REV11892 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

3 replacement verification done by the Division in a previous inspection on July 14, 1987. Finally, this report states that, "there were no signs of erosion" on the mine site. Copies of these inspection reports area also enclosed. 3. Four of five topsoil replacement samples checked at the Rienau site during the Phase I bond release inspection had 16-28 inches of topsoil. The fifth sample encountered rock at six inches. The Meeker permit requires that 12 inches of topsoil be replaced on the Rienau site. Rule 3.03.2(2) of the Colorado regulations requires that the Division "conduct an inspection and evaluation of the reclamation work involved" in a bond release request when application is made for such. The regulations continue to say the inspection should consider, among other things, the results of past inspections and monitoring, the degree and difficulty of remaining reclamation and whether water pollution is or is likely to occur. As discussed above, DMG did inspect the reclaimed areas at the Meeker Mines and evaluated topsoil replacement depths, vegetative cover, erosional conditions, water quality and remaining reclamation work at all three sites. These are the topics discussed in the regulations and pertinent to a Phase II bond release request. The operator submitted a report entitled "Homogeneity of the Meeker Mine Sites" to the DMG on July 22, 1993. This report was prepared to address questions raised by the OSM Western Support Center and the AFO regarding the appropriateness of treating vegetative cover data from the three reclaimed areas as one population. A copy of the report is enclosed. While this report was considered as a part of the review process for the Meeker bond release, DMG does not contend that there is any specific regulatory requirement for such demonstrations of successful vegetation establishment. There are two mathematical errors in the report. However, the conclusions of the report remain valid when these errors are corrected. DMG agrees with the conclusions of the report. Those conclusions are, 1) population variances in the three reclaimed areas are homogeneous (data was actually separated into five areas, accounting for two reclaimed topsoil pile locations), 2) mean cover values in the reclaimed areas are equal and therefore, the populations of the reclaimed areas are homogenous in regard to vegetative cover. It is therefore appropriate to combine data from the three areas for comparison to vegetative success criteria.