Laserfiche WebLink
Mr. Michael Cunningham <br />Western Sugar Project <br />June 11, 2011 <br />Page 2 of 2 <br />Item 4(a) -The soils were not named in the original simulations. The model attempted to input <br />names based on available data - hence the confusing legend. We generated a color soil profile <br />with an appropriate legend, which is provided as Attachment D. <br />Item 4(b) - A groundwater model was generated for a dewatering analysis and slightly flatter <br />gradients were simulated near the river and steeper gradients near the mine face. From <br />personal observations at other operational mines groundwater will daylight on the mine wall up <br />from the toe of the excavation. The water table was drawn to simulate this condition and there <br />is some artistic interpretation based on my 24 years as a practicing professional. However, <br />simulating the water table near the exposed mine wall, whether accurate or not, will provide <br />the most conservative analysis. <br />Item 4(c) - The geotechnical report provided a range of values for the gravel deposits. The <br />difference between the two simulations is that friction angles (f) of 40 and 45 degrees were <br />used for the poorly graded gravel as a sensitivity analysis. <br />Item 5 - Please refer to Item 2. <br />If you have any questions regarding this letter, please contact me at 970-493-7780. <br />Sincerely, <br />CGRS, Inc. <br />Jo L. dams, P.G. <br />Principal/Hydrogeologist