My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
REV00503
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
Revision
>
REV00503
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/25/2016 12:58:10 AM
Creation date
11/21/2007 8:46:32 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1981032
IBM Index Class Name
Revision
Doc Date
7/22/1993
Doc Name
BOND RELEASE AT THE MEEKER MINES
From
GREG LEWICKI AND ASSOCIATES
To
MLRD
Type & Sequence
SL1
Media Type
D
Archive
No
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
26
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
of the it points collected by the operator at the same mine <br />location is 59.1. <br />The average of the Division's two Northern # 1 east <br />sample points was 43.0 (including the 30$ sample). The <br />other transect had a value of 56.0$ which is equal to the <br />highest value sampled in that area by the operator and <br />exceeds the eastern average of 51.6. The average of the 11 <br />points collected by the operator at the same mine location <br />is 59.1$. The average of the Division's two Northern # 1 <br />west sample points was 61.0$. The average of the 6 points <br />collected by the operator at the same location is 65.3$. <br />Though the Division's mean is lower than that of the <br />operator, the difference is not large enough to warrant <br />concern, especially considering that the Division mean is <br />based upon only two samples, both of which fall within the <br />range sampled by the operator. <br />The similarity between the data describing the Rienau # <br />2 mine area is striking. The average of the Division's four <br />sample points was 55.0, which is almost identical to the <br />average of 55.2$ of the 5 points collected by the operator. <br />CONCLUSION <br />Close examination of the 1992 vegetation data collected <br />at the Meeker Area Mines by the Division and Enron Corp. <br />reveals two main facts. First, the Division's data was <br />neither collected to adequacy nor randomly or <br />proportionately spread throughout the reclaimed areas. <br />Therefore, the Division's data cannot be used as part of a <br />serious examination of whether the reclaimed vegetation is <br />of sufficient quality for the purposes of Phase II bond <br />release. Second, when a careful (comparing equivalent <br />sample areas) examination of the two data sets is carried <br />out, it becomes clear that the Division and operator cover <br />averages hardly differ and are at times almost identical. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.