Laserfiche WebLink
another bond even though reclamation has not occurred. This position is without <br />merit - it simply is not supported by applicable law. <br />A permit covers both extraction and reclamation activities. A bond is to <br />ensure RECLAMATION. Therefore, it is an essential requirement of the Coal Act <br />and regulations to have a bond throughout the extraction operations and throughout <br />reclamation activities. Simply put, the Coal Act and regulations require that a <br />compliant bond be in place until all reclamation is satisfactorily completed and bond <br />release has been granted. § § 34-33-113(4), 125, C.R.S.; 2 C.C.R. 407-2, Rule <br />3.02(4). Powderhorn's azgument overlooks this essential requirement, and if <br />accepted, renders these regulatory provisions meaningless. <br />Third, Powderhorn continues to argue that OSM agrees with Powderhorn that <br />a violation only occurs if a mining operation continues once a surety is incapacited. <br />Powderhorn's reference to the commentary to 30 C.F.R. § 800.16(e)(2) does not <br />support this allegation. That commentary does not change the plain language of the <br />regulations nor does it apply to a situation in which the operator is bankrupt and has <br />no financial means to complete reclamation, which is the situation in the present <br />matter. <br />l2 <br />