Laserfiche WebLink
operation. The Service acknowledged the presence of a golden eagle nest in the vicinity, <br />but concluded that it was at a distance suggesting impacts to the golden eagles from on- <br />site operations were unlikely. <br />32. The weight of the evidence demonstrates that the Applicant has met the minimum <br />requirements of Rule 6.4.8 -Exhibit H. <br />33. Issue 7(.n, Adequacy of Reclamation Plan to Achieve Post-Mining Land Use of <br />"Wildlife Habitat," Rules 3.1.10 and 6.4.5. The Division concluded that the Applicant <br />had submitted a revegetation plan that complied with the minimum requirements of Rules <br />3.1.I0 and 6.4.5 and is designed to facilitate reclamation for future wildlife habitat. The <br />Division stated that the revegetation plan includes provisions For re-establishment of <br />riparian trees and shrubs, as well as establishment of native grasses. Disturbed areas, <br />with the exception of highwalls, will be covered with available soil material and <br />revegelated with grasses, trees and shrubs. Neither Rule 3.1.10 nor Rute 6.4.5 requires <br />the Applicant to provide revegetation at a 1:1 ratio. The Division stated that the purposed <br />bond is adequate to cover the cost of revegetation as specified in the reclamation plan if <br />bond forfeiture is required. If revegetation fails' during final reclamation, the Division <br />would treat the matter as a compliance issue and would require the Applicant or its <br />successor to take appropriate measures to establish adequate vegetation. <br />34. The weight of the evidence demonstrates that the Applicant has met the minimum <br />requirements of Rules 3.1.10 and 6.4.5. <br />35. Issue 7(IQ, Adequacy of Plan to Control Weeds (Rule 3.1.100}. The Applicant has <br />provided a revegetation plan that meets the minimal requirements for control of noxious <br />weeds and is designed to facilitate reclamation for future wildlife habitat. The vegetation <br />MMRR Board Order, M-2004.067 15 <br />26$5 <br />