REV08206

• Permit No: C1981032
• IBM Index Class Name: Revision
• Doc Date: 6/21/1993
• From: OSM
• To: ENRON CORP
• Type & Sequence: SL1
• Media Type: D
• Archive: No

these areas of limited exCent that do not qualily !or bond
release should be traatnd as separate areas for bond release anQ
should be bonded separately under the provisions of
30 CFR 800.13(b). This rule vas developed to deal with
situations such as that described above. The operator also has
the option to vithdrav the bond release application for that area
and resubmit it when the area meets the success standards.
2. iPSC has reviewed the state rule at 4.15.1(4). Wsc
interprets this rule to apply only to monitoring data collected
by the operator for trends and problems on revegetated areas.
The rule allows the operator to use sampling techniques that are
not approved for evaluating revegetation success and does not
require that sample aflequacy be net. The final sentence of the
rule only prohibits the 6tate from using this data, Whioh doec
not meet the requirements of 4.15.7 through 4.15.10, for
determining revegetntion success. WSC does not intarprat this
rule to require that the State collect date independently from
that collected by the operator for determining revegetation
success. Rules x.15.7(1) and (2)(c) specifically require that
success of revegetation be measured using techniques approved by
the state, and that results must ba valid at a 90 percent
eonfidenae interval. WSC is unable to find any specific
requirement in either the rules or the proposed guideline that
the State conduct independent sampling to verily the information
submitted by the operator when applying !or bond release. The
State rules at 3.03.2(2) do require that the state inspect and
evaluate the reclamation work. This indicates that the entire
bond release area be visually examined and the revegetatian
evaluated !or compliance with the approved success standards.
The farm evaluate is not delined, but in Wsc•s opinion,
evaluation could include trend analysis using the monitoring data
in conjunction with the data collectod to demonstrate
revegetation success, on-site visual comparison of vegetation
data collected by the operator to on-the-ground conditions,
observation o! the vegetation sampling conducted by the operator,
or actual independent vegetation sampling to verify the
vegetation data collected by the operator.
Yf you have any questions regarding this technical review please
contact Robert Postle, Ecologist, at [phone].
/~~'~(
Russell F. Prfce