Laserfiche WebLink
by a permittee and does notjust require a bond prior to disturbing land. Rules 3.02.4 and <br />3.02.1, overall, establish that any disturbance must be covered by a bond to ensure <br />reclamation of the disturbed area. <br />Moreover, "permit" under the coal statute and regulations means a permit to conduct <br />surface coal mining and reclamation operations. § 34-33-103(16), C.R.S.; 2 C.C.R. 407-2, <br />Rule 1.04(87). A permittee's bond liability includes those actions which the petmittee is <br />obliged to take under the permit including completion of the reclamation plan. 2 C.C.R. 407- <br />2, Rule 3.02(7). Thus, the requirement to have a compliant bond does not simply end <br />because an operator, such as Powderhor, chooses to cease extraction operations. The <br />requirement continues until bond release is granted. That is, liability under the bond <br />continues for the duration of mining and reclamation and until bond release provisions are <br />met. See §§ 34-33-113(4) and 34-33-125, C.R.S; 2 C.C.R. 407-2, Rule 3.02(4). <br />In the present matter, prior to cessation, Powderhom extracted coal for almost 20 <br />years. Powderhom's permit covers approximately 10,400 acres of mostly federal property. <br />Powderhom has disturbed about 250 acres of surface with approximately 3,500 acres of <br />affected land (land that can be affected by subsidence because of underground mine <br />workings). In spite of this, Powderhom argues that an operator should be allowed to disturb <br />land, then choose to cease extraction, and if its surety becomes incapacitated at that point, the <br />operator should not have to replace its bond or face forfeiture proceedings, despite the fact <br />1~ <br />