2015-10-06_PERMIT FILE - C1981019A ‎(3)‎

• Permit No: C1981019A
• IBM Index Class Name: Permit File
• Doc Date: 10/6/2015
• Doc Name: Performance Standards
• Section_Exhibit Name: Volume 15 Rule 4
• Media Type: D
• Archive: Yes

RULE 4 PERFORMANCE STANDARDS
To summarize, success evaluatio;is involve either a direct or a statistical t-test comparison of
appropriate parameters for each variablf of interest (cover, production, diversity, or woody plant density).
For monitoring efforts, comparisons shall be made directly with either the reference area parameters or
the permitted standards to facilitate a determination of the progress of revegetation. In the case of ground
cover and production, comparisons shall be made against reference area data of the same year. Diversity
and woody plant density variables shall be compared against the standards defined above.
For bond release efforts, direct comparisons are made when the revegetated area mean value for a
given variable is greater than either 90% of the standard or the reference area mean assuming that a
statistically adequate sample has been collected. If a statistically adequate sample cannot be obtained, a
"reverse -null" hypothesis test may be employed as detailed in C.R.S. Rule 4.15.11 (2) (c). If an adequate
sample is obtained for a particular variable, but the mean is less than 90% of the reference area mean or
standard, a "standard -null" hypothesis t-test may be employed as detailed in C.R.S. Rule 4.15.11 (2) (b).
For the typically problematic variable of woody plant density, Colorado has implemented three
alternate adequacy / success evaluation methods under C.R.S. Rule 4.15.11 (3) that may be utilized in lieu
of those detailed under 4.15.11 (2). Until experience dictates which procedure is best (because these are
relatively new metrics to the science), it would be prudent to collect a minimum of 75 belt transects (at
least 100 mZ in size) as indicated in 4.15.11 (3)(b)(i). These data can then be used for the various
analyses / comparisons.
4.16 POSTMINING LAND USE
4.16.1 General
Implementation of the detailed reclamation plan as presented in Section 2.05.4 will result in a landscape
and vegetative cover that is equal to or better than the pre -mining condition for Rangeland/Fish and
Wildlife use that currently exists in the area.
4.16.2 Determining Use of Land
The pre -mining land uses for the mine and adjacent areas are shown on Map 17. Map 17 serves to identify
both the pre and post -mine land use designations. Colowyo is focused on re-establishment of the joint
land use of Rangeland/Fish and Wildlife Habitat post -mining. The narrative describing the land use of
the Collom permit area is presented under Sections 2.04.3 and 2.05.5. The proposed post -mining land use
will involve restoration to the pre -mining land use of Rangeland/Fish and Wildlife Habitat (grassland and
sagebrush steppe), as described in Section 2.05.5. The land management staff of Colowyo, the BLM and
the State Land Board fully support Colowyo's approach to the re-establishment and enhancement of
multiple -use Rangeland/Fish and Wildlife Habitat focused on improved range condition and the creation
of wildlife habitat specific to sagegrouse brood -rearing. Copies of the correspondence confirming these
views have been included in this package and are identified as Figures 2.05.5-1, 2.05.5-2 and 2.05.5-3.
4.16.3 Alternative Land Uses
The joint land use of Rangeland/Fish and Wildlife Habitat will be restored in a timely manner as outlined
in Section 2.05.4. No alternative land uses will be implemented in the reclamation plan set forth under
Section 2.05.4.
4.17 AIR RESOURCES PROTECTION
Collom — Rule 4, Page 49 Revision Date: 9/28/11
Revision No.: PR -03