APPCOR12901

• Permit No: C1981015
• IBM Index Class Name: Application Correspondence
• Doc Date: 4/9/1981
• Doc Name: FRUITA MINES 1 AND 2 APPLICATION FN C-015-81
• From: MLR
• To: DORCHESTER COAL CO
• Media Type: D
• Archive: No

-4-
2 2
nmin = t s
(DX)2
where
n = number of samples
s2 =variance of collected samples
t = t-table value (1.3 for 80% probability)
D = Desired level of accuracy (0.1 for 90% confidence)
X = Average herbaceous vegetative cover

Most of the sampled areas do not meet sampling adequacy. The three mine site
reference areas meet sampling adequacy, but the other affected areas and reference
areas do not meet sampling adequacy according to this formula. This issue must
be resolved before these reference areas can be approved by the Division.
6. The applicant should provide the scientific names (species) for the plants
used in the revegetation mix.
2.04.11 Fish and 4ildlife Resources Information
No site-specific fish and wildlife information has been provided by the applicant.
This is required in section 2.04.11(3)(b).
2.05.2 Operation Plan - Estimated Area for Life of Operation
1. Maps FM-2-GTL-II-TECH and FM-3-GTL-I2-TECH do not show the progression of
mining beyond 1985. The text states that mining of the Fruita mines complex
will probably extend through a second 5-year period. These development stages
must be more clearly addressed by the application to comply with 2.05.2(2).
Please clarify.
2.05.3 Operation Plan - Permit Area
1. What is the total production expected for the total life of the mine as
applied for in this permit? This is required by 2.05.3(1).
2. No supporting information is given on facilities such as buildings, structures,
and utility corridors as required by 2.05.3(3)(a).
3. The applicant must identify materials used in surface and subgrade materials
for the access and haul roads. Also, appropriate cross-sections should be
provided to demonstrate conformance with cut, fill, and foundation slope re-
quirements of Rules 4.03.2(c)(i), 4.03.2(d)(ii) and 4.03.2(d)(viii).
4. If the return of waste to underground mine workings is being considered as
a mode of operation (as is suggested in Vol. 2, page 168 of the application),
the requirements of Rule 2.05.3(10) must be addressed.

5. The applicant uses Manning's Equation to defend the culvert designs which