Laserfiche WebLink
C-1981-019 TR-81 <br />14 July 2010 <br />AR#2 - mlt <br />Page 3 of 6 <br />a) In the cross section views, the slopes ratios are not labeled. Please provide the H.-V slope for <br />the "Design Fill " surfaces (where sections have been drawn parallel to the slope), verifying <br />that recommended slopes from the Shannon & Wilson study have been incorporated. <br />Slope rations have been added to Map 45 cross sections, with explanatory note where <br />appropriate. Item resolved. <br />b) For each temporary fill, additional cross sections would be helpful, oriented approximately <br />perpendicular to B-B', C-C' and E-E'. <br />Section E-E' has been added, which runs approximately perpendicular to Sections A A , <br />B-B' and C-C'. Item resolved. <br />c) Extents of anticipated highwall mining are not shown on the cross sections or in plan view. <br />Please add these features to Map 45. <br />Anticipated and completed highwall mining lines have been added to the cross sections, <br />with explanatory notes as necessary. However, the zones are not depicted in plan view, as <br />Colowyo states. Please add zones of anticipated and completed highwall mining to the <br />Plan View. <br />d) The maroon-colored line in the southern portion of the plan view is not identified in the <br />legend. Please revise as necessary. <br />The line has been identified in the Legend as "South Taylor Pit Shell Outline". Item <br />resolved. <br />e) In the legend, a thin purple line is labeled "South Taylor Fill Design". This line does not <br />appear in the diagram. Please review and revise as necessary. <br />The color of the South Taylor Fill Design in the plan view and the legend has been <br />modified to blue in both locations. Item resolved. <br />19(0) The TR-81 application does not clearly delineate the changes proposed. Following a comparison <br />of the TR-81 cross sections with the versions previously approved, I make the following <br />observations: <br />a) Map 20, Section B-B' - TR-81 is proposing a change from Station 15000 to 17000 - <br />lowering the post-mining topography (PMT) by up to 180'. <br />The Colowyo maps and cross sections are not found to be "confusing" to the Division, and <br />no apology is required. The Division's comment referred to a comparison of the TR-81 <br />Map 20 to the currently-approved version of Map 20 (via TR-63 in June 2007). TR-81 did <br />indeed (originally) propose a lowering of the PMT between the Section B-B' stations <br />described. <br />b) Map 20A, Section E-E' - TR-81 is proposing a change from Station 15500 to 18000+, <br />lowering the PMT by up to 180'. <br />This observation regarding Section E-E' was made in comparing the original TR-81 Map <br />20A with the currently-approved Map 20A (via TR-63 in June 2007). <br />c) Map 20B, Section A-A' - The PMT in the eastern (right-hand) portion of this section is <br />below the pre-mine elevations, but higher in the west.