Laserfiche WebLink
the proposed M12 map submitted in PR-11,rather than comparing against the M3 map. With this comparison the <br /> elevation differences are much less. The elevations are slightly higher in the proposed PMT because not all <br /> overburden could be replaced in the boxcut because of anticipated overburden swell. <br /> DRMS 28 February 2023 <br /> DRMS compared the PRIG and PRII MI map and found the elevation differences acceptable. <br /> Trappers' response adequately addresses the above cited rule. <br /> L Pit PMT diverges from previous scenario. The drainage corridor EMF'shifting to the east for <br /> most of its length before it shifts west to confluence with EMF2. The EMF2 drainage shifts to <br /> the east for a short distance at the bottom of the drainage. The shift of EMF' at contour 7450 and <br /> 7400 could be problematic during peak flows. <br /> 38. Please discuss these changes as they relate to the possibility of having excess spoil and to <br /> high flow events. <br /> Trapper Response to Comment 38: With the PR-II application,two additional cuts are proposed for L Dip-Pit. <br /> This change has moved the drainage and AOC variance to the east. Trapper does not anticipate any difficulties in <br /> this drainage configuration. The shift at the top of the watershed should have a negligible effect on peak flows or <br /> erosional stability as it is high in the watershed. Appropriate check dams and other BMP's will be implemented in <br /> the drainage to minimize instability until sufficient vegetation is established. <br /> Trappers' response adequately addresses the above cited rule. <br /> The following questions derive from DRMS's groundwater hydrology review and continue <br /> the numbering from the original adequacy letter and are organized by rule below. <br /> Rule 2.04.6(2)(b)Geology Description: Surface Mining <br /> DRMS 28 February 2023 <br /> 39. Map 36 shows the locations of core holes used to characterize overburden geochemistry, <br /> and Section 2.7.2 (Page 2-357) presents the results of the analysis. No revisions to <br /> Section 2.7.2 have been proposed with PR-11, and Map 36 shows that few core holes <br /> were drilled in the western part of the permit area (see Figure 1 below). <br /> 15 <br /> Trapper Mine PR11 ADQ No 2 <br /> 2023 February <br />