Laserfiche WebLink
Response: Please refer to the previous response to Comment 9. <br />11) Proposed page 2.05 -3 identifies Map 23A. Please revise the proposed page to identify Map 23 <br />rather than 23A. <br />Response: The referenced page has been reviewed and revised to include a corrected map reference. <br />Copies of the revised page accompany these responses for replacement in the PAP. <br />12) Approved permit page 2.05 -163 identifies longwall panels that are proposed to undermine Fish <br />Creek. Please revise page 2.05 -163 to include any new longwall panels that will undermine Fish <br />Creek. <br />Response: The referenced page has been reviewed and revised to identify all longwall panels that will <br />undermine Fish Creek. Copies of the revised page accompany these responses for replacement in the <br />PAP. <br />13) Approved permit page 2.05- 181.10 provides discussion on panels that are proposed to <br />undermine the Fish Creek alluvial valley floor. Please revise page 2.05- 181.10 to include any new <br />longwall panels that will undermine the Fish Creek alluvial valley floor. <br />Response: The referenced page has been reviewed and revised to identify all longwall panels that will <br />undermine Fish Creek. Copies of the revised page accompany these responses for replacement in the <br />PAP. <br />14) Based on the approved PHCs, it was determined that the Twentymile Sandstone Aquifer <br />quantity and quality will not be substantially affected by mining. However, it is noted that the <br />potential for movement of significant quantities of ground water from the mine workings to the <br />Twentymile Sandstone is limited to major fault zones, which may provide significant communication. <br />Approved page 2.05 -142 states that, fault zones penetrated to date have not yielded any significant <br />long -term inflows from the Trout Creek Sandstone or the Twentymile Sandstone and fault zones, which <br />have the potential to provide communication through the intervening marine shale have not been <br />identified within the proposed mining area. <br />With the PR -9 application, the proposed mining area is proposed to be modified. In addition, the <br />proposed extensions of panels 12LT, 13LT, 14LT and the addition of 11LT will require mining through <br />a major fault zones previously not mined through. Please provide discussion identifying the fault <br />zone proposed to be mined through and evidence to ensure that the mining through the major fault <br />zone will present similar effects to the Trout Creek Sandstone and the Twentymile Sandstone. <br />Response: Pages 2.05 -135 through 137 provide a good discussion of groundwater inflows to the Mine <br />and the factors influencing the potential for groundwater movement between the mined area and key <br />units, including groundwater movement through fault zones. The two faults which will intersect the <br />WMD workings (refer to previous response to Comment 6) have been characterized by recent seismic <br />and drilling work, and are not considered to be major faults (width and displacement) within the <br />mining area, based on the available information. Where these faults have been encountered during <br />panel development in the WMD, they have produced some water, but not in large quantities, and <br />similar to other fault crossings, inflow rates have declined fairly rapidly after the initial inflows. The <br />discussion of PHC has been reviewed, and the specific discussion addressing groundwater movement <br />through fault zones remains applicable for the WMD panel extension given the nature of the faults in <br />this area, and TC's experience to date in crossing these faults. <br />