /> represented on that map depict the proposed pit advancement at the time of submittal. Map <br /> M10A and M10B have been updated and attached showing a new mining plan for this area. JPit <br /> East has been removed in lieu of extending J Pit West further west. <br /> DBMS: 21 July 2022 <br /> DRMS finds Trapper's response is inadequate. As PR 10 requested 206 acres of disturbance <br /> and bonded for a worst case scenario with approximately one millon dollars, indicating regrade <br /> and topsoil for 80.8 acres. The extension of J Pit West appears to have added an additional <br /> 10.46 acres over the original acres requested in PRI O. Trapper addressed the additional bonding <br /> for this in the addendum provided with their 27 June adequacy response. However, an increase <br /> in disturbance/redisturbance or affected land was not mentioned in any public notice nor <br /> explicitly in Trappers response to preliminary adequacy. All public notices state that no increase <br /> in disturbance/affected area is planned. Unless disturbance is noted in the application a proposed <br /> decision by DRMS will be based on the premise of no increase in affected area, and in this case <br /> would be false. <br /> DRMS suggests that Trapper Mine Inc,withdraw the J Pit West expansion and submit a separate <br /> TR addressing the expansion. As the expansion has been reviewed, and barring any changes,the <br /> permitting process for the new TR should be straight forward. <br /> DRMS compared the post mining topography(PMT),map entitled M6 Updated PMT for WCB <br /> year for extended I Pit submitted with TR130 with the previously approved PMT Map. The <br /> PMT associated with the westward expansion of I Pit appears unchanged with TR130. No <br /> similar map for L Pit PMT was submitted with TRI30. Trapper has stated that although the <br /> dimensions of the L pit remains the same with only the orientation changing,the volumes <br /> associated remain the same. <br /> 4. Please either submit an updated PMT map for the L Pit or explain why an updated map is not <br /> needed. <br /> Trapper Response: Proposed actions in TR130 will not significantly alter the currently approved <br /> PMT in L Pit. The extension of I Pit was included on the M6 map to demonstrate the new PMT <br /> for that area,which is not significantly different from the current pre-mining topography. A <br /> 3 <br />