2022-04-18_REVISION - C2010089 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

ACTION PLAN ID # UT-2017-001 cost index is most appropriate for use in reclamation cost escalation factors. ❑ By May 15, 2017,DOGM shall draft revisions to Tech-007 § 6(D)(1) to indicate a 5-year average will be used and submit those changes for DFB review. ❑ By May 30, 2017, DFB will review proposed revisions to Tech-007 and provide feedback to DOGM as appropriate. ❑ By June 15, 2017, DOGM will make final adjustments to Tech-007. ❑ By July 17, 2017, DOGM will draft and send a letter to coal mine operators and permittees informing them of changes to its bonding practices. ❑ By July 18, 2017, DOGM will begin implementing its revised bonding procedures. ISSUE 4: Cost Estimate Calculations and DOGM's Tech-007 Guidance PROBLEM DESCRIPTION: Although Tech-007 is a non-binding state guidance document formed for the purpose of standardizing line-item bond calculations,OSMRE requested clarification of several apparent discrepancies identified through PSD's internal technical findings. OSMRE communicated that discrepancies may detrimentally impact overall reclamation cost estimates and resultant bond amounts. The specific questions and discrepancies identified here were outlined in PSD's technical findings document,entitled "Cost Estimate Review Findings for Dugout Canyon, Skyline, and Sufco Mines." For this specific problem description,please refer to those technical findings in addition to the information presented here. SMCRA, the Federal regulations, and the Utah program require that each bond is set in an amount sufficient to cover the cost of reclamation in the event that the bond is forfeited,16 Because a bond forfeiture would result in the reclamation responsibility shifting to the State regulatory authority,the bond amount must be determined "based on the estimated reclamation cost to the regulatory authority of completing all work at an operation in order to bring the site into full compliance with the Act, and not on the estimated cost to the permittee . . . ." Consequently,the Utah program and the minimum Federal requirements set forth in SMCRA and the Federal regulations expressly state that the bond amount must depend on the reclamation requirements of the approved permit and must"[r]eflect the probable difficulty of reclamation[.]"18 The Utah rules at UAC R645-301-830.140 provide that the amount of each bonded area must "[b]e based on,but not limited to, the detailed estimated cost, with supporting calculations for the estimates,submitted by the permit applicant." Moreover, in the 1983 final rule published in the Federal Register, OSMRE briefly addressed the inclusion of administrative costs to the State regulatory authority as a factor to be considered in determining bond amounts. In the 1983 final rule, two commenters stated that, in addition to the cost estimate provided by the operator, a State regulatory authority should also consider the "administrative overhead in contracting for the reclamation work[.]"19 In response to this 1fi 30 U.S.C.§ 1259(a);30 C.F.R. § 800.14(b);Utah Code Ann.§40-10-15(1);and UAC R645-301-830.200. 44 Fed.Reg. 14902, 15111 (Mar. 13, 1979). 19 Utah Code Ann.§40-10-15(1);UAC R645-301-830.130;see also 30 U.S.C. § 1259(a)and 30 C.F.R. § 800.14(a)(3). 19 48 Fed.Reg.32932,page 22(July 19, 1983). 9