Laserfiche WebLink
1. Annual weed control activities and herbicide application Iwhen conducted) <br />2. Annual topsoil balance reporting <br />3. Revegetation monitoring report (when applicable) <br />4. Updated existing light use road locations and culverts with specific light use road <br />culvert design calculations <br />5. Submittal of existing graded topography with comparison to proposed postmining <br />topography <br />6. Wildlife monitoring reporting when conducted <br />Testing for Successful Reclamation <br />The following discussion details the applicable success criteria, methods to be used in <br />measurement of parameters, comparisons to be made between reclaimed and undisturbed <br />areas, and statistical tests to be performed. <br />An extended reference area approach will be used for assessing successful revegetation for the <br />parameters of cover and production at both the II-W and II-W South Extension areas. Woody <br />plant density and species diversity success criteria will be based on technical performance <br />standards. As discussed later in this section, seasonal variety as a success parameter is not <br />applicable because of the cool season vegetation dominance in the native areas. In addition, <br />premining data for the wetter phase of the mesic drainage type (Dry Creek area in II-W; <br />Hubberson Gulch in the II-W South Extension areal will be used as success standards for this <br />minor type lin terms of areal extentl~ The proposed revegetation plan for this mesic drainage <br />type should also be kept in mind when considering revegetation success criteria. <br />In March 1985, the Division issued Peabody a set of adequacy comments based on the review <br />of the Seneca II-W permit application. Included was a comment regarding the then proposed <br />two-acre reference areas and their comparability to the permit area. In May 1985, as part of a <br />Peabody response package, the extended reference area approach was proposed to alleviate <br />the concerns of the Division. The approach and response were approved as part of the August <br />5, 1985 Decision and Findings of Compliance document for the Seneca II-W Mine permit. The <br />Seneca II-W permit was signed on December 31, 1985. <br />In response to Peabody's Permit Revision 1 IPR 11 to the Seneca II-W permit, the Division <br />issued a Preliminary Adequacy Review letter on March 11, 1991 which, in part, required <br />documentation of the comparability of the extended reference area to the mine affected area. <br />Peabody responded to this requirement as part of an April 26, 1991 response package <br />37 Revised 1(99 <br />