GENERAL40389 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

release application (SL-06). Re-established drainage densities and locations appear analogous to drainage densities depicted in Map 46. Backfilling and grading at Mine No. 2 was conducted during 1979 and 1980. Documentation of the backfilling and grading work can be found in inspection reports from 1979 and 1980, under permit nos. 76-16 and 79-177. Colorado Yampa Coal Company employed the use of contour furrows on the reclaimed lands. These furrows have held up throughout the 16-18 years since reclamation, do not hinder the movement of the cattle, and aid in controlling erosion. At the South side of the East block, two gullies had formed up slope of the reclaimed azea. These gullies cut 2-3 feet deep through an azea undisturbed by mining, but upon reaching the azea reclaimed with contour furrows, they had only cut down approximately 3-4 inches, then dissipated altogether. During the October 14, 1997 inspection, the Division advised the operator to assure that run-on from the up slope gullies was directed to the drainage feeding livestock pond U-b, instead of across the reclaimed slope. At the onset of the November 18, 1997 follow-up inspection, this work had not been enacted During the course of the November 18, 1997 inspection, the operator redefined the southernmost contour furrow to direct tvn-on into livestock pond U-b drainage. This adjustment was acceptable. PHASE II All topsoil stockpiles, with the exception of TS 3-3, have been redistributed on the reclaimed land at Mine No. 2. TS 3-3 will be distributed upon reclamation of pond K. Topsoil was salvaged, stockpiled or direct hauled, and redistributed during 1979 and 1980 as documented in Division inspection reports. Mine No. 2 area was seeded with a pastureland seed mix. The approved pastureland seed mix was submitted with the bond release application as Exhibit A. Mine No. 2 areas were seeded in 1979, 1980, 1981, and 1982. Vegetative cover data was collected during July and August 1995 and 1996. Methods used to determine transect location and data collection are described on permit pages 779-107(a). Cover data was collected to sample adequacy for each bond release block and for the pasture reference area. Review of the vegetative cover data collected in 1995 finds that vegetative cover of the East Block exceeded the vegetative cover of a pasture reference area. The East Block was measured at 47.86% vegetative cover while the pasture reference area was measured at 47.25% in 1995. The West Block had slightly lower cover than the pasture reference area in 1995. The West Block was measured at 46.18% vegetative cover versus 47.25% vegetative cover in the pasture reference area. Rule 4.]5.8(3) provides that "vegetative cover [on] the revegetated area shall be considered acceptable if it is not less than 90% of the cover as determined from the reference area with 90% statistical confidence." The West Block vegetative cover value exceeded the 90% level of the reference area for the 1995 data. Ninety percent of 47.2 equals 42.52.