Laserfiche WebLink
b) Use transmissivity values based on well test data (rather than permeameter data) <br />with high and low values bracketed around an expected value of 0.017 ft2/day <br />(SCCC's coal geometric mean on page 2.04-48), and <br />c) Clarify the meaning of "gate road" on page 2.05-70. <br />Response: The calculations and relevant text and figures were revised in accordance <br />with the comment. The reference to Gate Road was deleted. Revised text and figures <br />beginning on page 2.05-70 for Section 2.05.6(3)(b)(iii), Probable Hydrologic <br />Consequences are included with the PAP response package. <br />51. On page 2.05-79, please revise the calculation of recovery time of the potentiometric <br />surface so that it uses the same storage coefficient value of 0.0001 that is used for <br />confined conditions in the mine inflow calculation on page 2.05-70. <br />Response: The calculations and relevant text on revised page 2.0-79 in Section <br />2.05.6(3)(b)(iii), Probable Hydrologic Consequences, have been revised in accordance <br />with the comment and are included in the PAP response package. <br />52. On pages 2.05-82 and 83, please revise the prediction of the duration of elevated TDS <br />in the workings so that it does not use the leaching tests from the Eckman Park Mine. <br />Those tests did not prove true based on the typical spoil leachate TDS of around <br />4,000 mg/l at Eckman Park upon final bond release which occurred long after 1.0 <br />pore volumes of water had passed through the spoil. <br />Response: The relevant text on pages 2.05-82 and -83 in Section 2.05.6(3)(b)(iii), <br />Probable Hydrologic Consequences has been revised in accordance with the comment <br />and discussions with CDRMS related to the comment during the conference calls <br />conducted on February 19 and 24, 2010. Revised materials are included with the PAP <br />response package. <br />53. Please resolve the apparent discrepancy between page 2.05-83 (which refers to the <br />mine inflow rate at the end of the 5-year mining period in Figure 2.05.6-F2 and in a <br />preceding calculation), and the referenced table and calculation which do not indicate <br />a rate at the end of the 5-year mining period. <br />Response: The text in the referenced area of Section 2.05.6(3)(b)(iii), Probable <br />Hydrologic Consequences has been revised and is included in the PAP response package. <br />54. Please add to the permit application the detailed design for the PSCM Waste Rock <br />Disposal Area demonstrating compliance with Rules 4.10 and 4.11. <br />Response: All waste rock will be hauled off the PSCM permitted area to Twentymile <br />Coal Company's Foidel Creek Mine facilities and disposed of as required in their <br />approved permit. Please refer to the responses to comments 57 and 58 for further <br />clarification. All references to disposing of waste rock within the PSCM permit area and <br />the waste rock disposal area have been eliminated from the permit. The disturbance area <br />6