You are on page 1of 321

Cheviot Coal Mine

MacKenzie Redcap Project

Joint Application for Amendments to Approvals under the


Environmental Protection and Enhancement Act, Water Act,
Public Lands Act, and Coal Conservation Act

Amendment to EPEA Approval #46972


Amendment to the Public Lands Act Approval MSL #0041321
Amendment to Fence-line Water Act Approval #00205213
Application for Pit and Dump Licences under Mine Permit #C2003-4A

March 2018

Teck Coal Limited


Cardinal River Operations
MacKenzie Redcap Project

Table of Contents
Page
1 PROJECT INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................1-1
1.1 Project Background ................................................................................................1-3
1.2 Project Proponent ...................................................................................................1-3
1.3 Project Overview ....................................................................................................1-4
1.4 Regional Planning Requirements............................................................................1-5
1.5 Regional Setting .....................................................................................................1-5
1.6 Project Regulatory Approval Process......................................................................1-6
1.7 Development Schedule ...........................................................................................1-8
1.8 Public Consultation Program ..................................................................................1-9
1.9 Application Guide and Description ........................................................................1-10
2 GEOLOGY AND GEOTECHNICAL .............................................................................2-1
2.1 Geology ..................................................................................................................2-1
2.2 Geotechnical Conditions .........................................................................................2-4
3.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION ...........................................................................................3-1
3.1 Existing and Planned Development ........................................................................3-2
3.2 MKRC Mine Extension ............................................................................................3-6
3.3 Detailed Scheduling ..............................................................................................3-12
3.4 Water Management Plan ......................................................................................3-17
3.5 Selenium Management .........................................................................................3-27
3.6 Additional Mine Operations Considerations ..........................................................3-30
3.7 Continual Planning................................................................................................3-36
3.8 Financial Security .................................................................................................3-36
3.9 Health, Safety and Environmental Management ...................................................3-36
4 CONSULTATION AND ENGAGEMENT ......................................................................4-1
4.1 Background ............................................................................................................4-1
4.2 Aboriginal Consultation ...........................................................................................4-1
4.3 Engagement with Stakeholders and the Public .......................................................4-7
4.4 Ongoing Stakeholder Engagement .........................................................................4-8
5 ENVIRONMENTAL INFORMATION ............................................................................5-1
5.1 Air Quality ...............................................................................................................5-2
5.2 Noise Assessment ................................................................................................5-12
5.3 Hydrogeology .......................................................................................................5-17
5.4 Hydrology .............................................................................................................5-27
5.5 Surface Water Quality...........................................................................................5-36
5.6 Fish and Fish Habitat ............................................................................................5-41

Teck Resources Limited


March 2018
MacKenzie Redcap Project

5.8 Soil and Terrain ....................................................................................................5-55


5.9 Vegetation and Wetlands ......................................................................................5-65
5.10 Wildlife ..................................................................................................................5-75
5.11 Historic Resources................................................................................................5-98
6 CONCEPTUAL CONSERVATION AND RECLAMATION PLAN .................................6-1
6.1 Introduction .............................................................................................................6-1
6.2 Summary of Reclamation Goals, Objectives, and Land Uses .................................6-2
6.3 Conservation Program ............................................................................................6-4
6.4 Mine Reclamation ...................................................................................................6-7
6.5 Establishment of Designated End Land Uses .......................................................6-21
6.6 Reclamation Research .........................................................................................6-25
7 APPROVAL AMENDMENTS REQUIRED ...................................................................7-1
7.1 Coal Conservation Act ............................................................................................7-1
7.2 Environmental Protection and Enhancement Act ....................................................7-5
7.3 Water Act ................................................................................................................7-5
7.4 Public Lands Act .....................................................................................................7-6
8 REFERENCES ................................................................................................................8

Appendix 1 Existing Approvals


Appendix 2 Concordance Tables – CCA, EPEA, WA, PLA
Appendix 3 Coal Quality Sample List
Appendix 4 Geotechnical Reports
Appendix 5 Detailed Bench Reserve Summary
Appendix 6 Air Quality Assessment
Appendix 7 Noise Assessment
Appendix 8 Approved Management Plans
Appendix 9 Acronyms and Glossary
Appendix 10 Project Team
Annex A Hydrogeology
Annex B Hydrology
Annex C Surface Water Quality and Benthics
Annex D Fish and Fish Habitat
Annex E Soil and Terrain
Annex F Vegetation and Wetlands
Annex G Wildlife

Teck Resources Limited


March 2018
Section 1 Project Introduction
March 2018
MacKenzie Redcap Project

Table of Contents
Page
1 PROJECT INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................... 1-1
1.1 Project Background ..................................................................................................... 1-3
1.2 Project Proponent ....................................................................................................... 1-3
1.3 Project Overview ......................................................................................................... 1-4
1.4 Regional Planning Requirements ................................................................................ 1-5
1.5 Regional Setting .......................................................................................................... 1-5
1.6 Project Regulatory Approval Process .......................................................................... 1-6
1.6.1 Existing Approvals ............................................................................................... 1-7
1.6.2 Approvals and Amendments Sought.................................................................... 1-8
1.7 Development Schedule ............................................................................................... 1-8
1.8 Public Consultation Program ....................................................................................... 1-9
1.9 Application Guide and Description ............................................................................ 1-10

List of Tables
Page
Table 1.0-1 Summary of MKRC Project Footprint Components .............................................. 1-2
Table 1.0-2 Proposed New Project Disturbance Areas within Existing and New MSL
Boundaries ....................................................................................................... 1-2
Table 1.7-1 Project Phases and General Activities ................................................................. 1-8

List of Figures
Figure 1.0-1 Project Location
Figure 1.0-2 Cardinal River Operations
Figure 1.0-3 Local Project Location
Figure 1.0-4 Project Overview (with Topography Contours)
Figure 1.0-5 Project Overview (with Imagery)
Figure 1.6-1 Actual Cheviot Mine Development Compared with Approved Development

Teck Resources Limited Page 1-i


March 2018
MacKenzie Redcap Project

1 Project Introduction
Cardinal River Coals Ltd., a wholly owned subsidiary of Teck Coal Limited (Teck), is seeking new and
amended regulatory approvals associated with the Cheviot Coal Mine to enable it to proceed with the
MacKenzie Redcap (MKRC) phase of mining operations (the Project).

The Cheviot Coal Mine is located approximately 300 kilometres (km) west of Edmonton and 70 km south
of Hinton, Alberta (Figure 1.0-1 and Figure 1.0-2). Other nearby communities include the Hamlet of
Cadomin 12 km to the north, Alexis Nakota Sioux Nation Reserve #234 located 12 km to the southeast,
and the Mountain Cree Community 30 km to the southeast.

The Project is the sixth and final phase of development at the Cheviot Coal Mine, which includes the
Prospect, Cheviot Creek, McLeod, Harris, Upper Harris and lastly the MKRC pits. The Project is located
within the eastern part of the Cheviot Coal Mine Permit (2003-4A) area, adjacent to the Upper Harris
Extension pit development (Figure 1.0-3). Coal will be mined within the eastern portions of Coal Lease
No’s. 1305010855, 1305010858, and 10305010861 within Sections 27, 28, 31, 32, 33 and 34,
Township 045, Range 22, West of the 5th Meridian, Sections 05 and 06, Township 046, Range 22 West of
the 5th Meridian, and Section 01, Township 046, Range 23 West of the 5th Meridian.

Cardinal River Coals Ltd. will complete mining of all current licenced coal in 2020. The Project, if
approved, would extend mining operations at the Cheviot Coal Mine to 2027, thereby completing all
mining at the Cheviot Coal Mine.

The Project will be operated as part of the Cheviot Mine No. 1808 under Alberta Energy Regulator (AER)
Mine Permit C2003-4A. This Mine Permit Boundary currently encompasses approximately 7,455 hectares
(ha) in Townships 45 and 46, Range 22, 23 and 24, West of the 5th Meridian. The Cheviot Coal Mine
operates under Environmental Protection and Enhancement Act (EPEA) Approval No. 0046972-01-00
and Mineral Surface Lease (MSL) No. 0041321. Amendments to these regulatory permits and approvals
are required to enable the Project to proceed.

In this submission to the AER for the proposed Project, Cardinal River Coals Ltd. is proposing to amend
existing approvals and licences to extend Cheviot Coal Mine development eastward for the next
operational phase of mining. The proposed development footprint associated with the Project is illustrated
in Figure 1.0-4. An orthophoto of the Project area has been provided on Figure 1.0-5. The coal
processing plant, much of the main haulroad, and other service facilities required for MKRC operations
are already constructed and covered under existing approvals. The total disturbance associated with the
Project is 606.5 ha, and the various Project components are presented in Table 1.0-1. Table 1.0-2
summarizes the Project development planned within the existing MSL and within the proposed MSL
amendment area. Mining of the MKRC Project is expected to produce approximately 1.5 million tonnes of
clean coal annually, although annual production targets may be up to 3 million tonnes of clean coal. This
medium-volatile metallurgical coal is primarily exported as steel-making coal to Pacific Rim and European
markets.

CRO currently employs 352 people, as well as contractors. With the continuation of mining in the MKRC
area, continued employment also occurs. Conversely, if mining is not approved, then employment will not
continue which would have a considerable impact in the region.

Teck Resources Limited Page 1-1


March 2018
MacKenzie Redcap Project

Table 1.0-1 Summary of MKRC Project Footprint Components

Footprint Component Area (ha)

Clean Water Infrastructure 7.9


Haulroads and Access Roads 68.3
MK1 (MacKenzie Phase 1) Pit 23.7
MK2 (MacKenzie Phase 2) Pit 14.5
MK4 (MacKenzie Phase 4) Pit 17.8
MK3EX1 (MacKenzie Phase 3 - External Dump 1) 12.6
MK3EX2 (MacKenzie Phase 3 - External Dump 2) 12.2
Powerline 21.9
RC Pit (MK3 [MacKenzie Phase 3], RC1 to RC5 [Redcap Pits 1 to 5]) 298.3
RCEX (Redcap External Dump) 81.6
Soil Stockpile 32.6
Waste Water Infrastructure 15.0
Total 606.5

Table 1.0-2 Proposed New Project Disturbance Areas within Existing and New MSL Boundaries

Disturbance
Project Element
MSL (ha)

MK1 Pit 3.4


Powerlines 2.9
Existing MSL

Haulroad 23.0
Soil Stockpiles (SP1 and SP2) 3.1
Subtotal 32.4
MK1 Pit 20.3
MK2 Pit 14.5
MK4 Pit 17.8
RC Pit 298.3
Powerlines 19.0
Proposed MSL Amendment

Haulroad and Access Roads 45.3


Soil Stockpiles (SP3 to SP6) 29.5
MK3EX1 (MacKenzie 3 External Dump 1) 12.6
MK3EX2 (MacKenzie 3 External Dump 2) 12.2
RCEX (Redcap External Dump) 81.6
Radio Transmission Tower Pad 0.1

Teck Resources Limited Page 1-2


March 2018
MacKenzie Redcap Project

Disturbance
Project Element
MSL (ha)

Sedimentation Ponds (MKPO, LHPO and RCPO) 9.9


Interception Ponds 2.7
Clean and Waste Water Ditch, Pipeline, Culvert and Pond Outlets 10.3
Subtotal 574.1
Total 606.5

1.1 Project Background

Coal mining began in 2004 at the Cheviot Coal Mine to replace coal production from the Luscar Mine,
which was ramped down due to depleted coal reserves. Mining has incorporated typical open pit coal
mine operations using shovels and haul trucks to remove waste rock and loaders, excavators and haul
trucks to recover raw coal. Trucks haul the coal from the pits along the haulroad to the existing coal
processing plant located on the Luscar Mine site.

CRO plans to continue operations on the Cheviot Project with the development of the MKRC Project.

1.2 Project Proponent

The applicant is Cardinal River Coals Ltd., a wholly owned subsidiary of Teck Coal Limited, which
operates six open-pit metallurgical coal mines in Western Canada, five of which are in the Elk Valley area
of southeastern British Columbia (BC) and one is in Alberta. Currently, Teck Coal Limited produces in
excess of 25 million tonnes of metallurgical coal annually. Teck undertakes all mining activity in the
Cheviot and Luscar Mine permit areas through its Cardinal River Operations (CRO). CRO has operated
coal mines in west-central Alberta for almost 100 years.

Teck Coal Limited is wholly owned by Teck Resources Limited, which is Canada’s largest diversified
mining company, with business units focused on base metals (copper and zinc), energy and steelmaking
coal.

Corporate Registered Company Name

Teck Coal Limited


Cardinal River Coals Ltd.
Bag Service 2570
Hinton, Alberta T7V 1V5

Mailing Address of Head Office (Alberta)

Teck Coal Limited


#1000, 205 9th Avenue SE
Calgary, AB T2G 0R3
Phone: (403) 260-9800
Fax: (403) 264-7339

Teck Resources Limited Page 1-3


March 2018
MacKenzie Redcap Project

Phone, Fax, and Email Contact Information

Hinton General Office Line Phone (780) 692-5100


Hinton Fax (780) 692-5124
Hinton General Office Email cardinalriver.feedback@teck.com
Environmental and Regulatory Management Marc.Symbaluk@teck.com

Contact Names

Correspondence regarding this application should be directed to the Hinton address, to the attention of:

Marc Symbaluk, MSc, PAg.


Superintendent Environment
Cardinal River Operations
Teck Coal Limited
Bag Service 2570
Hinton, Alberta T7V 1V5
Phone: (780) 692-5179
Email: Marc.Symbaluk@teck.com

Authorization of Application for Approval by Owner/Agent

Date: March 29, 2018

Signature:

Marc Symbaluk, MSc, PAg.


Superintendent Environment
Cardinal River Operations
Teck Coal Limited

1.3 Project Overview

The MKRC area is adjacent to the Upper Harris Extension Amendment (UHEA) pit development
(Figure 1.0-3). It is anticipated that the proposed development will increase the total disturbance by
approximately 606.5 ha.

The MKRC Project will be a typical truck and shovel open-pit coal mine operation with waste stripping
being carried out by large electric and hydraulic shovels, and coal loaded by backhoe excavators and
front-end loaders. Coal will be hauled approximately 35 km from the proposed MKRC pits along the
existing Cheviot Haulroad to the existing coal processing plant (CPP) located on the Luscar Mine site,
where it will be crushed, cleaned, dried, and loaded onto trains for transport to market. The Project will
maintain the Cheviot Coal Mine’s annual productive capacity of up to 3 million clean tonnes of medium-
volatile metallurgical coal for export primarily to Pacific Rim and European steel markets.

Waste rock from the MKRC pits will be deposited into pits that have already been mined or placed in one
of the external waste rock disposal areas. There are three external waste rock disposal areas planned in

Teck Resources Limited Page 1-4


March 2018
MacKenzie Redcap Project

the MKRC area. The proposed mine plan would extend Cheviot Mine operations until 2027. At that point,
the reserves will be depleted and the decommissioning and closure plan will be executed.

The Cheviot MSL area will increase by approximately 2,282 ha to accommodate new mining and
associated infrastructure, and a safety zone required for blasting. Blasting is an essential part of open pit
mining – harder rock layers on top of the coal seams need to be broken up before the coal can be mined.
Most of the major components required to operate the pit extensions are in place. The MKRC Project will
involve the construction of new facilities as outlined in Table 1.0-1.

1.4 Regional Planning Requirements

There are several regional initiatives within this region as follows:

• Coal Development Policy (Government of Alberta [GoA] 1976);

• Policy for Resource Management for the Eastern Slopes (GoA 1984);
• Coal Branch Sub-Regional Integrated Resource Plan (Alberta Forestry Lands and Wildlife
[AFLW] 1990);

• Coal Branch Access Management Plan (AFLW 1994);

• Jasper National Park Management Plan (Parks Canada 2010);


• Whitehorse Wildland Provincial Park and Management Plan (Alberta Environment [AE] 2000);
and

• Luscar and Gregg River Mines Land Management Plan (GoA 2013c).

Government approved regional initiatives or plans that pertain to the MKRC with requirements that relate
to environment and resource management for the proposed changes to the activity are discussed further
in Section 5.7.

1.5 Regional Setting

The MKRC Project lies within the Cheviot Mine Permit Boundary and consists of two distinct biophysical
units in the Subalpine ecoregion – MacKenzie and Redcap. The Project is located in the Athabasca
(MacKenzie) River and North Saskatchewan (Redcap) River watersheds.

Terrain in the headwaters of MacKenzie Creek consists of bedrock-controlled ridges with relatively narrow
valley bottoms. Vegetation is dominated by slow-growing lodgepole pine. Shrub-dominated communities
occur in valley bottoms and along drainage courses. The MacKenzie unit is seasonally used by moose,
mule deer, white-tailed deer and elk. Heavy snow accumulation over much of the area restricts use by
ungulates in winter. Lynx, hare, red squirrel and marten are common throughout the area. MacKenzie
Creek appears to be an important travel corridor for grizzly bear, wolves and other wildlife, particularly in
the spring. Harlequin ducks breed at low density in the MacKenzie Creek headwaters. There are rainbow
trout and bull trout found in MacKenzie Creek.

The Redcap unit occupies the eastern end of the Cheviot Mine Permit Boundary and includes the
headwaters of Redcap Creek; topography is gently sloping to inclined and rolling. Upland sites are
dominated by coniferous forests composed of lodgepole pine. Lowland areas often consist of shrub

Teck Resources Limited Page 1-5


March 2018
MacKenzie Redcap Project

dominated plant communities on wet mineral and water-saturated organic soils. This area provides
habitat for moose as well as elk, mule deer and white-tailed deer. Bighorn sheep occupy the Redcap
Range to the north of this unit and may travel through it to the mountains on the Jasper National Park
boundary. Wolves systematically travel the cut lines, while grizzly bears periodically forage in lower
elevations. Beaver are active in the headwaters of Redcap Creek. Harlequin Ducks nest intermittently in
the lower reaches of Redcap Creek. There are bull trout found in Redcap Creek.

The climate has characteristic long, cold winters with intermittent chinook warming, and cool, short
summers. Historic interpolated climate data for Alberta Townships was obtained from Alberta Climate
Information Service operated by Alberta Agriculture and Forestry (2018). The Project’s township area
(045-22 W5M) has data records from 1978 to 2016. During this time, temperatures ranged between -43°C
and 30°C, with a mean annual temperature of 1.6°C. Average annual precipitation was 660 millimetres
(mm). Historical average total precipitation in the June to September period is 351.3 mm.

1.6 Project Regulatory Approval Process

The Cheviot Coal Mine underwent an extensive regulatory approval process including an Environmental
Impact Assessment (EIA) that was subjected to a joint federal – provincial review. Over a six-year period,
the Cheviot Coal Mine became the focus of two public hearings and several court challenges. In 1997,
and again in 2000, a Joint Review Panel, consisting of representatives of the Alberta Energy and Utilities
Board (EUB) and appointees of the Federal Minister of Environment, recommended that the Cheviot Coal
Mine receive regulatory approval and that Cardinal River Coals Ltd. be allowed to proceed with
development of the Cheviot Coal Mine. Both the Governments of Alberta and Canada subsequently
accepted this recommendation and approved the Cheviot Coal Mine.

After the Cheviot Coal Mine was approved, a considerable number of assessments and regulatory
applications have been filed and approved to enable mining operations to continue. The following is the
chronology of this process from the time of the initial regulatory applications:

• file EIA and Regulatory Applications under the Coal Conservation Act (1996);

• EUB / Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency (CEAA) approval to construct and operate
Cheviot Mine (1997);

• judicial review of Joint Review Panel decision and Department of Fisheries and Oceans (DFO)
approvals (1999);

• Joint Review Panel upheld decision, and Cheviot Mine Permit 2000-37 issued (2000);
• Private Haulroad Project approved (2002);

• EUB replaced Permit C2000-37 with C2003-4 (2003);


• application to construct Cheviot haulroad and develop Cheviot Creek Pit; Cheviot’s EPEA, Public
Lands Act, and Water Act authorizations and licences issued/amended (2003);

• Alberta Environment and EUB approval to develop Prospect Pits (2007);


• Alberta Environment and Sustainable Resource Development (ESRD) and Energy Resources
Conservation Board (ERCB) approval of Prospect Pit application (2008);

Teck Resources Limited Page 1-6


March 2018
MacKenzie Redcap Project

• application to develop Cheviot Creek Phase 1 Extension; EPEA, Public Lands Act, and Water Act
authorizations and licences issued/amended (2008);
• renewal of Cheviot EPEA Approval, renewal of Cheviot Water Act Approval, amendment of
Cheviot Mine Permit C2003-4 granted (2009);

• application for McLeod-Harris Pits development (2010);


• Cheviot EPEA, Public Lands Act, and Water Act authorizations and licences issued/amended for
McLeod-Harris Pits; Approvals granted from Alberta Environment, Alberta Sustainable Resource
Development and ERCB to develop McLeod-Harris Pits (2010);
• Cheviot EPEA Approval renewed by ESRD (2010);

• application for Renewal of Luscar Mine EPEA (2010);

• Luscar EPEA Renewal granted by ESRD (2011);

• CCA Cheviot Mine Permit Amendment C2003-4A issued by ERCB (2013).

• application for UHEA (2015); and


• Cheviot EPEA, Public Lands Act, and Water Act authorizations and licences issued/amended for
Upper Harris Extension; Approvals granted by the AER to develop Upper Harris (2016).

The approved Cheviot Coal Mine has been optimized from the original development plan. The actual
development is compared to the approved development on Figure 1.6-1. The Cheviot Coal Mine is a
mature mine site and CRO has gained considerable knowledge and experience mining and mitigating
potential effects at Cheviot. CRO intends to continue applying proven operational methods used at the
Cheviot Coal Mine to the MKRC extension.

1.6.1 Existing Approvals

Cardinal River Coals Ltd. holds the following regulatory approvals for the existing Cheviot Coal Mine:

• Mine Permit C2003-4A (Cheviot Mine);

• Mine Licence C2010-11 (McLeod-Harris Pits);

• Mine Licence C2010-12 (McLeod-Harris Dumps);

• Mine Licence C2010-11 (Upper Harris Pits);


• Mine Licence C2016-03 (Upper Harris Dumps);

• EPEA Approvals 0046972-01-00 (Cheviot), 0046972-01-01 (McLeod-Harris amendment),


0046972-01-02 (Upper Harris Extension amendment);
• Water Act Approval 00205213-00-00 (fence-line Cheviot), and amendments 00205213-00-01,
00205213-00-03, 00205213-00-05, 00205213-00-06 and 00205213-00-07;

• Water Act Licence 00226852-01-00 (water well);

• MSL No. 041321; and

• MSL No. 040889 (Cheviot Haulroad).

Teck Resources Limited Page 1-7


March 2018
MacKenzie Redcap Project

These Approvals and Licences are presented in Appendix 1.

1.6.2 Approvals and Amendments Sought

The proposed Project area is adjacent to the existing Upper Harris Extension. Cardinal River Coals Ltd. is
applying for an integrated amendment application to the AER to develop the last area of the Cheviot Coal
Mine. The application will include:

• amendment to EPEA Approval No. 0046972-01-00, as amended;

• amendment to Public Lands Act Approval MSL No. 041321;

• amendment to Fence-line Water Act Approval No. 00205213-00-00; and

• new Pit and Dump Licences under the CCA in connection with Mine Permit #C2003-4A.

Cardinal River Coals Ltd. is proposing to add the MKRC extension to the Cheviot Coal Mine. The main
activities contemplated under the Activities Designation Regulation (GoA 2017b) include the addition of
numerous pits, dumps, water management features and minor infrastructure.

Section 7.0 presents the detail on the specific amendment requirements. The concordance tables for the
CCA (GoA 2013a) as per Directive 61 (AER 1983), Fence-line Water Act Application, and EPEA Guide to
Content for Energy Project Applications (AER 2014b) are provided in Appendix 2.

CRO understands that AER will give public notice of the application for the proposed amendments. As
part of CRO’s ongoing consultation, the stakeholders and Aboriginal communities will be informed of
these proposed changes and CRO will continue to engage and respond to questions and concerns. The
activities that have been completed to date are summarized in Section 4.0.

1.7 Development Schedule

Activities associated with the MKRC development include pre-construction, construction, operations,
decommissioning, closure, and reclamation (Table 1.7-1). As part of long-range planning, the optimization
of the sequence and pit extents are re-evaluated annually to meet market demand. The planned activities
for the MKRC are provided in Table 1.7-1. Completion of Project phases are dependent on achieving
planned productivities and actual completion dates may vary.

Table 1.7-1 Project Phases and General Activities

MKRC Project Phase Project Calendar Year Mine Development Activities


Year

Pre-construction 1 to 3 2019 to 2021 • Timber and brush clearing.


• Soil salvage and stockpiling.

Teck Resources Limited Page 1-8


March 2018
MacKenzie Redcap Project

MKRC Project Phase Project Calendar Year Mine Development Activities


Year

Construction 1 to 4 2019 to 2022 • Construction of MacKenzie and Little


Homer Creek clear span bridges.
• Construction of powerline extension
from Harris Pit to Redcap.
• Construction of water management
structures.
• Construction of haulroad to Redcap.
• Construction of Radio Transmission
Tower.
Operations 1 to 9 2019 to 2027 • Blasting and removal of waste rock.
• Mining and processing of raw coal.
• Transporting to market.
Reclamation 3 to 9(+) 2021 to • Contouring of waste rock dumps to
2027(+) acceptable configuration.
• Decommissioning and reclamation of
roadways.
• Coversoil and seed for closure.
Decommissioning and 10+ 2028+ • Contouring of waste rock dumps to
Closure acceptable configuration.
• Ongoing monitoring and maintenance.
• Decommissioning and reclamation of
roadways and powerline corridors.

1.8 Public Consultation Program

CRO has a long history of Aboriginal consultation, stakeholder engagement and public communication,
dating back to CRO's operation and permitting for the Cheviot Coal Mine. Teck’s Sustainability Strategy
(Teck 2010b), which includes community as a key focus area, complements and augments CRO’s past
and ongoing engagement. As part of the Sustainability Strategy, Teck introduced a social management
and responsibility framework that provides the structure for implementing a consistent approach to
engagement and managing social performance. Pillars of this framework are:

• engagement;

• maximizing sustainable benefits for communities;


• managing impacts on communities; and

• mutually beneficial relationships with Aboriginal communities.


Further information regarding consultation in relation to the Cheviot Coal Mine and the Project is
presented in Section 4.0.

Teck Resources Limited Page 1-9


March 2018
MacKenzie Redcap Project

1.9 Application Guide and Description

This application consists of two volumes with the following components:

Volume 1:

• Section 1 Project Introduction

• Section 2 Geology and Geotechnical

• Section 3 Project Description

• Section 4 Consultation and Engagement

• Section 5 Environmental Setting

• Section 6 Conceptual Conservation and Reclamation Plan


• Section 7 Approval Amendments Required

• Section 8 References

• Appendix 1 Existing Approvals

• Appendix 2 Concordance Tables – CCA, EPEA, WA, PLA

• Appendix 3 Coal Quality Sample List

• Appendix 4 Geotechnical Reports


• Appendix 5 Detailed Bench Reserve Summary

• Appendix 6 Air Quality Assessment

• Appendix 7 Noise Assessment


• Appendix 8 Approved Management Plans

• Appendix 9 Acronyms and Glossary

• Appendix 10 Project Team

Volume 2 (Baseline Reports):

• Annex A Hydrogeology

• Annex B Hydrology
• Annex C Surface Water Quality and Benthics

• Annex D Fish and Fish Habitat

• Annex E Soil and Terrain

• Annex F Vegetation and Wetlands

• Annex G Wildlife

Teck Resources Limited Page 1-10


March 2018
Section 1 Figures

Teck Resources Limited


March 2018
I Swan Hills Athabasca

33
³
²
801
V
U
661
V
U 661
U
V
658
V
U 44
³
²
43
³
²
V
U947
18
³
²
18
³
²
Westlock
Barrhead
Whitecourt

18 V
U777
³
²
751
U
V
Mayerthorpe 28
³
²
765
V
U 803
V
U
32
³
²
647
V
U Gibbons
Morinville
43
³
²
22
³
²
757
U
V 37
³
²
748
V
U St. Albert
751 V
U633
V
U 43 779
V
U
³
²
Spuce Grove
16
³
²
16
³
²
43
³
²
16
³
²
16 Edson
³
²
Stony Plain
22 Edmonton
³
²
753
V
U 770
U
V
47
³
²
Hinton 624
U
V Devon Beaumont
759 Calmar
V
U V
U 622
Leduc
623
U
V
Drayton
40
³
²
Valley 39
³
²
814
V
U
778
V
U
V
U620
2 Millet
³
²
40
³
²

Wetaskiwin
13
³
²
Project
Document Path: \\teckcominco\CGO\Groups\TCGIS\Data\Operations\CRO\Projects\MKRCPermitApplication\MXD\FinalFigures\MKCRProjectDescription_Fig1.mxd

Location 795
_
^ 771
V
U V
U
22
³
²
2
³
²
20 792
V
U
³
²
734
V
U Ponoka
53
³
²
Jasper 53
³
²
National Rimbey
U771
V U 604
Park VUV 792

815
V
U
766
V
U
Rocky 12 Lacombe
³
²
11
³
²
Mountain
House Blackfalds
V
U597
93
³
² Eckville
Sylvan Lake Red Deer
761
V
U
22
³
²
766
U
V 42
³
²
Penhold
54 2
³
² ³
²
22
³
²

LEGEND PROJECT

Railway
Primary Highway MacKenzie Redcap Project
Secondary Highway
Mine Permit Boundary TITLE

Whitehorse Wildland Provincial Park


PROJECT LOCATION
Jasper National Park
First Nation Reserve NOTES PROJECT: 14-00804

Towns Datum/Projection: UTM NAD 83 Zone 11


DRAWN BY: SP
CHECKED BY: SP
ATS TOWNSHIPS
DATE: Mar 12, 2018

FIGURE
0 25 50 100
Kilometres
1.0-1
I R 25 R 24 R 23 R 22 R 21 R 20 W5M

r
R i ve 16
³
²
a
sc T 51
ba
ha
At
Weald
s ca Riv e r Hinton
h ab a
At

47
³
²
40 T 50
³
²

_
^

T 49
Robb "

Mc
Le
od
R
i ve
r
40
³
²

Luscar T 48
Mine

Luscar Mine T 47
40
³
²
/
"

Coal Prep
" Cadomin Plant

ive r
ina R T 46
MacKenzie Pe m
b

"
/ Gap
MacKenzie
Whitehorse Wildland Provincial Park
Document Path: \\teckcominco\CGO\Groups\TCGIS\Data\Operations\CRO\Projects\MKRCPermitApplication\MXD\FinalFigures\MKCRProjectDescription_Fig2.mxd

Redcap
Area

Grave Flats Road


Jasper National Park T 45

Cheviot
Mine
Alexis Nakota
Sioux Nation
Reserve #234

T 44

LEGEND PROJECT
Primary Highway
Secondary Highway MacKenzie Redcap Project
Road
Railway TITLE

Towns CARDINAL RIVER OPERATIONS


Mine Permit Boundary
NOTES
Proposed MSL Boundary PROJECT: 14-00804

DRAWN BY: SP
Datum/Projection: UTM NAD 83 Zone 11
Current Cheviot MSL Boundary CHECKED BY: SP

Alexis Nakota Sioux Nation Reserve #234 DATE: Jan 4, 2018

FIGURE
Coal Haulroad
0 5 10
Kilometres
20
1.0-2
28 27 26 25
R24 R23 R23 R22

23 24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20 21 22 23
I 24

T 46
14 13 18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17 16 15 14 13
Grave Flats Road

11 12 7 8 9 10 11 12 7 8 9 10 11 12

k
ee
Cr
t
ec
sp
P ro

PROSPECT HARRIS
2 1AREA 6 5 4
AREA 3 Ha rris
C reek UPPER 2HARRIS 1 6 5 4 3 2 1
AREA
MacKENZIE
T46
Document Path: \\teckcominco\CGO\Groups\TCGIS\Data\Operations\CRO\Projects\MKRCPermitApplication\MXD\FinalFigures\MKCRProjectDescription_Fig3.mxd

Satellite Office / Shop Fuel Island


AREA
T46

T45 CHEVIOT AREA McLEOD T45


AREA
35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36

REDCAP
AREA
ek
re
C
n
r to
T ho

26 25 30 29 28 27 26 25 30 29 28 27 26 25

Whitehorse Wildland Provincial Park

Grave Flats Road


23 24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20 21 22 23 24

14 13 R24 R23 18 17 16 15 14 13 R23 R22 18 17 16 15 14 13

LEGEND PROJECT

MacKenzie Redcap Footprint


Pit Limit with 30m Buffer MacKenzie Redcap Project
Waste Dump Limit with 30m Buffer
Satellite Office / Shop TITLE

Satellite Fuel Island


LOCAL PROJECT LOCATION
Current Haulroad
Cheviot/Upper Harris Current Mine Footprint NOTES PROJECT: 14-00804

Proposed MSL Boundary Datum/Projection: UTM NAD 83 Zone 11


DRAWN BY: SP
CHECKED BY: SP
Current Cheviot MSL Boundary
DATE: Mar 13, 2018
CRO Mine Permit Boundary
FIGURE
Whitehorse Wildland Provincial Park
0 1 2
Kilometres
4
1.0-3
484,000 486,000 488,000 490,000 492,000 494,000

R23 R22
20 1925 19
25 2050 25 19 200 0 19
195

2000
0 1900

19
0
75 00
11

1950
12 7 10

19
200
1900

25

25
190 75 1875
0
8 9

19
18 197

18
5

50
197
5

50

22
19 1950

1900
25 1850

75

21
1950 1975

21

50
0
52.943, 2100 200

1950
22
25

00
-117.199
5,866,000

5,866,000
1650

0
5 200

190
18 1925 187 0
75 2025
21

21

50
25 2250

G
2075

1875
75

20
23
2075

25
23

Litt
23

Hom
!
00 25

2025
2350
167
le
182
5

er C

5
!

25
19
!
1750
1800 2 1 6 5

ree
4 3
! !

1825
MKPO
! ! ! ! !
1775
!

k
!

22
! !

2075
!
MK1
!
SP1
!

25
! !

25
!
1825
! ! ! !
2275
!

19
!
SP2
! !
!
! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
!

f
!
1925
¤
¥
!

19
!
1800
!
2125

75
!
!

75
!

!
19
SP3 0
!
225

!
! !
1950
!

170
!

!
18
LHPO

25
25
!
23

21
T46 ie
00

17
T46
2325

00
!

nz

!
MK3
!

1775
e
18

1750

K k
50

MK2
!

ac ee

!
G

19
21
f 20
50

M Cr
¤
¥
!
50

25
50

T45 T45
19

! 22
18 25

19
75
MK4 MK3EX1
!

00
1900 18
00

21
! !

75
1875
!

50
!
18 !

18

!
75
!

SP4
19

!
UTRC1-SU-1
!
75
5,864,000

5,864,000
1900
!
Little UTRC1-SU-2
!

!
!

Hom 18 MK3EX2 !
75
!
18

187
er C 75

!
35 36 31 r eek 32
!
33
!
34

5
185 UTRC2-SU-1

!
! !
1875 0
RC1
! !

!
!
!

195
1900
!
UTRC2-SU-2

2000
200

18
52.92,
75 18 !

0
75 !
0

-117.096
!

!
!
19

!
00

G
RC2
!
!

!
19

1900
50 52.916,
!
1825

!
TREE
-117.241
!

ISLAND 1850

!
RC4/5
25

18
G
19

!
50

1825

!
19
50

!
2000
! !
RC3
! !
!
SP5

R e dc a
!
1925

C re e k
1850 !

5
1950

177
!

26 25 30 29 28 !
27

p
75
!
21
!
5,862,000

5,862,000
00
22 RCEX
2050

2150 2100 187 SP6


5

18
2150

00
2125
2075 RCPO
52.901,

17
-117.093

50
2025 1725

G
1975

23 24 19 20 21 22
00

R23 R22
1925 17

5
192 1900
1925

484,000 486,000 488,000 490,000 492,000 494,000

MacKenzie Redcap Project - Project Overview - Figure 1.0-4


±
Hinton
!

!
Robb Existing & Approved Development Proposed MacKenzie Redcap Development
The m a psa nd m a pd a t a are pr o vid ed ‘a sis ’witho ut
a ny gua r a ntee,r epresent atio n,c o nd it
io n o rwa rra nt
y
!
PitLim it So ilSt
o c kpile Po nd O ut
let Clea n Wa t
erDit
c h-
Pipeline Culver
t
0 250 500 1,
000
Wa t
ers
hed Bo und a r
y CRO Mine Per
m itBo und a r
y UpperHa r
risAppr
o ved Dev
elo pm ent m
o f a ny kind ,eit
Res o urc esLim it
herexpr
ed a s
ess ,im plied ,o rst
sum esno lia b ilit
at
y wit
ut
hr
ory.Tec k
espec t Cur
rentChev
io tMSLBo und a r
y Wa t
erc o ur
se Co nt
o ur(
25m I
nter
va l)
PitLim it-30m Buffer Pr
o po sed MSLBo und a r
y I
nter
c ept
io n Po nd Wa s
te Wa t
erDit
c h-
Pipeline Culv
ert G Co m m unic a t
io nT
o wer

DATE: MI
NEO PERATI O N:
to a ny r
dat
trut
elia nc e t
a ,a nd t
h,a c c ur
he us
he usera ss
a c y,c urr
erpla c esin t
um est he ent
he m a psa nd m a p

enc y,o rc o m plet


irer isk a st
enesso f t
o t
he
he
Cadomin
!
Mountain
! ! Po wer
line Cur
rentDis
tur
b a nc e Ha ulr
oads
Wa s
t
Wa s
t
e Dum pLim it
e Dum pLim it-30m Buffer
Sed im ent
atio n Po nd
Em b a nkm ent
f
¤
¥ Cr
ossing St
ruc t
ure ! MKRCPo wer
line
3/
16/
2018 Ca r
d ina lRiv
er
Ac c es
sRo a d s
info r mat io n c o nt
a ined in the m a psa nd m a pd a t a. Cree SCALE: CO O RDI
NATESY STEM:
Community
!
Ha ulr
o a d a nd Po werRighto fWa ys
1:
26,
000 NAD1983UTM Z o ne 1
1N
Do c um entPa t
h:\
\t
ec kc o m inc o \
CGO \
Gro ups
\TCGI
S\Da t
a\O per
atio ns
\CRO \
Pro jec t
s\MKRCPer
m it
Applic a t
io n\
MXD\
Fina lFigur
es\
MKCRPr
o jec t
Des
cript
io n_Fig1.
0-4.
m xd
484,000 486,000 488,000 490,000 492,000 494,000

R23 R22
11 12 7 8 9 10
5,866,000

5,866,000
Litt
Hom
!

le
er C
!

!
2 1 6 5

ree
4 3
! !
MKPO
! ! !
! ! !

k
! ! ! !

MK1
!
SP1
! ! !
!
!
! !
! !
!
SP2
! !
!
! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
!

f
!

¤
¥
!

!
!
!
!
!

!
SP3
!

!
! ! ! !

!
LHPO
!

T46 ie
T46
!

nz

!
MK3
!

e
K k MK2
!

ac ee

!
G f
¤
¥
M Cr
!

T45 T45
!

MK4 MK3EX1
!
! !
! !

!
! !

SP4
!

!
UTRC1-SU-1
!
5,864,000

5,864,000
!
Little UTRC1-SU-2
!

!
!

Hom MK3EX2 ! !
er C

!
35 36 31 r eek 32
!
33
!
34
UTRC2-SU-1

!
! !

RC1
! !

!
!
!
!
!
! UTRC2-SU-2
!

!
!

!
RC2
!
!

!
!

!
TREE !

ISLAND

!
RC4/5

!
!
!

!
! !
RC3
! !
!
SP5

R e dc a
!

C re e k
!
!

26 25 30 29 28 !
27

p
!
!
5,862,000

5,862,000
RCEX

SP6

RCPO

23 24 19 20 21 22

R23 R22
484,000 486,000 488,000 490,000 492,000 494,000

MacKenzie Redcap Project - Project Overview(Imagery) - Figure 1.0-5


±
Hinton
!

!
Robb Existing & Approved Development Proposed MacKenzie Redcap Development
The m apsand m ap d at aare provid e d ‘asis ’wit hout
any guarant e e ,re pre se ntation,c ond it ionor warrant y
!
PitLim it SoilSt
oc kpile Pond Out
le t Cle anWat
e r Dit
c h-
Pipe line Culve rt
0 250 500 1,
000
Wat
e rs
he d Bound ary CR O Mine Pe rm itBound ary Uppe r HarrisApprove d De v
e lopm e nt m
of any k
R es
ind ,e ithe r e x
ourc e sLim it e d as
pre ss,im plie d ,or st
sum e sno liabilit
at
ut
y wit
ory.Te c k
h re spe c t Curre ntChe v
iotMSLBound ary Wat
e rc ours
e Cont
our (
25m I
nte rval)
PitLim it-30m Buffe r Propose d MSLBound ary I
nte rc e pt
ionPond Was
te Wat
e r Dit
c h-
Pipe line Culv
e rt G Com m unic at
ionT
owe r

DATE: MI
NEOPER ATI ON:
to any re lianc e t
d at
trut
a,and t
he us
he use r ass
e r plac e sint
um e st
he m apsand m ap
he e nt
h,ac c urac y,c urre nc y,or c om ple t
ire riskast
e ne ssof t
ot
he
he
Cadomin
!
Mountain
! ! Powe rline Curre ntDis
turbanc e Haulroad s
Was
t
Was
t
e Dum p Lim it
e Dum p Lim it-30m Buffe r
Se d im e nt
at
Em bankm e nt
ionPond f
¤
¥ Cros
sing St
ruc t
ure ! MKR CPowe rline
3/
16/
2018 Card inalR iv
er
Ac c e s
sR oad s
inform at ionc ont aine d int he m apsand m ap d at a. Cree SCALE: COOR DI
NATESYSTEM:
Community
!
Haulroad and Powe r R ightof Ways
1:
26,
000 NAD1983UTM Zone 1
1N
Doc um e ntPat
h:\\t
e ck
c om inc o\CGO\Groups
\TCGI
S\Dat
a\Ope rat
ions
\CR O\Proje c t
s\MKR CPe rm it
Applic at
ion\MXD\FinalFigure s
\MKCR Proje c t
De s
c r ipt
ion_ Fig1.
0-5.
mxd
R24 R23 R23 R22
27 26 25 30 29 28 27 26 25 30 29 28 27 26
I
25 30

22 23 24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19

15 14 13 18 17 16 15 14 13 18 17 16 15 14 13 18
Grave Flats Road

10 11 12 7 8 9 10 11 12 7 8 9 10 11 12 7

k
ee
Cr
t
ec
sp
P ro

Prospect Harris Upper Harris


Document Path: \\teckcominco\CGO\Groups\TCGIS\Data\Operations\CRO\Projects\MKRCPermitApplication\MXD\FinalFigures\MKCRProjectDescription_Fig1.6-1.mxd

3 2 1
Area Area Area 2
6 5 4 3 Ha rri s 1 6 5 4 3 2 1 6
C reek

T46
T46
MacKenzie
Cheviot Area Area
T45
McLeod T45
Area
34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31 32 33 34 35 36 31

Redcap
e k Area
re
C
n
rto
T ho

27 26 25 30 29 28 27 26 25 30 29 28 27 26 25 30

22 23 24 19 20 21
Grave Flats Road
22 23 24 19 20 21 22 23 24 19

15 14 13 R24 R23 18 17 16 15 14 13
R23 R22 18 17 16 15 14 13 18

LEGEND PROJECT

Proposed MSL Boundary


Current Cheviot MSL Boundary MacKenzie Redcap Project
CRO Mine Permit Boundary
Proposed MKRC Project Development TITLE

Current Disturbance Actual Cheviot Mine Development Compared with


Approved Disturbance Approved Development
Whitehorse Wildland Provincial Park NOTES PROJECT: 14-00804
DRAWN BY: SP
Datum/Projection: UTM NAD 83 Zone 11
CHECKED BY: SP
DATE: Mar 13, 2018

FIGURE

0 1 2
Kilometres
4
1.6-1
Section 2 Geology and Geotechnical
March 2018
MacKenzie Redcap Project

Table of Contents
Page
2 GEOLOGY AND GEOTECHNICAL .............................................................................2-1
2.1 Geology ....................................................................................................................2-1
2.1.1 Regional Structure ............................................................................................2-1
2.1.2 Regional Geological Structure...........................................................................2-1
2.1.3 Coal Geology ....................................................................................................2-1
2.1.4 Coal Quality ......................................................................................................2-3
2.1.5 Coal Leases ......................................................................................................2-3
2.2 Geotechnical Conditions ...........................................................................................2-4

List of Tables Page


Table 2.1-1 Coal Leases Held in the MKRC Area...............................................................2-4

List of Figures
Figure 2.1-1 Surficial Geology
Figure 2.1-2 Exploration Drill Holes
Figure 2.1-3 Geologic Cross Section 45+00
Figure 2.1-4 Geologic Cross Section 48+00
Figure 2.1-5 Geologic Cross Section 51+00
Figure 2.1-6 Geologic Cross Section 54+00
Figure 2.1-7 Geologic Cross Section 58+50
Figure 2.1-8 Geologic Cross Section 60+00
Figure 2.1-9 Geologic Cross Section 61+50
Figure 2.1-10 Geologic Cross Section 63+00
Figure 2.1-11 Geologic Cross Section 66+00
Figure 2.1-12 Geologic Cross Section 69+00
Figure 2.1-13 Geologic Cross Section 70+50
Figure 2.1-14 Geologic Cross Section 72+00
Figure 2.1-15 Geologic Cross Section 73+50
Figure 2.1-16 Geologic Cross Section 78+00
Figure 2.1-17 Geologic Cross Section 81+00
Figure 2.1-18 Geologic Cross Section 82+50
Figure 2.1-19 Geologic Cross Section 85+50
Figure 2.1-20 Geologic Cross Section 87+00
Figure 2.1-21 Geologic Cross Section 90+00
Figure 2.1-22 Geologic Cross Section 93+00

Teck Resources Limited Page 2-i


March 2018
MacKenzie Redcap Project

Figure 2.1-23 Geologic Cross Section 96+00


Figure 2.1-24 Geologic Cross Section 99+00
Figure 2.1-25 Geologic Cross Section 100+50
Figure 2.1-26 Geologic Cross Section 108+00
Figure 2.1-27 Geologic Cross Section 116+25
Figure 2.1-28 Geologic Cross Section 120+00
Figure 2.1-29 Geologic Cross Section 123+00
Figure 2.1-30 Detailed Stratigraphic Column

Teck Resources Limited Page 2-ii


March 2018
MacKenzie Redcap Project

2 GEOLOGY AND GEOTECHNICAL


2.1 Geology

2.1.1 Regional Structure

The MacKenzie Redcap (MKRC) Project (the Project) is located in the Cadomin-Luscar coal field, within
the northwesterly trending ridges and steep-sided valleys in the front ranges of the Rocky Mountains of
west central Alberta. The region is part of the disturbed belt of central Alberta in which tectonic mountain
building forces have uplifted Cretaceous and adjacent strata in a series of parallel folded belts. Major
thrust faults are found throughout the area.

2.1.2 Regional Geological Structure

The Project is close to the western margin of the original sedimentary basin responsible for coal
deposition and is structurally bounded by two major thrust faults:

• Nikanassin to the northeast of the proposed Project, which has thrust massive Devonian and
Mississippian aged carbonates to the surface. These carbonates form the mountainous ridge to
the northeast of the MKRC area; and

• McConnell to the southwest of the proposed Project, which has thrust Cambrian and Devonian
strata to the surface where they form a steep mountain range to the southwest of the MKRC area.

The MKRC area contains localized faulting and folding due to a moderate amount of structural variability
in the MKRC pits. Bedding in the central and eastern portion of the proposed ultimate pit will dip
moderately to steeply (e.g., 25° to 60°) southward. The regional geology of the Project and surrounding
area is presented in Figure 2.1-1.

2.1.3 Coal Geology

The Project is located within the Cheviot Coal Mine Permit Boundary, which is generally characterized by
undulating upland topography ranging in elevation between 1,700 and 2,000 metres above sea level
(masl). The Project is an extension of the currently licenced Upper Harris Extension (Figure 1.0-3), and
the final stage of Cheviot Coal Mine development.

Glacial till deposits drape the Project area with an average thickness of 5 metres (m), based on the
drill-hole record. Figure 2.1-2 presents a plan view of the MKRC area containing the exploration drill-holes
as well as the locations of the geological cross sections. The geological model was developed based on
exploration drilling completed from 1993 to 2017. Representative cross sections are created with 150 to
500 m spacing and are provided in Figures 2.1-3 to 2.1-29. The cross sections were created
perpendicular to the strike of the coal, which results in a baseline that is oriented at an Azimuth of 300°.
Exploration drill-holes have been included within 25 m on either side of the section line.

Teck Resources Limited Page 2-1


March 2018
MacKenzie Redcap Project

The figures include the following cross sections:

• Figure 2.1-3 Geological Cross Section 45+00

• Figure 2.1-4 Geological Cross Section 48+00

• Figure 2.1-5 Geological Cross Section 51+00

• Figure 2.1-6 Geological Cross Section 54+00

• Figure 2.1-7 Geological Cross Section 58+50

• Figure 2.1-8 Geological Cross Section 60+00

• Figure 2.1-9 Geological Cross Section 61+50


• Figure 2.1-10 Geological Cross Section 63+00

• Figure 2.1-11 Geological Cross Section 66+00

• Figure 2.1-12 Geological Cross Section 69+00


• Figure 2.1-13 Geological Cross Section 70+50

• Figure 2.1-14 Geological Cross Section 72+00

• Figure 2.1-15 Geological Cross Section 73+50

• Figure 2.1-16 Geological Cross Section 78+00

• Figure 2.1-17 Geological Cross Section 81+00

• Figure 2.1-18 Geological Cross Section 82+50

• Figure 2.1-19 Geological Cross Section 85+50

• Figure 2.1-20 Geological Cross Section 87+00

• Figure 2.1-21 Geological Cross Section 90+00


• Figure 2.1-22 Geological Cross Section 93+00

• Figure 2.1-23 Geological Cross Section 96+00

• Figure 2.1-24 Geological Cross Section 99+00

• Figure 2.1-25 Geological Cross Section 100+50

• Figure 2.1-26 Geological Cross Section 108+00

• Figure 2.1-27 Geological Cross Section 116+25


• Figure 2.1-28 Geological Cross Section 120+00

• Figure 2.1-29 Geological Cross Section 123+00

Teck Resources Limited Page 2-2


March 2018
MacKenzie Redcap Project

A lithostratigraphic profile of the sedimentary sequence found in the MKRC area is illustrated in
Figure 2.1-30, and summarized as follows:

• the lower Cretaceous, coal-bearing Luscar Group is marked at the base by the Cadomin
conglomerate, a resistant unit easily identified in outcrops;
• the Gladstone Formation (predominantly shales and siltstones) conformably overlies the Cadomin
conglomerate;

• the Moosebar Formation overlies the Gladstone, and is comprised of marine shales, siltstones,
carbonates, and shaley coal horizons (e.g., M0, M1, M2 and Cheviot seams);

• the overlying Gates Formation is divided into three members; the Torrens (sandstones, and
Torrens coal marker), Grande Cache (siltstones, shales, coal) and Mountain Park (sandstone);
and
• the recessive marine shales of the Blackstone Formation lie unconformably above the Gates
Formation.
Several coal seams occur within the Gates Formation, with as many as four seams used as stratigraphic
markers. These include the rider seams (R0 to R3) and the main Jewel seam. These coal seams are a
continuance of the coal sequence in the adjacent Harris and Upper Harris regions and directly
comparable to the coal seams in the Luscar Mine permit area. Within the coal lease area, the Jewel seam
represents all of the economically mineable coal.

All planned recoverable coal will come from the Jewel seam, which averages approximately 8 m in
thickness and is immediately above the Torrens Member sandstone footwall. Previous experience with
rider seams in the Cheviot/Prospect areas has shown that they are not economically recoverable due to
thickness and variable coal quality. The rider seams range in thickness from 0.5 to 3.0 m.

2.1.4 Coal Quality

To date, nearly 170 samples from the MKRC area have been collected for quality analysis. The results
can be found in Appendix 3. The coal quality varies between the mine phases and the expected coal yield
in the processing plant is expected to be in the range of 60% to 75% in the new areas, based upon the
plant feed ash.

2.1.5 Coal Leases

The entire Project lies within Category 4 lands as defined in the Coal Policy (Government of Alberta
[GoA] 1976), which states that surface mining may be conducted. All of the coal leases in the Project area
are held by Teck Coal Limited (Table 2.1-1), and are located within the existing Cheviot Coal Mine Permit
Boundary.

Teck Resources Limited Page 2-3


March 2018
MacKenzie Redcap Project

Table 2.1-1 Coal Leases Held in the Project Area

Disposition Disposition Holder Location

S 31-045-22 W5M;
S 32-045-22 W5M;
1305010855 Teck Coal Limited NE 32-045-22 W5M;
05-046-22 W5M;
N 06-046-22 W5M
35-045-23 W5M;
36-045-23 W5M;
1305010858 Teck Coal Limited
N 01-046-23 W5M;
02-046-23 W5M
N 27-045-22 W5M;
SE 27-045-22 W5M;
33-045-22 W5M;
10305010861 Teck Coal Limited
S 34-045-22 W5M;
NW 34-045-22 W5M;
S 04-046-22 W5M
23-045-22 W5M;
10307010894 Teck Coal Limited
Portions 24-045-22 W5M

2.2 Geotechnical Conditions

The reports documenting the pre-feasibility level geotechnical investigation and assessments for the
MKRC open pits, ex-pit waste rock dumps, and haulroad corridor are provided in Appendix 4. The key
findings and recommendations from the assessments are summarized as follows:

Open Pits

• Design criteria were developed for the final pit walls, based on a pre-feasibility level design
acceptance criteria Factor of Safety of 1.3 that is consistent with published guidance and industry
practices for pit slope design.

• The highwall and endwall designs consist primarily of double benches that are 30 m high with
bench face angles ranging from 65 to 75° and catch bench widths ranging from 8 to 11 m based
on the bedding dip and rock type. The resulting design inter-ramp slope angles range from 45° to
54°.

• For the footwall designs the maximum allowable unbenched heights and catch bench widths vary
based on bedding dip, ranging from unbenched footwalls for bedding dips of up to 25°, to
maximum double bench height (30 m) with 11 m wide catch benches for bedding dips of 65° or
greater.
• Design criteria were also developed for benched excavations in overburden soils at the crest of
pit slopes, including surface water management, to manage erosion of excavated overburden
slopes and safely accommodate expected raveling.
• Recommendations for controlled blasting of the bench faces to achieve the recommended pit wall
design criteria and careful scaling to reduce the volume of subsequent raveling.

Teck Resources Limited Page 2-4


March 2018
MacKenzie Redcap Project

• Recommendations for slope inspections and suitable monitoring for pit slope movements, to
check actual conditions vs. the design basis and to assess the performance of the pit slopes as
mining progresses.

• Recommendations for targeted feasibility-level geotechnical investigation and assessment work


to advance and refine the pit slope designs.

Ex-Pit Waste Rock Dumps

• Redcap Dump:

• The current design of the Redcap ex-pit waste rock dump meets the acceptance criteria for
waste rock dump stability (i.e., Factor of Safety values of 1.3 to 1.5 for static stability, and
1.05 to 1.15 under seismic loading) based on industry standard guidelines, except for the
lowest inter-platform slope, which had Factor of Safety values below the acceptance criteria
due to the presence of low strength peat in the dump foundation.

• A preliminary assessment of potential mitigation measures to increase the stability of the


lowest inter-platform slope showed that a combination of removal of portions of the peat
along with operational controls on the rate of dump construction should be sufficient to meet
the stability acceptance criteria.
• Further investigation is required to better delineate the extent and depth of the peat deposits
as part of the feasibility-level and detailed design work, and to confirm the most appropriate
mitigation measures and finalize the dump design.

• MacKenzie Dump

• The current design of the MacKenzie ex-pit waste rock dump meets the above-noted
acceptance criteria for dump stability except for an early, interim stage of dump construction
for which analyses showed potential foundation instability during the initial loading of weak
surficial soils in the sloping dump foundation.

• A preliminary assessment of a potential revised dump configuration was performed and


showed that extending the dump toe approximately 25 m further downslope to an area of
gentler topography would increase the Factor of Safety of the initial stage of the dump to
around or marginally below the acceptance criteria.

• Additional investigation of the foundation soil conditions as well as further analyses to finalize
a dump design that meets the stability acceptance criteria will be completed during the
feasibility-level and detailed design work.

Haulroad Corridor

• The pre-feasibility level geohazard mapping and geotechnical assessment of the proposed
haulroad corridor identified geohazards that could impact locations along the haulroad such as
localized flooding, gully erosion, snow avalanches, and cut slope instabilities.

• Further investigation and assessment of the potential geohazard impacts will be performed during
the feasibility and detailed design work for the haulroad corridor to determine if mitigation
measures beyond typical road inspection and maintenance during operation are warranted, and
to design any such mitigation measures.

Teck Resources Limited Page 2-5


March 2018
MacKenzie Redcap Project

Section 2 Figures

Teck Resources Limited


March 2018
(

N
484,000 486,000 488,000 490,000 492,000 494,000
( (
(

R23 R22

(
GL N
( (

(
( 11 12 7 8 9 10

(
( (
5,866,000

5,866,000
( (

GL
( ( (
(

GL
(
( ( (

(
MB
( (
(

S
(

M
(
2
(
1 6 5 4 3
(
(

GL
( (
(

(
MB
(

GCM N

(
(
(
( (
(

N
(

M GCM N

(
T46 GL T46

(
( (

GCM
(

(
T45 GL T45
( ( ( (

(
( (

M
( ( (

(
(

B M M
5,864,000

5,864,000
(

M
( (

(
( ( (
(

B
(
35 36 31 32 33 34
(

(
(
(
( (
(
(

(
N
(

(
( (

(
M
( (

M B
( (
( (

(
( ( ( (

(
( (
(

GCM N
( (

GCM
( (( ( (
( (
( (
( ( (
(

GL
(

B
(

MB
( (
CO
(
VE
(
RE
(
D
(
26 25 30 ( 29 28 27
(
5,862,000

5,862,000
(
(

B M
K Cardium Fm MB Moosebar Fm
B Blackstone Fm GL Gladstone Fm
M Mountain Park Mb N Nikanassin Fm B
GCM Grande Cache Mb F Fernie Gp K
TO Torrens
23 Mb S Spray River Gp24 19 20 21 22

COVERED Till Covered


R23 R22
K
484,000 486,000 488,000 490,000 492,000 494,000

MacKenzie Redcap Project Surficial Geology - Figure 2.1-1


±
Hinton
!

Robb
!

Foothills Surficial Geology


T h e maps andmap dataare provide d‘as is’with out
anyg uarante e ,re pre se ntation,condition or warranty
!
Formation Contacts Anticline Curre nt Ch e viot MSLBoundary CRO Mine Pe rmit Boundary Outwash plains 0 250 500 1,
000
m
F
ofanykind,e ith e r e x pre ss,implie d,or statutory .T e ck
Re source s Limite dassume s no liabilitywith re spe c t Je we lSe am Subcrop M Syncline Propose dMSLBoundary MacKe nzie Re dcap Footprint Colluvium Slig h tlyle ach e dtill,Cordille ran prov
e nance
to anyre liance th e use r plac e s in th e maps andmap Cadomin DAT E: MI
NEOPERAT I ON:
data,andth e use r assume s th e e ntire risk as to th e
! Bottom T orre ns Me mbe r ( T h rust Fault Alluvialf
ans andaprons Mode rate lyle ach e dtill,Cordille ran prov
e nance 3/
29/
2018 CardinalRiv
er
truth ,accurac y
,c urre nc y,or c omple te ne ss ofth e Mountain
inf ormation containe din th e maps andmap data. Cree Cadomin Formation Coarse stre am alluvium Be drock SCALE: COORDINAT ESYST EM:
Community
! 1:
26,
000 NAD1983UT M Zone 1
1N
Docume nt Path :\
\te ckcominco\
CGO\
Groups\
T CGI
S\Data\
Ope rations\
CRO\
Proje cts\
MKRCPe rmitApplication\
MXD\
FinalFig ure s\
MKCRProje ctDe scription_Fig 7.
mxd
(
484,000 486,000 ( 488,000 490,000 492,000 494,000

R23 R22

(
(
( ( (

( _00
( (

00
12

12
(
R4
(
00

0_
7 8 9 10 11
0_
(

12
B

25
as
( (
eli

6_
ne

11
( (

(
(
(

00

(
8_
(
(

10
5,866,000

5,866,000
R3
( ( (
00
(
E
(

(
(
0_

50
B
E ((
E as E
(

0_
(

0
EEE eE

_0
lin

10
EE E E E E E
E e
EEE E
(

99
E E
E E E E
(

0
EEE EE EEEEEEEE EE EEEE E

_0
(
E E E E E E E E E
(

(
EE E
EE EE E E E
EEE E EEE E E
E EE E E E E E

96
E EE E
E E E
E EE EEE EE E EE

0
E
(
EE EEE E EE EEEEE EE

_0
E EE E E EEEE E E E
2
Pembina
E EE E 1 E 6
E 4 3
E E EEE E E
EEEEE E EE
E EEE E E
(

93
EE EE E E EE
E E EE EEEEEEE E
( (

0
E EE E EEE E E
EEE EE E EE E
(
EEE EE

_0
E E E E E EE E E E E

(
E E E E E E E E

(
EE E
E E E
E E E E
E EEE
EE E
E E E E E E E E

90
EE E E
EE EE E EEE E EE E E E E EE E E
EEE

0
EEE EE E
5
EEE EE
(
E E E E E

(
E E

_0
EE EE E E E E E EE EE E E
E EE E E

0
EEEEEEE E E EE

_5
87
EE EE E EE EEE
EE E E
E E EE EEEE EE E E
(
E E E EE E E

85
E E E E EEEE EE E E E E E EE

0
E E E EEE EEEEE E E E
E E E EE
(
EE E EE E EE EE EEEEEE E

_5
E E
EEEE (
EE E E E E

0
(
E
EEEE E E EE E E E E E E E

_0
E

82
E
EEE E E E
(
E EE EE E E E E E E
E E E

(
E

81
E
E E EE E E EEE E E
ET46

0
T46
E E E
(
EE E E

_0
E E E E E (
E E E E E

78
E EEEE

(
E E E E E
E EE E E E E E
E E EE

0
E E
( (
E E
(

_5
E
(
E
(
E E
T45
E

0
E
T45
E E EE E

_0
73
E
(
E E
(
E E E

0
( E E E E E

_5
(
E

72
E
(
E EE E

0
E E EE E E E E

_0
E

70
E E E
EE
E E
E E
(
E
(
E

69
E E E E
(

0
E E

66 (
E E E E EE E E

_0
EE
(
E E E
EE E EE
( (

(
EE
5,864,000

5,864,000
(
E E E E

0
E
E E E E
(

E E E

(
E

_0
E E E E E EE
( (
E E

0
E E E EE EE E E
EE EE E

_5
E EE EE

63
E
(

58 ( 0
E E
EE EE EE
(

_0
61
E E E E E E
(

0
(

35
(
36 E 31 E

_5
32
E E33E E E

60
34
E E E

(
E E E
E E E E E E EE EE

(
(
E E E E E E E
E E
(

0
E E E E E E EE E E

_0
( (
E EE E E E EE EEE E

(
E E E

54
EE EEE EE
(
E
(
E

0
E E EE EE E E

(
(
E E

_0
E E E E E E
E E
E EE E E E EE E E E
E E EEE E E

(
E

51
E EE
( (
EE EE E

0
EE
(

_0
( (
E E E EE E E E E E EEE E EE
E E
(
E E E E E E
(

48
E E E E E E E E E
EE E EE E EE EE EE

0
(
EE E

_0
( (
E EEEE EE EE EE E
(
E E
E E E E E E E

45
( (( E
E E EE E EE E EE EE
( EE E
(
E E E EE E EE E (
E
E E
(
( E E
E E E E E E E
E E EE
(
E E E E EE E E
(
E
E EEE EE EE E E E EE
(
( E
E (
E E E E
E E
E E E E E
E E E E EE E EE EE
(
E E
(
E E E E E E
( (
E E E E EE E E
( E
E E
E E
E EE
E E E
E E EE E E ( (
E EE
(
26 25
E E
30 29 28
E E 27
E E
E
E
E EE
5,862,000

5,862,000
( E E
EE E E E
E
E (
E E

(
E E E E
E E E E E
E E (
E E E E E
E E E
E E E E
E E E
E E
E E
E E E
E E
E E
23 24 19 20 21 22 E E
E
R23 R22
E

484,000 486,000 488,000 490,000 492,000 494,000

MacKenzie Redcap Project Exploration Drill Holes - Figure 2.1-2


±
Hinton
!

Robb
!
Th em apsandm ap dataar
anyg uar antee,repr
epr ov ided‘
asis ’
esentation,condition orwar
with out
ranty
!
Anticline E Explor
ation Dr
illHole Cur
rentCh ev iotMSLBoundar
y CRO MinePer
m itBoundar
y PitLim it 0 250 500 1,
000
m
F
ofanykind,eith erex press ,im plied,orstatutory.Teck
Res our cesLim itedas sum esnoliabilitywith r espec t Syncline Cr
ossSection Pr
oposedMSLBoundar
y MacKenzieRedcap Footpr
int PitLim it-30m Buf
fer
Cadomin DATE: MI
NEOPERATI ON:
toanyr elianceth eus erplac esin th em apsandm ap
M
data,andth euserass um esth eentir eris
k astoth e
Th r
ustFault Sec
tion Bas
eline U pperHar
risAppr
ov edDev elopm ent 3/
29/
2018 Car
dinalRiv er
!
Mountain
truth ,acc urac y
,c urrenc y,orc om pletenessofth e
(
infor m ation containedin th em apsandm ap data. Cree SCALE: COORDINATESYSTEM:
Community
! 1:
30,
000 NAD1983U TM Zone1
1N
Docum entPath :\
\teckcom inco\
CGO\
Groups\
TCGI
S\Data\
Oper
ations\
CRO\
Projec
ts\
MKRCPer
m itApplication\
MXD\
FinalFig ur
es\
MKCRPr
ojectDescr
iption_Fig 8.
mxd
Not to Scale
Detailed Stratigraphic Column - Figure 2.1-30
Them a p s a n dm a p da ta a rep ro v ided‘a s i s’wi tho ut
a n ygua ra n tee,rep resen ta ti o n ,co n ditio n o r wa rra n ty
o fa n yk i
n d,ei ther exp ress,i m plied,o r sta tuto ry .T ec k
Reso urc es Li m i teda ssum es n o l ia bilitywi thresp ec t
to a n yrel ia n cetheuser p l ac es in them a p s a n dm a p DATE: MI
NEOPERATI ON:
da ta ,a n dtheuser a ssum es theen ti reri ska s to the 3/
6/2018 Ca rdi
nal
River
truth,a cc ura c y ,c urren cy,o r c om pl eten ess o fthe
inf o rm a ti
on c o n ta in edin them a p s a n dm a p da ta .

Do cum en tPa th:\


\teck
co m i
n co \
CGO\
Gro up s\
TCGI
S\Da ta \
Op era ti
o n s\
CRO\
Pro j
ects\
MKRCPerm i
tAp p l
i
ca ti
on\
MXD\
Final
Figures\
MKCRPro j
ectDescri
p ti
o n _Fi
g2.
1-30.
m xd
Section 3 Project Description
March 2018
MacKenzie Redcap Project

Table of Contents
Page
3.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION ...........................................................................................3-1
3.1 Existing and Planned Development ..........................................................................3-2
3.2 MKRC Mine Extension..............................................................................................3-6
3.2.1 Pit Economics/Design Criteria ...........................................................................3-7
3.2.2 Coal Reserves ..................................................................................................3-7
3.2.3 Mine Plan Review .............................................................................................3-8
3.2.4 Pit Phasing........................................................................................................3-9
3.2.4.1 MacKenzie Phase 1 (MK1) ...............................................................................3-9
3.2.4.2 MacKenzie Phase 2 (MK2) .............................................................................3-10
3.2.4.3 MacKenzie Phase 3 (MK3) .............................................................................3-10
3.2.4.4 MacKenzie Phase 4 (MK4) .............................................................................3-11
3.2.4.5 Redcap Phase 1 (RC1) ...................................................................................3-11
3.2.4.6 Redcap Phase 2 (RC2) ...................................................................................3-11
3.2.4.7 Redcap Phase 3 (RC3) ...................................................................................3-11
3.2.4.8 Redcap Phase 4 (RC4) ...................................................................................3-11
3.2.4.9 Redcap Phase 5 (RC5) ...................................................................................3-11
3.2.5 Haulage Assumptions .....................................................................................3-12
3.2.6 Production Equipment Constraints ..................................................................3-12
3.2.7 Plant Constraints.............................................................................................3-12
3.3 Detailed Scheduling ................................................................................................3-12
3.3.1 Overall Material Balance/Backfill Strategy .......................................................3-13
3.3.2 Annual Mine Plan Descriptions .......................................................................3-15
3.3.2.1 Year 1 (2019) ..................................................................................................3-15
3.3.2.2 Year 2 (2020) ..................................................................................................3-15
3.3.2.3 Year 3 (2021) ..................................................................................................3-15
3.3.2.4 Year 4 (2022) ..................................................................................................3-15
3.3.2.5 Year 5 (2023) ..................................................................................................3-15
3.3.2.6 Year 6 (2024) ..................................................................................................3-16
3.3.2.7 Year 7 (2025) ..................................................................................................3-16
3.3.2.8 Year 8 (2026) ..................................................................................................3-16
3.3.2.9 Year 9 (2027) ..................................................................................................3-16
3.4 Water Management Plan ........................................................................................3-17
3.4.1 MacKenzie Sector ...........................................................................................3-21
3.4.1.1 MacKenzie Creek Crossing .............................................................................3-21
3.4.1.2 MacKenzie Settling Pond (MKPO) ..................................................................3-21
3.4.1.3 MacKenzie Sump and Pipeline (MKSU) ..........................................................3-22
3.4.1.4 Roadside Ditching ...........................................................................................3-22
3.4.1.5 Pit Dewatering ................................................................................................3-22

Teck Resources Limited Page 3-i


March 2018
MacKenzie Redcap Project

3.4.2 Little Homer Sector .........................................................................................3-22


3.4.2.1 Little Homer Creek Crossing ...........................................................................3-23
3.4.2.2 Little Homer Settling Pond (LHPO) .................................................................3-23
3.4.2.3 Roadside Ditching ...........................................................................................3-24
3.4.2.4 Little Homer Sump and Pipeline (LHSU) .........................................................3-24
3.4.2.5 Pit Dewatering ................................................................................................3-24
3.4.3 Upper Tributary Redcap (UTRC) Sector .........................................................3-24
3.4.3.1 Interception Pond (UTRC1-SU-1) ...................................................................3-25
3.4.3.2 Interception Pond (UTRC1-SU-2) ...................................................................3-25
3.4.3.3 Interception Pond (UTRC2-SU-1) ...................................................................3-25
3.4.3.4 Interception Pond (UTRC2-SU-2) ...................................................................3-25
3.4.4 Redcap Sector ................................................................................................3-25
3.4.4.1 Redcap Creek Settling Pond (RCPO) .............................................................3-26
3.4.4.2 Redcap Contact Water Ditch (RCCD) .............................................................3-26
3.4.4.3 Pit Dewatering. ...............................................................................................3-26
3.4.5 Maintenance and Operation ............................................................................3-26
3.5 Selenium Management ...........................................................................................3-27
3.5.1 Strategies for Managing Selenium ..................................................................3-27
3.5.2 Selenium Trend Assessment ..........................................................................3-29
3.5.3 Selenium Monitoring .......................................................................................3-29
3.5.4 Conclusions ....................................................................................................3-30
3.6 Additional Mine Operations Considerations ............................................................3-30
3.6.1 Materials Handling Assumptions .....................................................................3-30
3.6.2 Pre-construction ..............................................................................................3-30
3.6.3 Construction....................................................................................................3-31
3.6.4 Haulroads .......................................................................................................3-31
3.6.5 Water Crossings .............................................................................................3-32
3.6.6 Power Transmission .......................................................................................3-32
3.6.7 Drilling and Blasting ........................................................................................3-32
3.6.8 Heavy Equipment............................................................................................3-33
3.6.9 Support Facilities ............................................................................................3-33
3.6.10 Pit Dewatering ................................................................................................3-34
3.6.11 Coal Handling and Processing ........................................................................3-34
3.6.12 Geotechnical Conditions .................................................................................3-34
3.6.12.1 Open Pits ........................................................................................................3-34
3.6.12.2 Ex-Pit Waste Dumps (Redcap Dump and MacKenzie Dump(s)) .....................3-35
3.6.12.3 Haulroad Corridor ...........................................................................................3-35
3.7 Continual Planning .................................................................................................3-36
3.8 Financial Security ...................................................................................................3-36
3.9 Health, Safety and Environmental Management .....................................................3-36

Teck Resources Limited Page 3-ii


March 2018
MacKenzie Redcap Project

3.9.1 Corporate Policies...........................................................................................3-36


3.9.2 Health and Safety Program .............................................................................3-37
3.9.3 Emergency Response Plan .............................................................................3-38
3.9.4 Environmental Protection Program .................................................................3-38
3.9.5 Health, Safety and Environment Integration into Project Management ............3-39
3.9.6 Fire Control Plan .............................................................................................3-39
3.9.7 Worker Competence and Training Program ....................................................3-39

List of Tables Page

Table 3.0-1 Summary of Project Footprint Components .....................................................3-1


Table 3.1-1 MKRC Project – Proposed Mineral Surface Lease Boundary ..........................3-2
Table 3.1-2 Administrative Boundaries for Pit and Dump Licences for MacKenzie Redcap
Project .............................................................................................................3-3
Table 3.2-1 Project Phases and General Activities .............................................................3-6
Table 3.2-2 Coal Reserve and Material Balance for MKRC Pits .........................................3-8
Table 3.3-1 Annual Mining Volumes and Schedule for MKRC ..........................................3-12
Table 3.3-2 Ex-Pit/In-Pit Waste Disposal (million loose cubic metres) ..............................3-13
Table 3.3-3 Waste Material Balance (million loose cubic metres) .....................................3-14
Table 3.4.1 Surface Water Management Schedule ..........................................................3-19
Table 3.6-1 Heavy Equipment Fleet .................................................................................3-33

List of Figures
Figure 3.1-1 Proposed Pit Licences
Figure 3.1-2 Proposed Dump Licences
Figure 3.2-1 Annual Progression Map - End of Year 2019 (Year 1)
Figure 3.2-2 Annual Progression Map - End of Year 2020 (Year 2)
Figure 3.2-3 Annual Progression Map - End of Year 2021 (Year 3)
Figure 3.2-4 Annual Progression Map - End of Year 2022 (Year 4)
Figure 3.2-5 Annual Progression Map - End of Year 2023 (Year 5)
Figure 3.2-6 Annual Progression Map - End of Year 2024 (Year 6)
Figure 3.2-7 Annual Progression Map - End of Year 2025 (Year 7)
Figure 3.2-8 Annual Progression Map - End of Year 2026 (Year 8)
Figure 3.2-9 Annual Progression Map - End of Year 2027 (Year 9)
Figure 3.4-1 Water Management Plan General Arrangement
Figure 3.4-2 Water Management Plan Overview of MacKenzie Sector
Figure 3.4-3 Water Management Plan Overview of Little Homer Sector
Figure 3.4-4 Water Management Plan Overview of UTRC Sector and Redcap Sector
Figure 3.7-1 Potential Future Haulroad Alignment

Teck Resources Limited Page 3-iii


March 2018
MacKenzie Redcap Project

3.0 Project Description


Cardinal River Coals Ltd. is proposing to develop the next and final phase of the Cheviot Coal Mine with
the proposed MacKenzie Redcap (MKRC) Project (the Project). The Cheviot Coal Mine is located
approximately 300 kilometres (km) west of Edmonton and 70 km south of Hinton, Alberta (Figure 1.0-1
and Figure 1.0-2). Other nearby communities include the Hamlet of Cadomin 12 km to the north, Alexis
Sioux Nation Reserve #234 located 12 km to southeast, and the Mountain Cree Community 30 km to the
southeast.

The Project is the next phase of development in the approved Cheviot Mine (Alberta Energy Regulator
[AER] Mine Permit C2003-4A) and is expected to produce approximately 1.5 million tonnes of clean coal
annually, although annual production targets may be up to 3 million tonnes of clean coal. The six phases
of the Cheviot Coal Mine include the Prospect, Cheviot Creek, McLeod, Harris, Upper Harris and the
MacKenzie Redcap pits (Figure 1.0-3). The MKRC area is adjacent to the Upper Harris Extension pit
development (Figure 1.0-3). Progressive reclamation activities at the Cheviot Coal Mine begin when a
mining or spoiling area are completed. This reclamation approach will continue for the Project.

The life of the Project is expected to be approximately nine years. The proposed mine plan would extend
the operations to 2027. At that point, the reserves will be depleted and the decommissioning and closure
plan will be executed. The proposed mining and associated infrastructures of the Project are provided in
Table 3.0-1.

CRO currently employs 352 people, as well as contractors. With the continuation of mining in the MKRC
area, continued employment also occurs. Conversely, if mining is not approved, then employment will not
continue which would have a considerable impact in the region.

Table 3.0-1 Summary of Project Footprint Components

Footprint Component Area (ha)

Clean Water Infrastructure 7.9


Haulroads and Access Roads 68.3
MK1 (MacKenzie Phase 1) Pit 23.7
MK2 (MacKenzie Phase 2) Pit 14.5
MK4 (MacKenzie Phase 4) Pit 17.8
MK3EX1 (MacKenzie Phase 3 - External Dump 1) 12.6
MK3EX2 (MacKenzie Phase 3 - External Dump 2) 12.2
Powerline 21.9
RC Pit (MK3 [MacKenzie Phase 3], RC1 to RC5 [Redcap Pits 1 to 5]) 298.3
RCEX (Redcap External Dump) 81.6
Soil Stockpile 32.6
Waste Water Infrastructure 15.0
Total 606.5

Teck Resources Limited Page 3-1


March 2018
MacKenzie Redcap Project

3.1 Existing and Planned Development

The Project is a component of the approved Cheviot Coal Mine, which began mining in 2004 and includes
the existing Prospect, Cheviot Creek, McLeod, Harris, Upper Harris and the proposed MKRC pits
(Figure 1.0-2). The MKRC pits on the eastern extent of the Cheviot Coal Mine constitute the next and final
phase of development of the Cheviot Coal Mine. If the Project is approved, Cardinal River Coals Ltd.
anticipates that all currently licenced coal in the Cheviot Coal Mine will be mined by 2027.

The disturbance associated with the Project is approximately 606.5 ha. A portion of the Project is already
covered by MSL No. 041321 (Figure 3.1-1). The lands required for the proposed MSL amendment are
provided in Table 3.1-1 and shown on Figure 1.0-4 and cover approximately 2,282 ha. The latitude and
longitude coordinates for the MSL are shown on Figure 1.0-4, for the following areas:

• NW corner of MSL – 52.943408N; -117.199491E

• SW corner of MSL – 52.916095N; -117.241404E


• NE corner of MSL – 52.919703N; -117.096342E

• SE corner of MSL – 52.90145N; -117.09306E

Table 3.1-1 MKRC – Proposed Mineral Surface Lease Boundary

Twp-Rge Meridian Section LSD LSD ¼

4 NW, NE, SW

6 ½ NW, ½ SW
26

12 SW, NW, ½ NE, ½ SE

045-22 W5M 13 ¼ NW, SW

28 1, 2, 5-16

27, 31, 32, 33

1-7, 12

34 8, 13 SW

11 NW, SW, SE

35 1, 2-8
045-23 W5M
36 1-8, 9, 16
4 2, 3, 4
046-22 W5M
5 1-7, 12

Teck Resources Limited Page 3-2


March 2018
MacKenzie Redcap Project

Twp-Rge Meridian Section LSD LSD ¼

11, 13 SW, SE
1, 2-12
6
13-16 SW, SE
1, 8, 9
046-23 W5M 1
16 SW, SE

The proposed locations for the MKRC pit and dump licences are listed in Table 3.1-2 and shown on
Figures 3.1-1 and 3.1-2.

Table 3.1-2 MKRC – Administrative Boundaries for Pit and Dump Licences

Twp-Rge Meridian Section LSD LSD 1/4

MK1 Pit
8 NW, SW
7
046-23 W5M 1
5, 6 NW, NE
10, 11, 12 SW, SE
MK2 Pit
15
045-22 W5M 31
14 NE
2 SW
046-22 W5M 6 3
4 NE, SE
MK3 Pit
8 NE
9, 15
045-22 W5M 32 10, 14 NW, NE, SE
13 NE
16 SW
2 SW
3 SW, NW, SE
5
4
046-22 W5M
5 SW, SE
1 SE, NW, NE
6
7 NE, SE

Teck Resources Limited Page 3-3


March 2018
MacKenzie Redcap Project

Twp-Rge Meridian Section LSD LSD 1/4

8
MK4 Pit
15 NE, SE
31
16
13
045-22 W5M
14 NW, SW
32
12 NW, NE
11 NW
RC1-RC5 Pits
7 NW, NE
8 NW
9 SW, NW
27
10, 11, 13-15
12 NW, NE, SE
16 SW
14 NE
045-22 W5M 28
15, 16
1-3, 5-8, 10-12
4 NE
9 SW, SE
33
13 SE, NE
14 NW, SW, SE
15 SW
RCEX Dump
2, 8 NW
3,4 NW, NE
5, 6, 10-15
27
7 NE, NE, SW
045-22 W5M 9 NW, SW
16 SW
1 NW, NE
28 7, 10 NE, SE
8, 9, 15, 16

Teck Resources Limited Page 3-4


March 2018
MacKenzie Redcap Project

Twp-Rge Meridian Section LSD LSD 1/4

14 NE
1-3, 5-8, 10-12
4 NE
9 SW, SE
33
13 NE, SE
14 NW, SW, SE
15 SW
2 SW, SE, NW
34 3-5
6 SW, SE
MK3EX1 Dump
14 NE
31
15, 16
11 NW
045-22 W5M
12 NE, NW
32
13
14 NW, SW
3 NW, SW
5 4
046-22 W5M 5 SW, SE
1-4, 8
6
7 NE, SE
1 NE
5, 6 NW, NE
046-23 W5M 1
7, 8
11, 12 SW, SE
MK3EX2 Dump
8 NE
9, 10, 15
045-22 W5M 32
11, 14 SE, NE
16 SW
2 SW
046-22 W5M 5
3 SE

Teck Resources Limited Page 3-5


March 2018
MacKenzie Redcap Project

3.2 MKRC Mine Extension

The Project will be a typical truck and shovel open-pit coal mine operation with waste stripping being
carried out by conventional drilling and blasting, equipment such as large electric and hydraulic shovels,
and coal loaded by excavators and front-end loaders. Mining and waste rock sequencing will be
integrated to ensure efficient waste rock removal and to maximize back-filling of mined out areas. Coal
will be hauled approximately 35 km from the proposed MKRC pits along the existing Cheviot Haulroad to
the existing CPP at the Luscar Mine, where it will be crushed, cleaned, dried, and loaded onto trains for
transport to market. Major activities associated with the Project include pre-construction, construction,
operations, decommissioning, closure, and reclamation (Table 3.2-1). As part of the long range planning
function, the optimization of the sequence and pit extents are re-evaluated annually to meet market
demand. The phases for the Project are provided in Table 3.2-1. The planned annual mining and
development progression is shown on Figures 3.2-1 to 3.2-9. Completion of Project phases are
dependent on achieving planned productivities, actual completion dates may vary.

Table 3.2-1 Project Phases and General Activities

Project Phase Project Calendar Year Mine Development Activities


Year

Pre-construction 1 to 3 2019 to 2021 • Timber and brush clearing.


• Soil salvage and stockpiling.
Construction 1 to 4 2019 to 2022 • Construction of MacKenzie and Little
Homer Creek clear span bridges.
• Construction of powerline extension
from Harris pit to Redcap.
• Construction of water management
structures.
• Construction of Haulroad to Redcap.
• Construction of Radio Transmission
Tower.
Operations 1 to 9 2019 to 2027 • Blasting and removal of waste rock.
• Mining and processing of raw coal.
• Transporting to market.
Reclamation 3 to 9(+) 2021 to • Contouring of waste rock dumps to
2027(+) acceptable configuration.
• Restoration of roadways to natural
state.
• Coversoil and seed for closure.
Decommissioning and 10+ 2028+ • Contouring of waste rock dumps to
Closure acceptable configuration.
• Ongoing monitoring and maintenance.
• Restoration of roadways and powerline
corridors to natural state.

Teck Resources Limited Page 3-6


March 2018
MacKenzie Redcap Project

3.2.1 Pit Economics/Design Criteria

CRO conducts annual evaluations of licenced and planned pits as part of a long-range planning process.
The steps involved in developing the long-range plan include the following:

• geological models are updated with any new exploration drill-hole information;
• operating cost assumptions are updated based on a review of historical costs and then adjusted
to account for projected changes based on commodity price forecasts, operating configurations,
and future contractual provisions;
• operating cost inputs include mining, coal processing, overhead, equipment leasing, closure, rail
transportation, port, and marketing;

• revenue assumptions are updated to reflect current contract coal pricing and future
pricing/exchange rate forecasts;
• these cost and revenue assumptions are used to populate a set of three-dimensional blocks
through the deposit to generate an individual block value;
• a pit finding exercise is completed using discrete mathematics in the application of a
Lerchs-Grossman (LG) algorithm to determine the ultimate pit;

• using the resultant LG shell as the foundation, the ultimate pit is adjusted to adhere to
geotechnical dictates and operating room constraints;

• the ultimate pit is sub-divided into discrete operational phases that form the basis for time
weighted scheduling of the reserve and have been designed to account for safe operating room,
adequate coal release, backfill opportunities, coal access, and water management;

• analysis of localized risks and opportunities to determine economic cutoffs (e.g., the value of
accessible coal in and under a creek bed versus the mitigation and reclamation costs associated
with fish bearing streams);
• inclusion of social concerns from Traditional Ecological Knowledge (TEK) and First Nation
consultation, such as minimize the impact to MacKenzie Creek, which has resulted in the
decision to leave a break between MK1 and MK2 pits; and
• inclusion of environmental concerns such as fisheries and water quality, which has resulted in the
decision to leave a break between MK2 and MK4 pits, due to the presence of fish and fish
habitat.

3.2.2 Coal Reserves

The coal reserves for the MKRC pits that comprise this application are summarized in Table 3.2-2. The
detailed bench reserve summary is provided in Appendix 5. The nine mining phases included in these
coal reserves are exclusive to the Project (i.e., they are the phases located in the proposed MKRC
development area only). These reserves were based on the following criteria:

• adherence to geotechnical considerations for pit slope design;

• pit coal loss due to mining efficiency on the main Jewel seams;
• rider seams are not generally recoverable and are not included in economic decisions;

Teck Resources Limited Page 3-7


March 2018
MacKenzie Redcap Project

• variable plant yield based on in-situ ash content for the main Jewel seam; and
• waste re-handle factor for over dig and re-handle concerns.

Teck is a publicly traded company that maintains an internal Reserves Committee of the Board. Reserve
estimates have been prepared using committee-approved short and long-term commodity prices and
exchange rates.

Table 3.2-2 Coal Reserve and Material Balance for MKRC Pits

Mining Phase Name Waste Raw Coal Clean Coal Ratio


Order (BCM(a)) (RMT(b)) (CMT(c)) (BCM/CMT)

1 MacKenzie 1 (MK1) 1,612,000 531,000 347,000 4.6:1


2 MacKenzie 2 (MK2) 836,000 380,000 257,000 3.3:1
3 MacKenzie 3 (MK3) 5,805,000 1,006,000 662,000 8.8:1
4 MacKenzie 4 (MK4) 1,939,000 807,000 559,000 3.5:1
5 Redcap 1 (RC1) 23,886,000 4,761,000 3,141,000 7.6:1
6 Redcap 2 (RC2) 17,572,000 3,748,000 2,487,000 7.1:1
7 Redcap 3 (RC3) 31,070,000 4,821,000 3,254,000 9.5:1
8 Redcap 4 (RC4) 28,762,000 3,792,000 2,585,000 11.1:1
9 Redcap 5 (RC5) 2,257,000 359,000 247,000 9.1:1
Total 113,739,000 20,206,000 13,539,000 8.4:1
(a)
BCM – bank cubic metres
(b)
RMT – raw metric tonnes
(c)
CMT – clean metric tonnes

In the 1996 Application and Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA), the Cheviot Coal Mine was predicted
to produce 65.3 million CMT of clean coal and 617.1 million bank cubic metres (BCM) of waste rock with an
average strip ratio of 9.4:1 BCM waste/CMT coal. When the Project is complete, the mine will have
produced 39 million CMT of clean coal and 361 million BCM of waste rock with an average strip ratio of
9.2:1 BCM waste/CMT coal. The main differences are the removal of Prospect phases at and above tree
line, local economic impacts of disturbing and reclaiming waterways, and the incorrect original assumption
that rider coal seams would be both easily recoverable and of coking quality.

3.2.3 Mine Plan Review

Life of mine plans are evaluated annually. The Project is a capital-intensive development that features a
long haulroad including multiple stream crossing structures and multiple areas where fish and water
impacts are a concern.

The current life of mine plan and schedule are based on an optimized mine plan that seeks to minimize
capital expenditure on new equipment, effects to fish-bearing streams and other waterways and to
maximize pit backfilling to reduce the size of ex-pit disposal areas and end pit lakes. The mine plan would
extend the life of the Cheviot Coal Mine to 2027. At that point the reserves will be depleted and the
decommissioning and closure plan will be executed.

Teck Resources Limited Page 3-8


March 2018
MacKenzie Redcap Project

3.2.4 Pit Phasing

The proposed Project is a continuation of the pit sequencing from the Cheviot Coal Mine and most
directly is an extension to the Upper Harris Extension development. The annual mining and development
progression are shown on Figures 3.2-1 to 3.2-9. These phases have been incorporated into the overall
mine plan. The MacKenzie pits are roughly mined from west to east through steep topography with a
focus on avoiding fish bearing streams. The Redcap pits are contiguous syncline/anticline/synclinal
structures that are roughly mined in a clockwise fashion from the northern limits. Annual production levels
were developed with consideration given to the site’s overall production commitments and operational
considerations such as fleet size, fleet maintenance, auxiliary support requirements, and phase access
constraints. The pit phases were also designed to comply with the guidelines as laid out in the Tetra Tech
geotechnical reports (Appendix 4) for the MKRC area.

The geological cross sections (Figures 2.1-3 to 2.1-29) contain the highwall locations and ultimate levels
of in-pit backfill. The cross sections start in the west and follow the Jewel 1 Lower (J1L) seam as a
moderately dipping monoclinal structure, dipping to the south, in the MK1, MK2, and MK4 pits. A regional
level fault separates the J1L coal from the Jewel 1 Upper (J1U) to the north. The J1U seam daylights to
the west in MK3 as a closely folded syncline. As the J1U seam trends to the east, it becomes a
moderately dipping monoclinal structure dipping to the south. The J1U seam joins with the J1M seam in a
syncline/anticline structure that daylights in the western portion of RC4 and continues into RC5. There is
a brief length of overlap of both J1U and J1M seams where the J1M is structurally below the J1U. The
southern extent of the seam continues to dip to the south deeper than is economically recoverable. At the
southeastern limits of RC4, the syncline is at depth and the coal expresses as a monoclinal structure
dipping to the south. The northwestern limit of RC1 is a synclinal structure in J1L coal that shallowly dips
to the east. Near the RC1/RC2 boundary, there is a splitting of the J1L coal into J1L and J1M seams that
continue to trend to the southwest. The J1L is structurally below the J1M and becomes a monoclinal
structure dipping to the south. The J1L daylights to the north and continues to the east beyond economic
limits that are imposed by water management requirements. The J1M seam becomes a synclinal
structure that is shallowly dipping to the southeast. As the J1M trends to the southeast there is a
daylighting anticline that joints the RC1/RC2 synclinal structures to the RC4/RC5 synclinal structures
(shallowly dipping to the southeast). The J1M daylights to the north and continues to the east beyond
economic limits imposed by water management requirements.

The accessing and dumping plan does not sterilize any coal outside of planned backfilled pit areas. Areas
with steep topography or economic cut-offs related to water and/or fish management will have no added
impediments to future mining activities. Coal underlying ex-pit waste dumps are steeply dipping single
seams at depths of 200 m and more.

3.2.4.1 MacKenzie Phase 1 (MK1)

Phase 1 of the MKRC sequence (MK1) is contiguous to the North Limb of the existing licenced Harris pit
(Figure 3.2-1). It is a surface phase and abuts Harris Phase 10 (H10). Phase 1 is planned to be mined
entirely in 2019. MK1 is controlled by Harris Phase 10 to the west, by the daylighting J1L seam on the
north, highwall design requirements on the south, and is limited by the fish-bearing MacKenzie Creek to
the east. The original 1996 EIA planned for mining through MacKenzie Creek, which has now been
changed. The value of the accessible coal underlying MacKenzie Creek is less than the costs of
mitigation and reclamation associated with mining through the creek. As a result:

Teck Resources Limited Page 3-9


March 2018
MacKenzie Redcap Project

• MacKenzie Creek will not be mined through;

• an environmental buffer has been included; and


• an open span creek crossing structure is planned to mitigate environmental impacts.

Waste rock from MK1 will be used to construct the Redcap haulroad and as fill for the MacKenzie Creek
crossing structure. Any additional waste rock will be used to backfill Harris Phase 10.

The final pit configuration will have some highwall and footwall that will remain in place. By not mining
between MK1 and MK2, there is approximately 370,000 CMT of coal and 2,350,000 BCM of overburden
left in place.

3.2.4.2 MacKenzie Phase 2 (MK2)

Phase 2 of the MKRC sequence (MK2; Figure 3.2-1) is also located on J1L coal seam. It is a surface
phase that is cut off by steep topography to the west and the fish-bearing Little Homer Creek to the east.
The initial mine plan had a continuous pit across Little Homer Creek that joined with the MK4 Pit.
Environmental considerations related to diverting and managing flows in Little Homer Creek led to a
change in the mine plan:

• the creek will not be mined through;

• an environmental buffer has been included;

• an open span creek crossing structure is planned; and


• the sedimentation ponds have been moved away from the creek to mitigate environmental
impacts.

The value of the accessible coal underlying Little Homer Creek is less than the costs of mitigation and
reclamation of the creek bed. MK2 is planned to be mined entirely in 2019. The phase is controlled by
steep topography on the west, the daylighting J1L seam on the north, the economic cut-off at Little Homer
Creek on the east, and highwall design requirements to the south. Waste rock from MK2 will be used to
construct the Redcap haulroad and the Little Homer open span crossing structure. Any additional waste
rock will be used to backfill MK1.

The final pit configuration will have some highwall and footwall that will remain in place. By not mining
between MK2 and MK4, there is approximately 59,000 CMT of coal and 310,000 BCM of overburden left
in place.

3.2.4.3 MacKenzie Phase 3 (MK3)

Phase 3 of the MKRC sequence (MK3; Figure 3.2-1 and Figure 3.2-2) is controlled by the J1U seam
daylighting on the north and west, and highwall design requirements on the south. The eastern limit of the
phase ties into the RC4 and RC5 phases. MK3 is planned to be mined in 2019 and 2020. Waste rock
from MK3 will mostly go to ex-pit waste dumps (MKEX1 and MKEX2). Any additional waste rock will be
used to backfill completed portions of MK3. The backfilled MK3 pit will become a portion of the Redcap
haulroad, which helps reduce the footprint of the extension.

Teck Resources Limited Page 3-10


March 2018
MacKenzie Redcap Project

3.2.4.4 MacKenzie Phase 4 (MK4)

Phase 4 of the MKRC sequence (MK4; Figure 3.2-1 and Figure 3.2-2) is controlled by the J1L seam
daylighting on the north, increasing depth of coal and a fault cut-off of the coal seam to the east, highwall
design requirements on the south, and the economic cut-off of the fish bearing Little Homer Creek to the
west. Mining in MK4 will start in 2019 with most of the mining completed in 2020. Waste rock from MK4
will mostly go to backfilling MK3 to build the Redcap haulroad. Any additional waste rock will be hauled to
ex-pit waste dumps (MKEX1).

3.2.4.5 Redcap Phase 1 (RC1)

Phase 5 of the MKRC sequence (RC1; Figures 3.2-2 to 3.2-4) is controlled by the J1L seam daylighting
on the north, south, and west, and interim highwall design requirements to the east. RC1 is planned to be
mined between 2020 and 2022. Waste rock from RC1 will mostly go to ex-pit waste dumps.

3.2.4.6 Redcap Phase 2 (RC2)

Phase 6 of the MKRC sequence (RC2; Figures 3.2-3 to 3.2-6) is controlled by the J1L seam daylighting
on the north, the J1M seam daylighting on the western portions of the south and increasing depth to coal
on the eastern portions of the south, an economic cut-off related to freshwater diversion management and
costs to the east, and the phase daylights to RC1 to the west. RC2 is scheduled to be mined between
2021 and 2024. Waste rock from RC2 will go to an ex-pit waste dump until the RC1 phase is completed
sufficiently to allow backfilling. This will result in approximately 40% of waste rock from RC2 being used
for in-pit dumping.

3.2.4.7 Redcap Phase 3 (RC3)

Phase 7 of the MKRC sequence (RC3; Figures 3.2-5 to 3.2-7) is controlled by the J1M seam on the north,
daylighting to surface and to RC2 to the west, an economic cut-off related to freshwater diversion
management and costs to the east and increasing depth to coal to the south. RC3 is scheduled to be
mined between 2023 and 2025. Waste rock from RC3 will go to backfilling RC1 and RC2. Any additional
waste rock will be hauled to ex-pit waste dumps.

The economic pit configuration terminates just west of UTRC4 (Figure 3.2-9). The coal continues to the
east but was not deemed economical to mine. There is approximately 840,000 CMT of coal and
5,100,000 BCM of overburden left in place.

3.2.4.8 Redcap Phase 4 (RC4)

Phase 8 of the MKRC sequence (RC4; Figure 3.2-7 and Figure 3.2-8) is controlled by the J1M seam
daylighting on the north and west, MK3 to the west and RC3 in the east, increasing depth to coal to the
east and south. RC4 is planned to be mined between 2024 and 2027. Waste rock from RC4 will be used
for backfilling RC2 and RC3.

3.2.4.9 Redcap Phase 5 (RC5)

Phase 9 of the MKRC sequence (RC5; Figure 3.2-8 and Figure 3.2-9) is mining out the access ramp that
provided access to RC3 backfilling from RC4. RC5 is controlled by the J1M seam on the north and west
and increasing depth to coal to the east and south. RC5 is planned to be mined between 2026 and 2027.

Teck Resources Limited Page 3-11


March 2018
MacKenzie Redcap Project

Waste rock from RC4 will be used for backfilling the MK3 and MK4. The final pit configuration will have
some highwall and footwall that will remain in place. An end pit lake will remain as there is no further
mining activities to produce waste rock material for backfill.

3.2.5 Haulage Assumptions

The haulage assumptions used at the mine to model future schedules are derived from empirical models
as well as the use of information technology and mining-specific software. The combination of
MineSight3D mine planning software, TalPac haulage simulation software, and proprietary Teck
spreadsheets is designed to calculate haul truck cycle times for various road conditions based on
distances, grades, speeds, and rolling resistance of the fleets at the CRO.

3.2.6 Production Equipment Constraints

All schedules are constrained to the operating range of the mobile equipment fleet and the availability of
the fleet from a mechanical availability perspective. The current fleet consists of primary movers as well
as auxiliary support equipment such as graders for road maintenance, dozers, water trucks, and drills for
drilling and blasting. The primary earthmoving fleet consists of five loading units: two P&H electric
shovels, one Komatsu hydraulic excavator, and two Letourneau front end loaders. The primary
earthmoving and loading equipment employ a mixed fleet of trucking models. The trucking fleet is
primarily made up of Komatsu KMS 830Es ACs and coal-handling KMS 830E DCs and Kress trucks. The
length of the coal haul and the number of dedicated coal hauling trucks has historically constrained raw
coal delivery to the CPP.

3.2.7 Plant Constraints

The CPP has a maximum production capacity of 3 million CMT of coal produced per year. This maximum
capacity is not currently constraining the total coal production at the Cheviot Coal Mine.

3.3 Detailed Scheduling

The detailed mine and reclamation schedules along with the backfill plan are presented in the following
subsections. The detailed plan that is provided is the life of mine Base Case that has operations
scheduled to the first quarter of 2027. In the first quarter of 2027, the reserves are expected to be
depleted. This milestone will then trigger the closure and final reclamation phase of the Project. The
detailed coal and waste mining volumes and schedule by year are summarized in Table 3.3-1.
Reclamation will start in the MKRC area in 2021 and progress thereafter as the mine plan allows. The
detailed mine and reclamation sequencing is shown on Figures 3.2-1 to 3.2-9, which provide an estimate
of the annual activities.

Table 3.3-1 Annual Mining Volumes and Project Schedule

Year 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 Total

Coal Mined 1.1 3.5 2.4 2.2 2.5 3.2 2.2 2.3 0.7 20.2
(million RMT)
Clean Coal 0.7 2.3 1.6 1.5 1.7 2.2 1.5 1.6 0.5 13.5
(million CMT)

Teck Resources Limited Page 3-12


March 2018
MacKenzie Redcap Project

Year 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 Total

Waste Mined 3.6 17.2 12.0 10.5 13.5 18.7 15.6 17.5 5.1 113.7
(million BCM)

3.3.1 Overall Material Balance/Backfill Strategy

The mine plan, subject to operational constraints, seeks to minimize ex-pit disturbance whenever possible
through in-pit backfilling of previous pit phases. There are also three ex-pit dumps planned for the Project.
The production schedule (Table 3.3-1) includes mining through to the completion of the Project. The total
volume of waste to be disposed is approximately 114 million BCM. Applying a swell factor of 30%
requires placement of almost 149 million loose cubic metres (LCM). Through detailed mine planning
efforts, CRO is planning to direct approximately 65% of the total waste back into previously mined areas,
with the remainder (35%) directed to the Harris ex-pit dump. A breakdown by disposal area, in-pit and ex-
pit has been included in Table 3.3-2.

Table 3.3-2 Ex-Pit/In-Pit Waste Disposal

Area Waste (million LCM) % of Total

MK3EX1 2.3 1.6%


MK3EX2 2.3 1.6%
RCEX 38.7 26.4%
Backfilling in pit 99.5 67.9%
Haulroad 3.7 2.5%
Total 146.5 100%
% -percentage
LCM – loose cubic metres

An annual breakdown of the waste disposal plan is included in Table 3.3-3.

Teck Resources Limited Page 3-13


March 2018
MacKenzie Redcap Project

Table 3.3-3 Waste Material Balance (million LCM)

Mining Disposal Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Year 6 Year 7 Year 8 Year 9 Total
Phase Area (2019) (2020) (2021) (2022) (2023) (2024) (2025) (2026) (2027)

MK1 Haulroad 1.1 1.1


MK1 Backfill 1.0 1.0
MK2 Haulroad 1.1 1.1
MK3 Haulroad 1.3 1.3
MK3 MK3EX2 0.2 4.0 4.2
MK3 Backfill 2.0 2.0
MK4 Haulroad 0.1 0.1
MK4 Backfill 0.6 1.2 0.6
MK4 MK3EX1 0.4 0.4
RC1 Haulroad 0.1 0.1
RC1 RCEX 15.1 15.3 0.5 30.9
RC1 Backfill 0.1 0.1
RC2 Backfill 0.3 13.1 9.1 0.4 22.9
RC3 Backfill 8.5 14.8 9.2 0.1 32.6
RC3 RCEX 7.8 7.8
RC4 Backfill 11.1 22.6 3.7 37.4
RC5 Backfill 2.9 2.9
Total 4.7 22.4 15.6 13.7 17.6 24.3 20.3 22.7 6.6 146.5

Teck Resources Limited Page 3-14


March 2018
MacKenzie Redcap Project

3.3.2 Annual Mine Plan Descriptions

3.3.2.1 Year 1 (2019)

Tree and brush clearing and soil salvage will commence within the Project area upon approval, prior to
construction and operations. The MacKenzie haulroad, powerline, radio transmission tower and access
road, and clear span crossing structures across MacKenzie and Little Homer creeks will be constructed in
2019. MacKenzie and Redcap water management structures are scheduled to be completed in 2019.
Mining activity will continue in the currently approved Harris pits. Mining and haulroad development will
start at MK1, work eastward through MK2, begin MK3 and MK4 (Figure 3.2-1). Mining in MK1 and MK2 is
scheduled to be completed in 2019. Waste will be used to create the running surface of the haulroad with
some being hauled to MKEX2. Any additional waste will be hauled to backfill the currently licenced Harris
pits.

3.3.2.2 Year 2 (2020)

Tree and brush clearing and soil salvage will continue in the Redcap pit area prior to construction and
operations. Mining activity will be completed in MK3 and begun in MK4 and RC1 (Figure 3.2-2). Mining
will progress down to 1,760 m elevation in MK4, and down to 1,805 m elevation in RC1. Waste from MK3
will be directed to the MK3EX1 and MKEX2 ex-pit dumps and to backfilling the MK3 pit for use as the
primary haulroad. Waste from MK4 will be used to backfill MK3. Waste from RC1 will go to the RCEX
ex-pit dump. The RCEX ex-pit dump will be developed up to 1,800 m elevation by year end. MK3 will be
backfilled up to 1,790 m elevation. The powerline will be extended south of the future RC3 pit.

3.3.2.3 Year 3 (2021)

Tree and brush clearing and soil salvage will continue in the Redcap pit area prior to construction and
operations. Mining activity will continue in RC1 and begin in RC2 (Figure 3.2-3). Mining will progress
down to 1,730 m elevation in RC1, and down to 1,835 m elevation in RC2. All waste will go to the RCEX
ex-pit dump. The RCEX ex-pit dump will be developed up to 1,830 m elevation by year end.

Reclamation can begin in MK1 as all mining and rock disposal activities will be completed (Figure 3.2-3).

3.3.2.4 Year 4 (2022)

Mining activity will be completed in RC1 and continue in RC2 (Figure 3.2-4). Mining will progress down to
1,760 m elevation in RC2. Backfilling of RC1 is targeted and will be done immediately upon completion of
RC1 mining. Prior to backfilling all waste will be sent to the RCEX ex-pit dump. The RCEX ex-pit dump
will continue to be developed at the 1,830 m elevation by year end. The RC1 backfill dump will be
developed to the 1,865 m elevation by year end.

Reclamation can begin in MK2 as all mining and rock disposal activities will be completed (Figure 3.2-4).

3.3.2.5 Year 5 (2023)

Mining activity will be completed in MK4, with coal going directly to the plant. Mining will continue in RC2
and will commence in RC3 (Figure 3.2-5). Mining will progress down to 1,685 m elevation in RC2, and
down to the 1,760 m elevation in RC3. Waste materials from MK4 will be used to backfill the completed
MK3 pit. Although backfilling is targeted and will be done as available in the Redcap pits, there are

Teck Resources Limited Page 3-15


March 2018
MacKenzie Redcap Project

portions of the year when backfilling access is not available and the RCEX will be used. The RCEX ex-pit
dump will be developed at the 1,860 m elevation by year end. The RC2 backfill upper dump will be
completed to the 1,890 m elevation, and the main RC2 backfill dump will be developed to the 1,800 m
elevation.

Reclamation can begin along the south toe of RCEX as the lower lifts of the rock disposal area will be
completed (Figure 3.2-5).

3.3.2.6 Year 6 (2024)

Mining activity will continue in RC3 in Year 6 (Figure 3.2-6). Mining will progress down to the 1,715 m
elevation in RC3. Although backfilling is targeted and will be done as access is available, there are
portions of the year when constraints will result in the RCEX being used. The RCEX ex-pit dump will be
developed at the 1,890 m elevation by year end. Sections of the main RC2 backfill dump will be
developed to the 1,795 m, 1,830 m, and 1,865 m elevations.

Reclamation can begin in the north end of RC1, as all mining and rock disposal activities will be
completed (Figure 3.2-6).

3.3.2.7 Year 7 (2025)

Mining activity will be completed in RC3 and will commence in RC4 during Year 7 (Figure 3.2-7). Mining
will progress down to 1,760 m elevation in RC4. All waste is planned to be used to backfill the completed
RC2 and RC3 mining areas. Sections of the main RC2 and RC3 backfill dumps will be developed to the
1,775 m, and 1,830 m elevations.

Reclamation may be completed on RCEX, as all planned lifts of the rock disposal area will be completed
(Figure 3.2-7).

3.3.2.8 Year 8 (2026)

Mining activity will continue in RC4 and RC5 in Year 8 (Figure 3.2-8). Mining will progress down to
1,715 m elevation in RC4. All waste is planned to be used to backfill the completed RC2 and RC3 mining
area. Sections of the main RC2 and RC3 backfill dumps will be developed to the 1,825 m and 1,865 m
elevations.

Reclamation can begin in the south end of RC1 and south end or RC2, as all mining and rock disposal
activities will be completed (Figure 3.2-8).

3.3.2.9 Year 9 (2027)

All mining activity will be completed in 2027. RC4 will be completed, and RC5 will be started and
completed in 2027. (Figure 3.2-9). All RC4 waste is planned to be used to backfill the completed RC3
mining area. All RC5 waste is planned to be used to backfill the completed MK3 and MK4 pits. Sections
of the main RC3 backfill dumps will be developed to the 1,840 m and 1,865 m elevations. MK3 backfilling
will be completed to the 1,760 m elevation. MK4 backfilling will be completed to the 1,815 m elevation.

Reclamation can be completed in the remainder of RC2 and remainder of RC3 with the exception of the
end pit lake, as all mining and rock disposal activities will be completed (Figure 3.2-9). All remaining areas

Teck Resources Limited Page 3-16


March 2018
MacKenzie Redcap Project

will be reclaimed after all mining activities are completed. Additional details regarding the reclamation
plan are provided in Section 6 – Conservation and Reclamation Plan.

3.4 Water Management Plan

The Project straddles the divide between the Athabasca River and North Saskatchewan River
watersheds (Figure 1.0-4). MacKenzie Creek is the largest watercourse within the Project area that lies in
the Athabasca River watershed. It has a drainage area of 28.9 square kilometres (km2) in the Mine Permit
Boundary. Redcap Creek is the largest watercourse within the Project area that lies in the North
Saskatchewan watershed. It has a drainage area of 17.1 km2 in the Cheviot Coal Mine Permit Boundary.

A water management plan was prepared for the MKRC Project to reduce the effects on:

• water quality;

• flow regimes of receiving streams;

• fish and fish habitat of receiving streams;

• public and operational staff safety; and

• public access.

The water management strategies used to achieve these objectives are to:

• follow regulatory requirements and guidelines;

• meet downstream flow needs by using sedimentation ponds to augment flows in natural
waterbodies (e.g., active dewatering from pit areas to sedimentation ponds);
• manage natural runoff (i.e., clean water) and contact water separately to the extent practical;

• reduce the number of sedimentation ponds, with more reliance on sumps and pumping;

• use pits (e.g., mined-out pits, in-pit backfills) for temporary water storage to reduce potential
effects on receiving streams; and

• optimize the configuration of facilities for ease of access and maintenance.

The water management facilities are divided into four sectors (Figure 3.4-1) based on watershed area
and/or on the types of water (i.e., clean or contact water). The prime purpose of these facilities is to
effectively reduce impacts to the local waterbodies and fish and fish habitat. These four sectors are listed
below:

• MacKenzie Sector (MK; Figure 3.4-2): contains one settling pond (MKPO), one sump (MKSU)
and road side ditches/culverts to capture and settle contact water from the haulroad and soil
stockpile. Runoff to pit MK1 will be managed in pit and conveyed to the Harris pits.
• Little Homer Sector (LHC; Figure 3.4-3): contains one settling pond (LHPO) and road side
ditches/culverts to capture and settle contact water from the haulroad, dumps (MK3EX1 and
MK3EX2), and operational releases from pits MK2, MK3 and MK4.

Teck Resources Limited Page 3-17


March 2018
MacKenzie Redcap Project

• Unnamed Tributary to Redcap Creek Sector (UTRC; Figure 3.4-4): contains one clean water
diversion consisting of various sized pipelines (UTRC1-PL-1 and 2, UTRC2-PL-1 and 2) and
associated interception facilities (UTRC1-SU-1 and 2, UTRC2-SU-1 and 2, UTRC1-PU-1 and 2,
and UTRC2-PU-1 and 2). This diversion is along the north side of Redcap pits RC1 and RC2 to
prevent up-slope drainage from contacting the pit. The diversion releases to UTRC4.
• Redcap Sector (RC; Figure 3.4-4): contains one settling pond (RCPO) and one contact water
ditch (RCCD) to manage water from the RCEX dump and operational releases from Redcap pits
(RC1 to RC5). The end pit lake will also be located in this sector.

The design criteria used for the water management components include:

• Diversion Ditches – objective is to keep contact water contained and direct it to a location for
treatment or storage:
• diversion ditches have been designed to convey the one in 10-year peak discharge.
Diversion ditches will maintain a minimum freeboard of 0.5 m above the design discharge
elevation;

• diversion ditches will only be required for contact water;

• side slopes will vary from 1H:1V to 3H:1V depending upon materials encountered;

• design bed slopes will be a minimum of 2% to minimize ice and debris build-up;

• minimum bed width will be 1 m in consideration of ease of construction for an excavator;


and

• access and maintenance benches will be constructed adjacent to diversion ditches, with
a width of 5 m, side slopes varying from 1H:1V to 3H:1V depending upon materials
encountered.

• Clean Water Diversion – objective is to keep clean water away from mine wastewater and being
deemed contact water:

• clean water diversions, including sumps or interception ponds, pumps and pipelines have
been designed to collectively convey the one in 10-year event;

• pipelines will be engineered to ensure consistency with other pipelines at CRO;

• pipelines will be constructed above ground on 8 m wide benches to facilitate access and
maintenance, and anchored with soil anchors, for consistency with anchoring systems at
CRO; and

• embankment slopes will vary from 1H:1V to 3H:1V depending upon materials
encountered.
• Sedimentation Ponds – recommended design criteria for sedimentation ponds were based on
technical guidelines from Alberta (GoA 2013d, AER 2014a) and British Columbia (BC Ministry of
Environment [BCMOE] 2015), consideration of successful previous practice at CRO, and
following EPEA Approval 46972-01-00 (as amended):

Teck Resources Limited Page 3-18


March 2018
MacKenzie Redcap Project

• sedimentation ponds will be sized to meet the settleable solids criteria of 0.5 millilitres per
litre (mL/L) for all water inflows up to the 10-year storm event to comply with design
guidelines (AER 2014a);

• ponds will be sized to capture the 15 micron soil particle for the 10-year, 24-hour runoff
event, without flocculant;

• particle sizes smaller than 15 microns will require flocculant in controlled proportions to
prevent effects to the sedimentation rate and the effluent quality;
• spillways will be sized to the one in 200-year peak discharge and will be designed to
maintain 0.5 m of freeboard during the design runoff events and a minimum freeboard of
1.0 m under normal operating conditions (BCMOE 2015); and
• a smaller primary pond will be provided upstream of sedimentation ponds discussed
above to remove coarse sediment (BCMOE 2015).

• Mined out pits – purpose is to use the mined out pits to capture and store surface runoff and
contact water, and releasing it when it is of suitable quality.

• Dams – required for construction of sedimentation ponds, which are required to store and treat
contact water prior to release to the surface waterbodies:

• the designs for embankments that meet the definition of a “dam” (i.e., a structure
providing a storage capacity of 30,000 m3 or more and 2.5 m or greater in height) are
based on applicable guidelines and requirements (CDA 2013, GoA 1999).

The facilities are expected to be constructed by the end of 2019 and operational during the mining period.
The approximate timelines are presented in Table 3.4.1.

Table 3.4-1 Surface Water Management Schedule

Year Mine Year Active Mine / Development Activities Surface Water Management Facilities

2019 Year 1 - haulroad extended from Harris pit to - all Water Management infrastructure is
(Figure 3.2-1) accommodate all MKRC Mining. constructed in Year 1.
- mining in MK and LHC Sectors. - operational releases from pits MK2 and MK3
- MK1 and MK2 pits complete; MK3 pit at are conveyed LHPO. (Operational releases
1,775 m. from pit MK1 are managed in Harris pit).
- waste from MK1 and MK2 pits mostly - runoff from MK3EX1 dump is conveyed to
used for haulroad construction and to LHPO.
backfill completed Harris and MK1 pits.
MK3 waste goes to MK3EX1 dump.
2020 Year 2 - mining in MK and RC Sectors. MK3 and - operational releases from pits MK3 and MK4
(Figure 3.2-2) MK4 Pits complete; RC1 Pit at 1,760 m. are conveyed to LHPO and from RC1 Pit to
- waste mostly goes to MK3EX1, RCPO.
MK3EX2, and RCEX dumps. - runoff from MK3EX1 is conveyed to LHPO.
Runoff from MK3EX2 dump drains into pit
MK3.
- runoff from RCEX dump is conveyed to
RCPO.

Teck Resources Limited Page 3-19


March 2018
MacKenzie Redcap Project

Year Mine Year Active Mine / Development Activities Surface Water Management Facilities

2021 Year 3 - mining in RC Sector. RC1 Pit at - operational releases from pits RC1 and RC2
(Figure 3.2-3) 1,730 m, RC2 Pit at 1,835 m. are conveyed to RCPO.
- waste goes to RCEX dump. - runoff from MK3EX1 and MK3EX2 dumps is
conveyed to LHPO.
- runoff from RCEX dump is conveyed to
RCPO.
2022 Year 4 - mining in RC Sector. RC1 pit complete, - operational releases from pits RC1 and RC2
(Figure 3.2-4) RC2 Pit at 1,760 m. are conveyed to RCPO.
- waste backfilled in RC1 and RCEX - runoff from MK3EX1 is conveyed to LHPO.
dump. Runoff from MK3EX2 dump drains into pit
MK3.
- runoff from RCEX dump is conveyed to
RCPO.
2023 Year 5 - mining in MK and RC Sector. MK4 and - operational releases from pits RC2 and RC3
(Figure 3.2-5) RC2 pits are complete, RC3 pit is at to RCPO.
1,760 m. - runoff from MK3EX1 is conveyed to LHPO.
- waste backfilled in RC2 pit and RC3 pit Runoff from MK3EX2 dump drains into pit
upper benches, and RCEX dump. MK3.
- runoff from RCEX dump is conveyed to
RCPO.
2024 Year 6 - mining in RC Sector. RC3 pit at 1,715 m. - operational releases from RC3 pit to RCPO.
(Figure 3.2-6) - waste backfilled in RC2 and RC3 pits - runoff from MK3EX11 is conveyed to LHPO.
and RCEX dump. Runoff from MK3EX2 dump drains into pit
MK3.
- runoff from RCEX dump is conveyed to
RCPO.
2025 Year 7 - mining in RC Sector. RC3 pit is - operational releases from RC3 and RC4 pits
(Figure 3.2-7) complete, RC4 pit is at 1,760 m. to RCPO.
- waste backfilled in RC3 pit. - runoff from MK3EX1 is conveyed to LHPO.
Runoff from MK3EX2 dump drains into pit
MK3.
- runoff from RCEX dump is conveyed to
RCPO.
2026 Year 8 - mining in RC Sector; RC4 pit is at - operational releases from RC4 and RC5 pits
(Figure 3.2-8) 1,715 m. to RCPO.
- waste backfilled in RC2 and RC3 pits. - runoff from MK3EX1 is conveyed to LHPO.
Runoff from MK3EX2 dump drains into pit
MK3.
- runoff from RCEX dump is conveyed to
RCPO.
2027 Year 9 - mining complete in RC4 and RC5 pits. - operational releases from RC4 and RC5 pits
(Figure 3.2-9) - Waste backfilled in RC2, RC3, MK3 and to RCPO.
MK4 pits. - runoff from MK3EX1 is conveyed to LHPO.
- filling of end pit lake (pits RC4 and RC5) Runoff from MK3EX2 dump drains into pit
commences MK3.
- runoff from RCEX dump is conveyed to
RCPO.

Teck Resources Limited Page 3-20


March 2018
MacKenzie Redcap Project

3.4.1 MacKenzie Sector

The MacKenzie Sector is located in the vicinity of MacKenzie Creek and includes the clear span crossing
structure across MacKenzie Creek and is shown on Figure 3.4-2. The key water management
components in this sector include:

• MacKenzie Creek Crossing;


• MacKenzie Settling Pond (MKPO);

• MacKenzie Sump and Pipeline (MKSU);

• Roadside Ditching; and

• Pit Dewatering.

Each of these components and their function are described in the section below.

3.4.1.1 MacKenzie Creek Crossing

The haulroad will cross MacKenzie Creek just downstream of the confluence of UTMC3 with MacKenzie
Creek (with a drainage area of 8.7 km2). CRO will plan to use a structural plate corrugated steel pipe
(SPCSP) arch culvert to span the creek. The SPCSP arch culvert was designed to convey the 100-year
flood peak discharge of the MacKenzie Creek, which was estimated to be 20.9 m3/s.

Surface run-off from the haulroad on the east side of the crossing, will flow through a culvert and will
cross over the structure. The water will flow west over the crossing structure and will cross the haulroad in
a culvert before being directed to a sump (MKSU). Water in the sump will be pumped to the MacKenzie
Sedimentation Pond (MKPO).

No in-stream work will be required during construction which increases protection of the stream. Other
features of the crossing will allow contact water to be safely conveyed to MKPO for treatment prior to
release.

3.4.1.2 MacKenzie Settling Pond (MKPO)

The MKPO pond has a drainage area of 0.44 km2 with a storage capacity of 35,000 m3. It was designed
to capture particles of 15 microns or greater during the 10-year flood peak discharge (i.e. 0.56 m3/s). The
pond embankment to create the sedimentation pond was designed to extend across the valley walls, with:

• a maximum downstream embankment height of 17 m (from approximately 1705 m to 1722.0 m);


• an approximate 10 m wide crest;

• side slopes of 3H:1V;

• spillway designed to pass flows up to the 200 year flood peak discharge that will discharge to
MacKenzie Creek; and

• 0.5 m of freeboard beyond the derived 200 year design water surface elevation. The
embankment will be constructed of common fill with a drainage layer to lower the phreatic
surface.

Teck Resources Limited Page 3-21


March 2018
MacKenzie Redcap Project

The embankment will be higher than 2.5 m and retain more than 30,000 m3 at its full storage capacity of
35,000 m3. The embankment will be classified as a dam under the Alberta Dam and Canal Safety
Guidelines (GoA 1999) and an application will be submitted six months prior to construction.

All surface runoff and pit water from this sector will be treated and released through this pond keeping the
MacKenzie Creek clean. CRO plans to use flocculants (floc), which have been approved for use by the
AER (and are listed in Section 4.2.8 of the EPEA approval) as necessary to assist in removal of
suspended solids.

3.4.1.3 MacKenzie Sump and Pipeline (MKSU)

The primary purpose of the MKSU sump is to collect surface run-off from the east side of the crossing,
and then pump it up to the MKPO pond. The sump will have a drainage area of 0.11 km2 and was sized to
have a storage capacity of 205 m3 with a surface area of 121 m2 (at normal operating level). This
component will prevent contact water from entering MacKenzie Creek and directing it to MKPO for
treatment and release. No sumps in the surface water management system will discharge to the
environment.

3.4.1.4 Roadside Ditching

On the west side of the MacKenzie Creek crossing all surface run-off will drain to the south where a
contact water ditch will be constructed. The road-side ditch (MKCD) will be mostly constructed on the
uphill side of the road. The ditch will convey the contact water to the MKPO pond, for the portions of the
ditch located upslope of the pond. The road that is downslope of the MKPO will have the run-off flow to
the MKSU, where it will get pumped up to the inlet of the MKPO pond.

Surface run-off from the haulroad on the east side of the crossing, will pass through a culvert over the
crossing structure. The water will flow west over the structure and will cross the haulroad in a culvert
before being directed to a sump (MKSU). Water in the sump will be pumped to the MKPO for treatment
and release.

The ditch is designed to convey at least the 10-year flood peak discharges upstream of the MKPO pond.

3.4.1.5 Pit Dewatering

Surface run-off and groundwater that reports to the MK1 pit will be pumped to the extent practical for the
purpose of maintaining safe working conditions during mining operations. Operational sumps and pumps
will be located in strategic locations near the active mining in the MK1 pit and will pump water to the
MKCD road side ditch, where it will flow to the MKPO pond for treatment and release to MacKenzie Creek
or back to the west to the UHEA area for treatment through that system.

3.4.2 Little Homer Sector

The Little Homer sector is located in the vicinity of Little Homer Creek and includes a clear span crossing
structure and is shown on Figure 3.4-3. The key water management components in this sector include:

• Little Homer Creek Crossing;

• Little Homer Settling Pond (LHPO);

Teck Resources Limited Page 3-22


March 2018
MacKenzie Redcap Project

• Little Homer Sump and Pipeline (LHSU);

• Roadside Ditching; and


• Pit Dewatering.

Each of these components and their function are described in the section below.

3.4.2.1 Little Homer Creek Crossing

The haulroad will cross Little Homer Creek just downstream of MK2 and MK4 pits (with drainage area of
5.93 km2). CRO plans to use a structural plate corrugated steel pipe (SPCSP) arch culvert to span the
creek similar to the MacKenzie Creek crossing. It will be designed to withstand the 100-year flood peak
discharge of 15.9 m3/s. No in-stream work is expected for its construction.

The haulroad on the east side of the crossing will be graded so that all surface run-off will flow to the east
away from the crossing and eventually to the Little Homer Pond (LHPO). All run-off from the west side of
the crossing will be directed toward the MK2 pit. As the MK2 pit is being developed, the run-off will be
captured in a sump (LHSU) and then pumped to the contact water drainage ditch on the east side of the
crossing, eventually going to the LHPO.

No in-stream work will be required during construction which increases protection of the stream. Other
features of the crossing will allow contact water to be safely conveyed to LHPO for treatment prior to
release.

3.4.2.2 Little Homer Settling Pond (LHPO)

The LHPO will have a storage capacity of 56,700 m3 and a surface area of 10,100 m2 (at normal
operating level). It is designed to capture particles of 15 microns or greater during the 10-year flood peak
discharge of 1.1 m3/s. The drainage area for LHPO is 0.96 km2. The pond embankment was designed to
extend across the valley walls with:

• an approximate downstream embankment height of 19 m (from 1708 m to 1727 m);

• an approximate 10 m wide crest;


• side slopes of 3H:1V (upstream) and 3.5H:1V (downstream);

• spillway designed to pass flows up to the 200 year flood peak discharge that will discharge to
Little Homer Creek; and

• 0.5 m of freeboard beyond the derived 200-year flood peak water surface elevation.

The embankment will be higher than 2.5 m and retain more than 30,000 m 3 of water at its full storage
capacity of 76,000 m3. The embankment will be classified as a dam under the Alberta Dam and Canal
Safety Guidelines (GoA 1999) and an application will be submitted six months prior to construction.

All surface runoff and pit water from this sector will be treated and released through this pond, keeping
the Little Homer Creek clean. CRO plans to use flocculants (floc), which have been approved for use by
AER (and are listed in Section 4.2.8 of the EPEA approval) to assist in removal of suspended solids.

Teck Resources Limited Page 3-23


March 2018
MacKenzie Redcap Project

3.4.2.3 Roadside Ditching

On the west side of the Little Homer Creek crossing, all surface run-off will drain to the east via a contact
water ditch. The road-side ditch (MKCD) will be constructed on the uphill side of the road. The ditch will
convey the contact water toward the crossing and will be diverted to the MK2 pit. As the MK2 pit is being
developed, the run-off will be captured in a sump (LHSU) and then pumped to the contact water drainage
ditch on the east side of the crossing, eventually going to the LHPO for treatment and release.

The haulroad on the east side of the crossing will be graded so that all surface run-off will flow to the east
away from the crossing and eventually to the LHPO for treatment and release.

The ditch is designed to convey at least the 10-year flood peak discharges upstream of the sedimentation
pond.

3.4.2.4 Little Homer Sump and Pipeline (LHSU)

The LHSU will be required to capture surface run-off from the west side of the crossing until the MK2 pit
has been completed. Once the pit is completed, all surface run-off will be directed into the MK2 pit. Prior
to the MK2 pit being completed, all water will be captured in the LHSU and will be pumped to the roadside
ditch network located on the east side of the haulroad, eventually going to the LHPO for treatment and
release.

3.4.2.5 Pit Dewatering

Surface run-off and groundwater that reports to the pit must be pumped out to the extent practical for the
purpose of maintaining safe working conditions during mining operations. Operational sumps and pumps
will be located in strategic locations near the active mining in the MK2, MK4 and MK3 pits and will pump
water to the LHCD road side ditch, where it will flow to the LHPO pond for treatment and release to Little
Homer Creek.

3.4.3 Upper Tributary Redcap (UTRC) Sector

The UTRC sector refers to the drainage area of the tributaries of Redcap Creek located upstream of the
Redcap pit and is shown on Figure 3.4-4. In this sector, the clean water from these tributaries will require
management to control potential contact with the Redcap pit, and to allow diversion of the clean water to
the receiving stream. The focus of this sector is to keep clean water clean. Water from the tributaries will
be managed using interception ponds located just upstream of the Redcap pit, coupled with pumps and
pipelines to convey the clean water to watercourse UTRC4 located just east of the Redcap pit. Water
transfer in this system is from west to east. The key water management components in this sector
include:

• Interception Pond (UTRC1-SU-1)

• Interception Pond (UTRC1-SU-2)

• Interception Pond (UTRC2-SU-1)


• Interception Pond (UTRC2-SU-2)

Each of these components and their function are described in the section below.

Teck Resources Limited Page 3-24


March 2018
MacKenzie Redcap Project

3.4.3.1 Interception Pond (UTRC1-SU-1)

The westernmost interception pond UTRC1-SU-1 will have a drainage area of 0.17 km2 from the natural
catchment area of UTRC1 only at UTRC1-SU-1. The pond will have a storage volume of 300 m3 with a
surface area of 170 m2 (at normal operating level). The pond will be equipped with a pump and pipeline
designed to convey the 10-year volume of 720 m3 to the next downstream interception pond
(UTRC1-SU-2).

3.4.3.2 Interception Pond (UTRC1-SU-2)

The second westernmost interception pond (UTRC1-SU-2) will have an incremental drainage area of
0.39 km2 from the natural catchment area of UTRC1 only at UTRC1-SU-2. The pond will have a storage
volume of 720 m3 with a surface area of 430 m2 (at normal operating level). The pond will be equipped
with a pump and pipeline designed to convey the 10-year volume of 1,600 m3 to the next downstream
interception pond (UTRC2-SU-1).

3.4.3.3 Interception Pond (UTRC2-SU-1)

The third westernmost interception pond (UTRC2-SU-1) will have an incremental drainage area of 1.83
km2 from the natural catchment area of UTRC2 only at UTRC2-SU-1. The pond will have a storage
volume of 6,700 m3 with a surface area of 2,700 m2 (at normal operating level). The pond will be
equipped with a pump and pipeline designed to convey the 10-year volume of 7,600 m3 to the next
downstream interception pond (UTRC2-SU-2).

3.4.3.4 Interception Pond (UTRC2-SU-2)

The fourth westernmost interception pond (UTRC2-SU-2) will have an incremental drainage area of
0.23 km2 from the natural catchment area of UTRC2 only at UTRC2-SU-2. The pond will have a storage
volume of 900 m3 with a surface area of 500 m2 (at normal operating level). The pond will be equipped
with a pump and pipeline designed to convey the 10-year volume of 950 m3 to the next downstream
interception pond (UTRC4). Once the clean water reaches the UTRC4 tributary, it will flow down the
natural channel into the Redcap Creek.

Overall this approach reduces the flow increases and effects to watercourse UTRC4 by limiting the peak
flows pumped to UTRC4 to 10% of the 10-year flood peak discharge in UTRC4.

3.4.4 Redcap Sector

The Redcap sector refers to the drainage area of the dump just upstream of Redcap Creek as shown on
Figure 3.4-4. In this sector, the contact water from the dump and the dewatering flows from the Redcap
pit will be managed to control potential sediment release to the Redcap Creek and local tributaries. The
contact water from the dump will be collected by a contact water ditch (RCCD) located just downstream of
the dump, which will convey the collected water to a sedimentation pond (RCPO) located at the south end
of the dump.

The key water management components in this sector include:

• Redcap Creek Settling Pond (RCPO);

• Redcap Contact Water Ditch (RCCD); and

Teck Resources Limited Page 3-25


March 2018
MacKenzie Redcap Project

• Pit Dewatering.

Each of these components and their function are described in the section below.

3.4.4.1 Redcap Creek Settling Pond (RCPO)

The RCPO will have a storage capacity of 122,000 m3 and a surface area of 36,300 m2 (at normal
operating level). It is designed to capture particles of 15 microns or greater during the 10-year flood peak
discharge of 4.0 m3/s. The drainage area for RCPO is 3.99 km2. The pond embankment was designed to
extend across the valley walls with:

• an approximate downstream embankment height of 7 m (from 1,712 m [below existing ground


level] to 1,719 m [at or above existing ground level]);

• an approximate 10 m wide crest;

• side slopes of 3H:1V;

• spillway designed to pass flows up to the 200 year flood peak discharge that will discharge to
Redcap Creek; and

• 0.5 m of freeboard beyond the 200-year flood peak water surface elevation.

The pond embankment will be higher than 2.5 m and retain more than 30,000 m 3 of water at its full
storage capacity of 179,000 m3. The embankment will be classified as a dam under the Alberta Dam and
Canal Safety Guidelines (GoA 1999) and an application will be submitted six months prior to construction.

All surface runoff and pit water from this sector will be treated and released through this pond, keeping
the water in Redcap Creek clean. Teck plans to use flocculants (floc), which have been approved for use
by AER (and are listed in Section 4.2.8 of the EPEA approval) to assist in removal of suspended solids.

3.4.4.2 Redcap Contact Water Ditch (RCCD)

The contact water ditch will have a drainage area 3.99 km2 and was sized to convey the 10-year flood
peak discharge of 4.0 m3/s plus 0.5 m of freeboard. The ditch and adjacent 5 m wide maintenance bench
were designed to be constructed through excavation. Inclusion of the bench design effectively increases
the flow conveyance capacity of the ditch system because the ditch overflows will be accommodated by
the additional conveyance above the bench. Water will be directed to the RCPO and will be treated and
released to the receiving waterbodies.

3.4.4.3 Pit Dewatering

Surface run-off and groundwater that reports to the pit must be pumped out to the extent practical for the
purpose of maintaining safe working conditions during mining operations. Operational sumps and pumps
will be located in strategic locations near the active mining in all of the RC pits and will pump water to the
contact water (RCCD) ditch, where it will flow to the RCPO pond for treatment and release to Redcap
Creek.

3.4.5 Maintenance and Operation

The runoff from the disturbed areas (e.g. soil stockpiles, road fill, pit boundaries) located upstream of
receiving watercourses will be managed through general erosion and sediment controls, including

Teck Resources Limited Page 3-26


March 2018
MacKenzie Redcap Project

perimeter silt fences at a minimum, and supplemented with coversoil, track packing, and hydroseeding,
where required.

The following maintenance activities will need to be performed during operations for the proposed water
management structures:

• monitoring of settling ponds to ensure effectiveness of water treatment when water is flowing;
• monitoring and operation of flocculant stations when floc is being used;

• settling pond dam inspections;

• ice-breaking in sedimentation and inception ponds will be done in the winter as needed;

• sediment accumulation in ponds and ditches will be routinely inspected and cleaned out on an as-
required basis;

• MacKenzie Creek and Little Homer Creek crossing structures and drainage will be monitored and
maintained to ensure water management features are functioning and keeping the contact water
out of the water courses; and

• variances to water monitoring compliance will be reported immediately as required in the EPEA
approval and the cause of the variance will be identified and corrected immediately.

3.5 Selenium Management

Conditions in CRO’s Luscar EPEA Approval #11767-02-00 and Cheviot EPEA Approval #46972-01-00
(as amended) require CRO to maintain a Selenium Management Plan (SMP) for the upper McLeod River
and receiving tributaries. The approval states:

2.6.2 The Revised Selenium Management Plan shall, at a minimum include:

(a) identification of techniques, best management plans, or technologies that will be employed to
achieve a cumulative load reduction of selenium target within three years;

(b) a comprehensive monitoring and evaluation program to assess the achievement of the selenium
load reduction strategy to determine and direct future monitoring and management on the mine
site and evaluate historical and current cumulative loads (kg/day) to the McLeod River;

(c) a summary of activities conducted annually and information on the strategies to be implemented
in the year following the year in which the information was reported; and,
(d) Any other information requested by the Director.

CRO has an approved selenium management plan (2014) and has recently (June/2017) submitted a new
plan that is under review. The update plan reflects the modifications and adjustments CRO intends to
implement to the selenium management program. The following information reflects the contents of the
2017 plan.

3.5.1 Strategies for Managing Selenium

The following are strategies that CRO has undertaken at the Cheviot Coal Mine to manage selenium:

Teck Resources Limited Page 3-27


March 2018
MacKenzie Redcap Project

• Selective Water Management


This strategy involves phased water management projects to actively control the direction of
wastewater flows. There are more options for managing wastewater, with relatively higher selenium,
in an established development than in a new one due to the availability of mined-out pits that can
potentially be used for storage or attenuation through use of saturated fills. Predominately utilized on
the Luscar mine, this option of returning wastewater back into a mined-out pit has become more
viable at Cheviot as the first pits have been completely mined out.

• Increase in-pit waste rock disposal and minimize external waste rock dumping.
The goal of this strategy is to maximize sub-aqueous disposal of waste rock in-order to promote
conditions that reduce the oxidation and subsequent release of selenium. It may also result in the
establishment of reducing conditions which can result in the removal of selenium from solution. In
addition, the reduction in the number of ex-pit dumps has important implications as it has reduced the
potential selenium loading available for release from the Cheviot mine. The selective management of
pit water as discussed above also benefits selenium management by taking advantage of these
expected reducing conditions.

• Minimize the development of end pit lakes in the reclaimed landscape.

While end pit lakes may be usable for the in situ reduction of water-borne selenium in certain
situations, it is also desirable to maximize sub-aqueous disposal to minimize oxidation and to possibly
develop anoxic reducing conditions. At this point, we cannot say which scenario is preferable from a
selenium management perspective at a given site. This plan is based on the assumption that both
situations can be used to manage selenium, but that pit backfilling is a preferred scenario.

• Progressive reclamation with mine development.

Development of a coversoil, vegetation and re-establishment of streams and drainage reduces


infiltration of precipitation and percolation / seepage through waste rock dumps.

• Avoid construction of external or internal rock drains where possible.

• Maximize clean water diversions.

Use of clean water diversion reduces contact between water and waste rock

• Selective handling of selenium-bearing geologic strata.


The Moosebar Formation is a marine-based shale bed geologically underlying the coal-bearing unit.
In the preliminary assessments of total selenium concentrations in geologic strata, the Moosebar
Formation is reported as containing and potentially releasing higher concentrations of selenium than
other strata. It is not encountered in significant volumes in the Cheviot Creek or Prospect pits, but in
the McLeod-Harris development this formation has been thrust above the coal and therefore a small
volume, approximately 3% of the total waste rock, will be handled.

• Treatment
Research and development of treatment methods that are effective in reducing selenium
concentrations in mine discharge waters is currently on-going within Teck. Conclusions from these

Teck Resources Limited Page 3-28


March 2018
MacKenzie Redcap Project

efforts indicate that two types of technologies are the most promising at this point: passive, such as in
situ (end pit lake or backfilled pit), and active treatment. Besides use of passive treatment options
such as backfilled pits and current pilot projects for (e.g. passive biochemical reactor at Leyland
Pond), CRO has no plans at this time to construct full scale active treatment facilities. It is the
intention of CRO, as outlined in this plan, to integrate selenium management into its core business
values and day-to-day activities to successfully manage release of selenium.

• Research and Development


On-going research and studies continue to take place at both CRO and within Teck to improve our
understanding on the mechanisms of selenium release and attenuation, the risk to the downstream
environments, and to further develop and refine management options, technologies and strategies.
As information becomes available, learnings will be incorporated into CRO’s management plan and
actions.

3.5.2 Selenium Trend Assessment

CRO’s management actions have had a positive influence on selenium trends in the McLeod River.
Although an initial increase was observed at many of the sites, primarily due to operational challenges,
over the past three-year period there has been a net decrease in total selenium concentrations as
measured at MR-2, MR-4, and MR-6. These results can be attributed to CRO’s adaptive approach in
water management, reduction in the number of discharge sources, and utilization of saturated zones in
backfilled pits.

A net increase in the trend of total selenium concentrations was observed in the analysis of data collected
from MR-4 over the management period (five-year average from 2006 to 2010). It is believed that this
trend is temporary and primarily the result of dewatering from Prospect pit. Discharge from dewatering
activities is anticipated to be further reduced with the phased startup of reclamation in the completed
Prospect mining area. As this occurs, it is anticipated that a corresponding decrease in selenium
concentrations will occur in both Prospect Creek (PRCK03) and the McLeod River (MR-4) over the next
three years.

Comparison of results from the management period of 2011 to 2013 and 2014 to 2016 against the five-
year average, median and 90th percentile (as detailed in Appendix 8, Selenium Management Plan,
Table 2.2) is provided in Appendix 8, Selenium Management Plan, Table 6.1.

The averages were calculated using the first data point for each month within each year (for the period of
2006 to 2010, 2011 to 2013, and 2014 to 2016) so as to minimize the error of averages. In a similar
fashion, the median and 90th percentiles were calculated with only the first sampling event of each month
(for each year) in an effort to account for periods of more frequent sampling.

3.5.3 Selenium Monitoring

The selenium monitoring program implemented by CRO has included frequent monitoring of surface
water selenium, as well as tissue sampling of benthic invertebrates, algae, fish tissue, and bird eggs.
Results from the monitoring program indicate that the SMP has a positive influence on managing
selenium levels in the McLeod River.

Teck Resources Limited Page 3-29


March 2018
MacKenzie Redcap Project

Teck will add additional monitoring sites on MacKenzie Creek, Redcap Creek and the Cardinal River,
measuring the same parameters as discussed above.

3.5.4 Conclusions

Results of the 2014 Selenium Management Plan demonstrate that CRO actions have led to a reduction in
selenium concentrations at priority locations along the McLeod River. It is CRO’s goal to continue to
strategically manage release of selenium from its operation in an effort to support downstream water
quality objectives in the McLeod River watershed. Teck will update the 2017 Selenium Management Plan
if and when the Project is approved.

CRO submitted an updated plan in June 2017 and will steward to the measures identified in this plan for
the next three years and will continue utilizing adaptive management to identify, plan, and carry-out
actions that have measurable and meaningful ecological benefits. Results of the research and
development program provide valuable insight to existing actions and have the potential to guide our
future activities. This plan will promote continuous improvement through incorporation of expanding
knowledge and techniques/technologies in selenium management. Results of CRO’s management
measures will be reported at the conclusion of the three-year period identified above. However, ongoing
changes that occur annually will be recorded and communicated through an annual update on March 31st
of the year following data collection.

3.6 Additional Mine Operations Considerations

3.6.1 Materials Handling Assumptions

The proposed MKRC has approximately 116 million BCM of waste rock that needs to be removed to
access the recoverable coal seams. To simulate waste removal operations, the following parameters and
values were used that are derived from CRO’s experience at the Cheviot Coal Mine:

• angle of repose of 37 degrees;

• re-sloped angle of approximately 26.5 degrees for rock dumps;

• re-sloped angle of approximately 26.5 degrees for the highwall where they are reclaimed, escape
terrain will have rock faces at 65 degrees and scree slopes at 37 degrees;

• swell factor of 30%;

• ex-pit rock dumps are built and re-sloped in 10 m to 45 m lifts;


• coversoil is removed beneath rock dumps prior to dumping; and

• five-year average of 35% of the total run of mine (ROM) feed results in coarse rejects.

3.6.2 Pre-construction

Timber clearing will be followed by coversoil salvage and stockpiling, commencing in Year 1 (2019). The
disturbance associated with the MKRC will not begin until 2019 or until all necessary permits are secured.

Teck Resources Limited Page 3-30


March 2018
MacKenzie Redcap Project

Clearing and grubbing will be required to prepare for the construction of access, haul road, radio
transmission tower, power transmission lines and water management features, as well as to prepare for
pit and waste rock spoil development.

As part of the pre-construction and ongoing activities planned for the proposed new areas, timber clearing
and soil salvage practices will be undertaken to comply with current practices and protocols established
at the mine. While strategic and discrete locations of the soil stockpiles have been conceived
(Figure 3.1-1), the practice of salvaging coversoil to ensure requirements are met at closure will be
maintained. Although the disturbance is known and discrete, the areas of disturbance associated with the
stockpiling of coversoil may increase depending on the actual amount of coversoil that is salvaged. This
concept of maximizing the coversoil is expanded in the reclamation closure and decommissioning section
of this application.

The timber clearing and soil salvage activities will mimic the surface phases of the MKRC to ensure
sufficient coversoil salvage for future reclamation purposes. The MKRC surface phasing is as follows:
MK1, MK2, MK3, MK4, RC1, RC2, RC3, RC4, and RC5 (refer to Section 3.3.2 and Figures 3.2-1 to
3.2-9).

Temporary sumps and pump systems will be placed strategically during this process. No water will be
released to the environment until licenced water structures are in place.

3.6.3 Construction

The Project is an extension of the existing operation. Ongoing construction will ensure the efficient and
timely construction of key infrastructure required to facilitate operation of the Project. Construction
activities will commence upon receipt of licences and approvals to ensure a smooth mining transition from
the phases currently under development to the new active working area.

3.6.4 Haulroads

Roads for transporting waste rock to waste spoils, transporting ROM coal to the processing plant and
equipment movement are required throughout the mine area. Extension of the existing roads to
accommodate the proposed Project will be minimal and limited to, for the most part, short-term roadways
to access specific areas in the pits and waste spoils. Main proposed haulroads are shown in the annual
progression maps (Figures 3.2-1 to 3.2-9).

New haulroads will be constructed to support the heavy loads they will experience. They will be
constructed with pit-run rock and regularly maintained to provide a reliable route for the haul trucks,
including watering the haulroads for dust control.

Short in-pit ramps will be built to meet double or single-lane haul truck traffic requirements as required
and crowned to provide adequate drainage. The heavy loads and on-going maintenance are expected to
produce a driving surface that will be constantly weathering and wearing, and storm events/run-off
conditions may result in high suspended solids content. Drainage will be directed into pits that will be
dewatered in a controlled manner.

Teck Resources Limited Page 3-31


March 2018
MacKenzie Redcap Project

3.6.5 Water Crossings

The MacKenzie and Little Homer creeks are the two major watercourses that will require crossings. The
crossings will be constructed on the haul road so the equipment, including the haul trucks can access the
mining area and haul coal to the processing plant. A clear span crossing is proposed both creek
crossings. The select locations are shown on Figure 3.4-1. Instream works are not anticipated.

Arched crossings are proposed for both creeks which are similar to other creek crossings at the Cheviot
Coal Mine (e.g. Prospect Creek, Whitehorse Creek). The crossings will be constructed to free-span both
MacKenzie and Little Homer creeks to reduce environmental impacts. All surface run-off from the haul
road will be directed away from the crossing into nearby impoundments as per the water management
plan (Section 3.4).

3.6.6 Power Transmission

TransAlta Utilities (TAU) provides 69 kV service to the Luscar Mine main substation. From that point,
CRO is responsible for the 69 kV electrical distribution systems throughout the property. At strategic
locations, substations are located to transform the electricity to 7.2kV for distribution to the mining
equipment. Progressive extensions of the 7.2kV mine system are required to advance with the mine
development. Electricity is also transformed to 480 V for serviced bays, pumping and for pit lighting. The
lowest transformation is to 110 V for general use.

Solar/battery and propane generator installations are sometimes utilized for outlying areas for service in
drainage control facilities. These installations are normally light electrical loads associated with metering
equipment for flocculation control or environmental monitoring equipment. Where possible, power lines
are brought into these areas unless distance to the site or duration of the facility would not warrant the
cost.

Power transmission and load calculation associated with the Project is shown on the annual progression
maps (Figures 3.2-1 to 3.2-9).

3.6.7 Drilling and Blasting

Drilling and blasting of geologic layers overlying coal deposits is paramount to a mining operation. CRO
has developed and implements and maintains standard drilling and blasting practices and procedures to
address safety, operational, and environmental risks. At CRO, a fleet of mining drills are used to drill 15 m
benches in a blast pattern. The holes are loaded with ammonium nitrate and fuel Oil (ANFO)-based bulk
explosive. Emulsion explosives used in wet conditions are mixed at Teck Coal’s Elkview operation and
shipped to the Cheviot Coal Mine site. Components of ANFO Explosives are hauled to a satellite facility
at the Cheviot Coal Mine, currently located on unreclaimed mine disturbance in the south end of the
McLeod footprint, and are mixed in the explosives truck at time of loading into blastholes. The satellite
facility may be relocated to the Project area once development is underway.

Explosives will be managed according to established protocols and procedures to ensure the safety of
personnel and effectiveness of the blasting agents. Additional information surrounding the handling and
storage of explosives is outlined in company specific protocols which are based on provincial and national
regulations.

Teck Resources Limited Page 3-32


March 2018
MacKenzie Redcap Project

3.6.8 Heavy Equipment

The MKRC will be mined with traditional truck and shovel techniques using the mining equipment that is
currently mining the licenced Harris and Upper Harris phases of the Cheviot Coal Mine. A list of heavy
mining equipment is provided in Table 3.6-1.

Table 3.6-1 Heavy Equipment Fleet

Description Type Capacity Number of Units

Shovel P&H 2800 30 m³ 1


Komatsu PC5500 23 m3 1
P&H 4100 44 m³ 1
Excavator Komatsu PC2000 15.7 m3 1
Caterpillar 390D 9 m³ 1
Komatsu 300LC 2
Caterpillar 345 1
Drill P&H 120A 376 mm dia. 2
Front End Loader LeTourneau L950 - 1
LeTourneau L1100 - 2
LeTourneau L1850 18 m³ 1
Dozer Caterpillar D10T Not applicable 5
Caterpillar D11R 1
Grader Caterpillar 16H Not applicable 2
Caterpillar 24M 1
Caterpillar 24H 1
Haul Truck Euclid R170 150 tonne 1
Wabco 630E (Water Truck) - 1
Komatsu 830E AC drive 215 tonne 11
Komatsu 830E DC drive (coal 200 tonne 3
box truck) -
Kress CH200C II 220 tonne 4
Euclid R260 215 tonne 1

3.6.9 Support Facilities

Fleet maintenance is provided by permanent and temporary support facilities. Two sets of permanent
office/shop complexes currently support the Cheviot operation. The main set is at the Luscar Mine and
contains the offices, shop, warehouse, tire shop and fueling facilities. The second is a satellite shop/office
facility (Cheviot Dry) at the Cheviot Coal Mine along with a satellite service bay / fuel island (Figure 1.0-3).
This may be relocated to the Project area once development is underway.

The satellite service bays consist of a trailer and fuel storage tanks with secondary containment. Within
the trailer, bulk storage of lubricants and coolants is provided with the necessary pumps and metering

Teck Resources Limited Page 3-33


March 2018
MacKenzie Redcap Project

equipment for delivery to mobile equipment. Minor consumable supplies such as paper towels, window
cleaner, replacement bulbs, etc. are also provided. The sites are relocated as necessary to keep them
close to active mining areas and are often located along main hauling routes. These sites mainly serve
haul trucks but also include dozers and graders. Most other mobile equipment is serviced from fuel
service trucks.

3.6.10 Pit Dewatering

Clean water diversions minimize the volume of water that reaches active pit operations, but some water
will still enter pits during active operations. Dewatering of pit areas is critical to ensure safe and efficient
pit operation. Dewatering is comprised of pumping in advance of mining and pit bottom dewatering during
active mining.

Removal of groundwater in advance of mining serves the same purpose as clean-water diversions – to
minimize the volume of clean water that is exposed to mine activities and to enable safe mining.
Groundwater dewatering in advance of mining has been conducted consistently as part of Cheviot Coal
Mine operations since development began in 2004.

Consistent with existing operations at the Cheviot Coal Mine, the water pumped from the active MKRC pit
bottoms will be diverted to a wastewater handling facility, or an inactive pit backfill, as it will likely be high
in suspended solids. Pumped water will not be diverted directly to the receiving environment.

3.6.11 Coal Handling and Processing

Raw coal will be hauled from the Project pits via the haulroad to the existing CPP at the Luscar Mine.
Coal is initially stockpiled beside the feed crusher and then fed into the breaker with front end loaders.
The raw coal is sized by screening and passing through breakers and separated into two fractions
(coarse and fine) in preparation for coal processing. CRO’s coal preparation plant produces a high quality
metallurgical product. Modifications to the CPP are not contemplated as part of the Project.

3.6.12 Geotechnical Conditions

The pre-feasibility level geotechnical reports for the Project are provided in Appendix 4. The key
recommendations from the pre-feasibility level geotechnical work are summarized below.

3.6.12.1 Open Pits

The pre-feasibility level geotechnical highwall design criteria consist primarily of double benches that are
30 m high with 65 to 70 degrees bench faces angles and safety bench widths ranging from 8 to 12 m
depending on rock type and rock mass conditions. The resulting inter-ramp slope angles range from 45 to
54 degrees, which are slightly steeper than the designs for previous Cheviot-area pits. The favourable dip
structures that would allow for inter-slope angles of 54 degrees do not occur within the planning area. The
pre-feasibility design uses benches that are 30 m high with 65 degrees bench faces and safety benches
between 11 m and 16 m wide, resulting in inter-ramp slope angles ranging from 45 to 49 degrees. These
design angles are consistent with previous Cheviot project applications.

The pre-feasibility level footwall design criteria specify maximum allowable unbenched heights as a
function of the bedding dip of the bedrock, and for relatively steeper bedding dips that require benching of
the footwalls the associated safety bench widths are targeted to range from 8 to 11 m. Where strata

Teck Resources Limited Page 3-34


March 2018
MacKenzie Redcap Project

thickness is insufficient for the rock mass to achieve competent footwalls the safety benches are pushed
back to the next competent strata layer, resulting in some 20 m wide safety benches within the footwall.
Localized safety benches have been increased to as high as a 35 m where waste haul backfilling is
planned along the footwall. Recommendations are also provided for excavation and sloping of
overburden soils adjacent to the pit slope requests.

Further investigation and design work at the feasibility-level and detailed design level is required to
finalize the pit wall design criteria.

The pre-feasibility pit slope design criteria are contingent upon:

• effective controlled blasting adjacent to the final pit walls, including the use of angled pre-shear
holes, along with careful scaling of final bench faces;
• a suitable instrumentation and monitoring program to check the actual geological and rock mass
conditions encountered as mining progresses, monitor for movements of the pit walls as well as
the groundwater conditions within the walls; and
• the above-noted blasting and monitoring aspects of the implementation of the pit slope design
criteria will be considered further during the feasibility-level and detailed design level work for the
open pits and adjusted as appropriate.

3.6.12.2 Ex-Pit Waste Dumps (Redcap Dump and MacKenzie Dump(s))

The pre-feasibility level geotechnical assessment for the MacKenzie dumps (MKEX1 and MKEX2)
identified potential issues with the scoping-level dump design due to the presence of weak, colluvial
deposits on sloping terrain in portions of the planned dump footprint. It was determined that the stability of
the dump can be sufficiently improved by adjusting the dump design to extend the toe of the dump
approximately 25 m downslope onto more gently-sloping terrain. Further work during the feasibility-level
stage is required to finalize the design of this mitigation measure and determine if operational controls on
the rate of dump construction will also be required, as well as to assess the stability of the waste dump
and adjacent MacKenzie pit due to their close proximity and refine the waste dump and/or MacKenzie pit
design as required to meet acceptance criteria for stability.

The pre-feasibility level geotechnical assessment for RCEX identified that the low strength peat deposits
within a portion of the footprint area of the dump will require mitigation measures to meet the acceptance
criteria for dump stability. The mitigation measures will likely include a combination of foundation
preparation to improve the foundation conditions along with operational measures to manage the rate of
dump construction and verify acceptable performance of the dump. Further investigation of the extent,
depth and properties of the peat deposits are required during the feasibility-level work to inform the
design and planning of the mitigation measures.

3.6.12.3 Haulroad Corridor

The pre-feasibility level geohazard mapping and geotechnical assessment of the MKRC haulroad corridor
identified some naturally-occurring slope instabilities as well as gully erosion areas that will need to be
considered during the selection and detailed design of the final route for the haulroad corridor. None of
the identified geohazards were assessed to be significant enough to warrant rerouting of the haulroad

Teck Resources Limited Page 3-35


March 2018
MacKenzie Redcap Project

corridor; however, mitigation and maintenance measures with respect to the existing and potential
geohazards that were identified will need to be incorporated into the final design of the haulroad.

3.7 Continual Planning

As part of all projects, planning and project refinement continues constantly at CRO. Of particular note
with MKRC, engineering and evaluation continues regarding optimizing access to the mine development
area by a haul road routing to the south that would go directly to the Redcap mining area. Such an
alignment is show on Figure 3.7-1. Further detailed engineering is ongoing on this potential routing.

3.8 Financial Security

CRO provides financial security in accordance Alberta’s Mine Financial Security Provision (MFSP) and
supporting AER guidelines (https://www.aer.ca/documents/liability/MFSP_Guide.pdf). This liability
provision is revised and secured annually for both Luscar and Cheviot Coal Mines, and includes all
liabilities for decommissioning and reclamation, as well as interim care and maintenance costs. As the
Project area is developed, the new disturbance liabilities will be included in this provision.

3.9 Health, Safety and Environmental Management

3.9.1 Corporate Policies

Teck is committed to responsible practices in all aspects of its business and will apply these responsible
practices to the Project. The Safety and Sustainability Committee of the Board of Directors provides policy
direction and monitors the company’s environmental, social and safety performance. The Corporate
Environment and Risk Management Committee, chaired by the Chief Executive Officer (CEO), is a senior
management committee that sets priorities and direction for environment, health, safety and community
management programs and tracks performance.

Teck’s Health, Safety, Environment and Community (HSEC) Management System provides a structure
for implementing the company’s sustainability commitments. It includes overarching corporate policies,
the HSEC Management Standards, guidelines and site-level policies and procedures. Teck’s
company-wide commitments are outlined in the following key sustainability policy documents.

• Charter of Corporate Responsibility is a set of principles related to business ethics, health, safety,
environment and community that governs the company’s operating practices and provides the
overarching sustainability governance commitment.

• Code of Sustainable Conduct and Our Strategy for Sustainability outline the company’s
commitment to sustainable development, focusing on aspects such as community and
environmental performance
• Code of Ethics sets out the company’s dedication to upholding high moral and ethical standards,
specifying basic business conduct and behaviour.
• Safety and Health Policy sets out the company’s commitment to providing leadership and
resources for entrenching the core value of safety.

Teck Resources Limited Page 3-36


March 2018
MacKenzie Redcap Project

• Human Rights Policy sets out the company’s commitment to respecting the rights of employees,
the communities in which the company operates and others affected by the company’s activities.
• The Indigenous Peoples Policy reflects Teck’s commitment to responsible resource development.
We recognize that building relationships with Indigenous Peoples is fundamental to our success.

In addition to the charters, codes and policies described above, each operation of Teck implements
an environmental policy. The Cardinal River Operations Environmental Policy is presented in
Table 3.9-1 and identifies sustainability as a core value and environmental management as an
integral component of CRO’s business.

Table 3.9-1 Cardinal River Environmental Policy

At Teck, the pursuit of sustainability guides our approach to business. We are committed to environmental management best
practices and every goal we set in the future builds on our stewardship of the earth yesterday and today. We are determined to
achieve continual improvement in our environmental performance through our management systems. Through this policy we
commit to
• complying with applicable legal, regulatory and other requirements which relate to our operations’ identified environmental
aspects;
• ensuring effective implementation, maintenance, and documentation of each environmental management system (EMS);
• setting environmental objectives and targets which measure progress towards continual improvement, utilizing accepted
assessment processes;
• prevention of pollution;
• minimizing environmental impacts of activities and services related to mining operations;
• making this policy available to our employees, persons working on our behalf and the public; and
• raising the environmental awareness of our employees and those working on our behalf.
Signed Signed
Robin Sheremeta Matt Cole
Senior Vice President, Coal Operations General Manager, Cardinal River Operations
Teck Resources Limited Teck Coal Limited
August 2016
ISO = International Organization for Standardization; OHSAS = Occupational Health and Safety Assessment Series;
HSEC = Health, Safety, Environment and Community.

3.9.2 Health and Safety Program

CRO has Occupational Health and Safety systems in place and would be implemented for the Project.
The occupational health systems and procedures at CRO help prevent occupational illness and are
designed to limit worker exposure to dust, noise, vibration and hazardous materials. Where appropriate,
CRO has education, training and counselling, prevention and risk control programs, as well as
committees for managing and minimizing potential occupational exposures and diseases. Teck will
continue to develop an occupational hygiene strategy to identify and minimize employee and contractor
exposure to chemical, physical and biological health hazards.

Teck has a three-pillar approach to health and safety that drives continual improvement and supports the
vision of everyone going home safe and healthy every day, embedding a culture of safety, learning from
high potential incidents and sharing best practices, and operating with excellence. All employees
participate in the Courageous Safety Leadership program to foster a culture of safety at Teck, building
commitment and leadership in safety. Teck fosters a culture of continual learning and improvement in
safety performance by learning from high-potential incidents (HPIs), sharing best practices in safety

Teck Resources Limited Page 3-37


March 2018
MacKenzie Redcap Project

through employee training and development and participating in mine safety working groups. CRO tracks
all safety incidents and classifies significant incidents as HPIs, serious HPIs or potentially fatal
occurrences, and analyzes and learns from these incidents to identify target actions for high-risk tasks
and areas.

3.9.3 Emergency Response Plan

Emergency Preparedness is managed through Standard Practices and Procedures (SP&Ps), ongoing
training programs, protection system inspections, tests, drills, incident review and emergency response
and evacuation plans. These procedures provide the guidelines for use in emergency situations which
can vary widely in scope and location. These SP&Ps are controlled documents, revised and reviewed
regularly by senior site personnel.

CRO has an existing Emergency Response Plan SP&P in place for the Cheviot Coal Mine that would
continue to be implemented for the Project. This SP&P is designed to provide CRO staff guidance in
preparation for and response to emergency situations. The primary function of this emergency response
plan SP&P is to ensure a prompt well-organized response to minimize effects of potential disaster,
serious accident or hazardous situation. The SP&P includes emergency response procedures for
delineating roles and responsibilities, contingency plans, emergency response measures, emergency
response evaluation, and training for identified potential hazards. Health and emergency response
training would also be implemented. This manual is a controlled document revised on a 12-month basis
or as required.

3.9.4 Environmental Protection Program

CRO manages all environmental issues through an Environmental Management System (EMS) that is
certified to the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) 14001:2004 Standard. Teck’s EMS
Manual describes the systems at CRO designed to meet the requirements as outlines in the ISO
14001:2004 standard, and is based on continual improvement, preventing pollution, and following
legislation. This manual provides a guide to the system and identifies supporting controlled documents.
The manual and supporting documentation defines and describes roles and responsibilities,
organizational structure, training programs, applicable statutory legislation and environmental standards
and procedures, best management practices and other industry specific guidance documents.

The scope of the EMS applies to all mining and processing activities that CRO can control and influence
at the mine site, including mine planning and design, exploration mining operations, waste management,
reclamation, monitoring processing and loading of rail cars. CRO’s Environmental Policy is posted on
Teck’s website, throughout CRO site and at the CRO gatehouse for public viewing.

The system was accredited in 2010 and retention of certification requires an annual audit by an
accredited third party. The entire EMS is recertified every three years, with the last recertification on
October 18, 2017, with upgrade to the ISO14001:2015 Standard expected in April 2018.

Since 2002, Teck has worked towards certification of environmental management systems to conform to
the internationally recognized International Organization for Standardization (ISO) 14001 standard
(ISO 2004). Currently all six of Teck’s operating coal operations are IS014001-2004 registered.

Teck Resources Limited Page 3-38


March 2018
MacKenzie Redcap Project

3.9.5 Health, Safety and Environment Integration into Project Management

The HSEC Management Standards integrate requirements from Teck’s internal corporate policies and
external sustainability commitments and, as such, they form the framework for implementing sustainability
at Teck. The HSEC Management Standards provide a consistent and systematic methodology for the
identification and effective management of HSEC issues and risks, and provide a platform to support
continual improvement in HSEC programs and performance. The HSEC Management Standards provide
auditable criteria for evaluating the performance of the HSEC management systems and set out minimum
expectations for managing the HSEC-related aspects of day-to--day activities. As a result, the Standards
are intended to provide clarity on the practices that must be in place throughout the company.

Teck’s aim is to minimize its footprint and mitigate impacts and, once mining operations have ceased, to
leave behind ecosystems that support productive uses for future generations. Within the HSEC
Management System, the HSEC Management Standards and environmental audit program help drive
continual improvement and assessment of compliance with environmental regulations. Across all of
Teck’s operations, there is a focus on comprehensive environmental management that facilitates effective
environmental stewardship.

Teck’s licence to operate depends on the ability to meet legal requirements and demonstrate value and
responsibility to all stakeholders, including both shareholders and communities. Teck continually monitors
and manages the social and environmental aspects of its activities to meet or exceed regulations, and to
ensure regulatory compliance and performance. Teck’s environmental assurance program is designed to
verify that requirements are met, as dictated by the applicable permits, legislation and regulations in each
jurisdiction. Compliance audits are conducted on a three-year rotational basis for all operations, as well
as mid-term reviews to assess the resolution of audit findings.

3.9.6 Fire Control Plan

CRO currently has guidance within the Emergency Response Plan SP&P (and other site specific SP&Ps)
that CRO will continue to implement through the life of the Project. CRO meets all regulatory
requirements with respect to effective response to a fire or explosion regardless of severity. A Mine
Rescue team is in place to meet the requirements of the Alberta Occupational Health and Safety
Legislation. To support this response, the site has two fire trucks (one at Cardinal, one at Cheviot) that
are stocked and maintained as per the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) standards. Team
members are trained in the use of Self Contained Breathing Apparatus (SCBA) as well as fire
extinguishing techniques and the hazards involved with suppressing a fire. Mine Rescue team members
are not structural fire fighters but are trained to that standard.

3.9.7 Worker Competence and Training Program

All Project site staff are required to review and sign-off on SP&Ps; initially at the start of employment and
then on a routine basis according to the SP&P review schedule. All contractors receive thorough training
during their orientation before being authorized to work onsite.

Teck Resources Limited Page 3-39


March 2018
MacKenzie Redcap Project

Section 3 Figures

Teck Resources Limited


March 2018
484,000 486,000 488,000 490,000 492,000 494,000

R23 R22
20 1925 19
25 2050 25 19 200 0 19
195

2000
0 1900

19
0
75 00
11

1950
12 7 10

19
200
1900

25

25
190 75 1875
0
8 9

19
18 197

18
5

50
197
5

50

22
19 1950

1900
25 1850

75

21
1950 1975

21

50
0
2100 200

1950
22
25

00
5,866,000

5,866,000
1650

0
5 200

190
18 1925 187 0
75 2025
21

21

50
25 2075 2250

1875
75

20
23
2075

25
23

Litt
23

Hom
!
00 25

2025
2350
167
le
182
5

er C

5
!

25
19
!
1750
1800 2 1 6 5

ree
4 3
! !

1825
MKPO
! ! ! !

is Cre
!
1775
!

k
!

22
! !

2075
!
MK1
!
SP1
!

25
! !

25
ek
!
1825
! ! ! !
2275
!

19
!
SP2
! !
!
! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
!

f
!
1925
¤
¥
!

19
!
1800
!
2125

75
!
!

75
!

!
19
SP3 0
!
225

!
! !
1950
!

170
!

!
18
LHPO

25
25
!
23

21
T46 ie
00

17
T46
2325

00
!

nz

!
MK3
!

1775
e
18

1750

K k
50

MK2
!

ac ee

!
G

19
21
f 20
50

M Cr
¤
¥
!
50

25
50

T45 T45
19

! 22
18 25

19
75
MK4 MK3EX1
!

00
1900 18
00

21
! !

75
1875
!

50
!
18 !

18

!
75
!

SP4
19

!
!
75
5,864,000

5,864,000
1900
!
Little
!

!
!

Hom 18 MK3EX2 !
75
!
18

187
er C 75

!
35 36 31 r eek 32
!
33
!
34

5
185

!
! !
1875 0
RC1
! !

!
!

1850
!

195
1900
!

2000
200

18 18
75
!

0
75 !
0

!
!
19

!
00

RC2
!
!

!
19

1900
50 !
1825

!
TREE !

SLAND
I

!
5
RC4/
25

18
19

!
50

1825

!
19
50

!
2000
! !
RC3
! !
!
SP5

R e dc a
!
1925

C re e k
1850 !

5
1950

177
!

26 25 30 29 28 !
27

p
75
!
21
!
5,862,000

5,862,000
00
22 RCEX
2050

2150 2100 187


5
SP6

18
2150

00
2125
2075 RCPO

17
50
2025 1725

1975

23 24 19 20 21 22
00

R23 R22
1925 17

5
192 1900
1925

484,000 486,000 488,000 490,000 492,000 494,000

MacKenzi
eRed capPr
oject– Pr
oposed Pi
tLi
cences-Fi
gu r
e3.
1-1
±
Hi
nton
!

Robb Ex i
sti
ng&Appr