Laserfiche WebLink
Technical Revision (TR01-10) Adequacy Responses <br />Page 3 <br />7. Although no discussion is provided as to haulage activities for haulroad D, it is mentioned on <br />proposed revised page 2.05.3-19 the Road D will be used for coal haulage, overburden <br />haulage and mine development waste haulage. Based on this use of Road D and the <br />statement that Road AIBIB-1 will provide for two-way haulage of both full and empty tractor- <br />trailer haul-trucks moving coal from the coal stockpile to the customers receiving facility, the <br />Division is concerned with the slope and approximately 150 degree turn at the end of Road D. <br />It is the Division's concern that this location may not provide an adequate turn angle for two- <br />way tractor-trailer haul trucks to negotiate. Please address the activities to be conducted on <br />Haulroad D as requested in comment number 6. <br />Response: The text has been expanded to discuss the two-way haulage on Road D. <br />8. Under the heading, Soil Material Handling on page 2.05-28, the location of the soil stockpile <br />is described as south of the coal stockpile and Pond SCM-001. Please revise this statement <br />to include which coal stockpile and the PeCoCo Pond rather than channel SCM-001. <br />Response: The referenced text has been revised. <br />9. Under the heading Coal Handling Structures on page 2.05.3-32 and throughout Section <br />2.05, reference is made the coal stockpile. With the proposed addition of a ROM coal <br />stockpile, this reference is somewhat confusing based on the text, it appears that the 100, 000 <br />ton coal stockpile is temporary and the 300,000 ton ROM stockpile will be utilized after <br />initial development. The ROM coal stockpile should be included as part of coal handling <br />structures and facilities and should be delineated on Map2.05.3 MIA with an established <br />footprint and reference should be made throughout the text as to the temporary stockpile or <br />the ROM stockpile with appropriate acreage included as discussed in comment number 4. <br />Response: The text has been revised to clarify the use and life of the coal stockpiles. <br />10. Per Rule 2.05.4(2)(b) the operator shall provide a detailed cost estimate for proposed <br />activities to be conducted under this Technical Revision application. Please provide a <br />detailed estimate of the cost of reclamation of the proposed operations required to be <br />covered by a performance bond with supporting calculations for the estimates or provide <br />an explanation as to why no estimate is provided. <br />Response: It has been the past practice for the DRMS to calculate the bond which is reviewed <br />by the mining company and the accepted amount posted. This has been done because the DRMS <br />recalculates the bond no matter what is submitted by the mining company. <br />If the DRMS requires a detailed estimate from PSCM, we respectfully submit the existing bond <br />as an adequate reclamation estimate for reclaiming the PSCM operation. <br />11. Map 2.05.3 MIA and Map 2.05.3 M5D identifies Ditch RD-D2A flowing into culvert SC-13. <br />Ditch RD-D2A is not included on Table 2.05.3-E2-5 in Exhibit 2.05.3-E2, the Summary <br />Table in appendix 2.05.3-E2. G-2, and no SED CAD Design was included for Ditch RD-