GENERAL46113

• Permit No: C1982057
• IBM Index Class Name: General Documents
• Doc Date: 7/3/2006
• Doc Name: Proposed Decision & Findings of Compliance for RN4
• Permit Index Doc Type: Findings
• Media Type: D
• Archive: No

resources". There has been no expansion of the permit boundary since the approval of
PR-2, in 1999. The SHPO's "No Effect" finding was most recently confirmed in their
letter of June 2, 2005, in response to the Division's) RN-4 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 finds that Seneca Coal
Company does no[ 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 [he 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 finds that surface coal mining and reclamation operations to be performed
under this 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 estimated reclamation liability for mining operations was calculated by the Division
for PR-5 and RN-4. 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
$9,517,212.00, 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 $9,707,373.00. 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
prime farmland mapping units within the proposed permit area (2.07.6(2)(k}}. This
evidence can be found in Volume 5, Tab 9, Appendix 9-5.
12. Based on information provided in the application, the Division has determined that
alluvial valley floors exist within the permit or adjacent area. The alluvial valley floors
Seneca II-W Findings Document 22 July 3, 2006
Permit Renewal No. 5