|
According to a 2014 survey by the Interstate Mining Compact Commission, Peabody self -bonds
<br />a total of $1,106,718,756 in these states, covering mining and reclamation operations at six
<br />mines in Colorado, two in New Mexico, and four in Wyoming. 13 See Table below.
<br />State
<br />Total Peabody Self-
<br />Mines (Permit No.)
<br />bonding Obligations
<br />Foidel Creek (C-1982-056), Sage Creek (C -2009 -
<br />Colorado
<br />$26,000,000
<br />087), Seneca (C-1982-057), Yoast (C-1994-082),
<br />Hayden Gulch Terminal (C-1992-081), Williams
<br />Form (C-1981-044)
<br />New Mexico
<br />$290,439,433
<br />El Segundo (2005-01), Lee Ranch (19-2P)
<br />Wyoming
<br />$790,2791323
<br />Caballo (PT0433), North Antelope -Rochelle (PT -
<br />0569), Rawhide (PT0240), School Creek PT -0764)
<br />TOTAL
<br />$1,106,718,756
<br />Although all indications are that Peabody Energy no longer qualifies for self -bonding
<br />pursuant to SMCRA regulations, the company does not appear to have notified regulatory
<br />authorities in these states that it does not qualify. Further, Peabody does not appear to have
<br />posted alternate bonds for the aforementioned mining and reclamation operations.
<br />In fact, Peabody claims that these states have continued to determine that the company
<br />qualifies for self -bonding, even though it clearly does not. Most recently, Peabody asserted that
<br />the State of Wyoming re -affirmed the company's self -bonding of its North Antelope -Rochelle
<br />and Rawhide mining operations in the state. 14 The company also asserted that the State of New
<br />Mexico approved of its self -bonding. 15 However, there is no indication that Peabody provided
<br />notification to the states of Wyoming or New Mexico, or the state of Colorado for that matter,
<br />that the company does not actually qualify for self -bonding. Regardless of the opinions of
<br />regulators in the states of Colorado, New Mexico, or Wyoming, the obligation remains upon
<br />Peabody to provide proper notification when the company no longer qualifies for self -bonding
<br />and to take steps to ensure adequate bonds are in place.
<br />Furthermore, the circumstances that appear to have rendered Peabody ineligible for self -
<br />bonding show no signs of dissipating. As indicated above, even though the company has
<br />expressed its intent to sell its Colorado and New Mexico assets, this sale would not eliminate
<br />sufficient bonding obligations to render the company eligible for self -bonding again.
<br />Additionally, there is skepticism that this deal may even go through and suggestions that
<br />Peabody may file for bankruptcy in the next few days. 16
<br />13 Interstate Mining Compact Commission, "Self -bonding Survey," available at
<br />http://imcc.isa.us/Self°/620Bonding%20Survev.12df. Attached as Exhibit 4.
<br />14 Peabody Energy, "Form 8-K" (Dec. 21, 2015), available at
<br />htto://.www.see.eov/Archives/ed2ar,Idata./1064728/000106472815000126/btu 201512218-k.htm
<br />15 Supra. Note 4.
<br />16 WYCO Researcher, "Peabody Energy Could File for Bankruptcy Unless Bowie Gets Financing," Seeking Alpha,
<br />available at http://seekingalpha.com/article/3872816-peabod yY energy -file -bankruptcy -unless -bowie -gets -financing.
<br />
|