GENERAL44450

• Permit No: C1982057
• IBM Index Class Name: General Documents
• Doc Date: 6/12/2006
• Doc Name: Proposed Decision & Findings of Compliance for PR5
• From: Revise Operation Plan/Cease Mining in 2006
• Permit Index Doc Type: Findings
• Media Type: D
• Archive: No

"original" mine permit boundary). in a letter of July 17, 2000 associated with Permit
Renewal No. 3 (RN-3), the SHPO noted that, since the renewal "will involve no changes
to the permitted mining boundaries, we find that there will be no effect to cultural
resources°. There has been no expansion of the permit boundary since the approval of
PR-2, in 1999. The SHPO's "No Effect" fording was most recently confirmed in
their letter of June 2, 2005, in response to the Division's Perini[ Revision No. 5
(PR-5) Notification Letter.
6. For this surface mining operation, private mineral estate has been severed from private
surface estate. Documentation specified by Rule 2.03.6(2) is provided in Appendix 3-3
and Appendix 3-4 of the permit application package, as revised in PR-4 (2.07.6(2)(f)).
7. On the basis of evidence submitted by the applicant and received from other state and
federal agencies as a result of the Section 34-33-114(3) compliance review required by the
Colorado Surface Coal Mining Reclamation Act, the Division fords that Seneca Coal
Company does not own or control any operations which are currently in violation of any
law, rule, or regulation of the United States, or any State law, rule, or regulation, or any
provision of the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act or the Colorado Surface
Coal Mining Reclamation Act (2.07.6(2)(g)(i)).
8. Seneca Coal Company does not control and has not controlled mining operations with a
demonstrated pattern of willful violations of the Act of such nature, duration, and with
such resulting irreparable damage to the environment as to indicate an intent not to
comply with the provisions of the Act (2.07.6(2)(h)).
9. The Division fords that surface coal mining and reclamation operations to be performed
under [his permit will not be inconsistent with other such operations anticipated to be
performed in areas adjacent to the permit area (2.07.6(2)(1)).
10. The estitated reclamation liability for mining operations was calculated by the Division
for PR-5. Based on relevant permit maps and on-site investigation, the Division
determined that the "worst case disturbance° occurred in August 2004. The
estimated liability amount necessary to reclaim the worst case disturbance is
59,517,212.00, based on reclamation plan information and standard cost and
equipment production references used by the Division. The Division currently holds
acceptable surety bonds for the Seneca II-W Mine, in the amount of 59,707,373.00.
As such, Seneca Coal Company has complied with the reclamation performance
bond submittal requirements of Rule 3 {2.07.6(2)(j)).
11. The Division has made a negative determination for the presence of prime farmland
within the permit area. The decision was based on the evidence provided by the Soil
Conservation Service (now Natural Resources Conservation Service) that there are no
Seneca II-W Findings Document 22 June l2, 2006
Perini[ Renewal No. 5