Laserfiche WebLink
<br />returned, we believe it would be prudent and appropriate to follow <br />the concept of the bond release schedule set forth in Rule 3.03.1. <br />Although the provisions of Rule 3.03 are not directly applicable to <br />bond forfeiture, there is no reason that unused bond funds should <br />be returned to a permittee more expeditiously in the event of bond <br />forfeiture than would be the case if the bond had not been <br />forfeited. Otherwise, an incentive might be provided for operators <br />who have ceased mining to allow the State to forfeit their bond and <br />assume liability for remaining reclamation, maintenance or repairs. <br />Consequently, we would propose to evaluate the status of the <br />revegetated stands in the first few growing seasons following the <br />AML revegetation project. Upon determining that establishment of <br />vegetation supporting the postmining land use has been <br />accomplished, an additional portion of the remaining bond amount <br />(up to $13,650.00) might be returned. Upon completion of the 10 <br />year liability period, if reclamation is deemed successful, any <br />remaining bond funds would be returned. <br />Please let me know if you have additional questions or concerns. <br />Sin el~a~~~ <br />C <br />Dan T. Mathews <br />Environmental Protection Specialist <br />cc: Paul Krabacher, DMG <br />Larry Routten, DMG <br />Drew Wilson, American Shield Coal Co. <br />Earl Madden <br />