Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Mr. Jeff Deckler <br />October 21, 1985 <br />Page 3 <br />revegetated anew cdrich hould be sufficient fora third party <br />to cover the crest of reestablishing revegetation at any time <br />during the period specified for permittee zesponsiblity for <br />revegetation described in 3.02.3. <br />(d) The Division shall not release any liability under <br />performance bonds applicable to a permit if such zelEase ceould <br />reduce the total +~~~+m Liability carrier performance bonds <br />to an amount less than that necessary for the Division to <br />oa~vlete the approved reclamation plan. <br />3.02.2(5) <br />After the amount of the bond has been determined for the permi t <br />area in accordance with 3.02.2, the applicant shall file either: <br />(a) The entire performance bond amount required during the <br />term of the permit, or <br />(b) A cwnulative bowl schedule listing the rncremental areas <br />to be covered by bond and the sequence of anticipated <br />reclamation, as described in (6) below, and the bond amount <br />required for the first ,nrr9lR~.nt of the schedule. The amormt <br />of bond required for the first increment, and therefore, to <br />obtain the permit, shall include the full reclamation cast of <br />the initial az+ea being affected. <br />These rules, which define the intended purpose of bonds and bonds <br />remaining after release, indicated that the amoernt of bond to be released <br />for Phases I and II, should be based on the amount of work remaining and <br />its associated cost. Based on this analysis, Phases I and II have been <br />met by the S1ui Coal Company. <br />The only technical performance criteria outlined for Phase II bond release <br />are "...the successful establishment of revegetation in accordance with <br /> <br />