GENERAL52327

• Permit No: C1981071
• IBM Index Class Name: General Documents
• Doc Date: 6/6/1995
• Doc Name: Denied Proposed Decision & Findings of Compliance for SL2
• From: Phase II/III Block B
• Permit Index Doc Type: Findings
• Media Type: D
• Archive: No

As required by Rule 3.03.2(5)(a), this document constitutes written
notification of the Division of Minerals and Geology (Division)
decision to deny the Phase II/III Bond Release request for Block B
(SL-02) for Mine 1, Mine 2, and Eckman Park, Permit #` C-81-071,
submitted by Colorado Yampa Coal Company (CYCC) on October 4, 1993.
The reasons for this denial are as outlined below.
Rule 3.03.1(2)(a) allows for up to sixty percent of the applicable
bond to be released when the permittee successfully completes
backfilling, grading and drainage control. All Block B acreage was
included in the Phase I bond release granted as per the final
publication dated September 17, 1987. Rule 3.01.1(3)(b) does not
allow more than sixty percent of the applicable bond to be released
as long as the lands subject to the release are contributing
suspended solids to streamflow outside the permit area in excess of
levels determined on adjacent non-mined areas. The operator
submitted computer modelling simulations comparing sediment
production from the reclaimed areas as compared to revegetation
reference areas. This information was reviewed by the Division and
questions and concerns were forwarded to the permittee on March 22,
1994. At this time, no response to these issues has been received
by the Division.
Rule 3.03.1(2)(c) allows for any remaining portion of bond to be
released when the "permittee has successfully completed all surface
coal mining reclamation operations in accordance with the approved
plan and the final inspection and procedures of 3.03.2 have been
satisfied. This shall not be before the expiration of the period
specified for revegetation responsibility in 3.02.3" Rule 3.02.3
defines the period of responsibility as ten years and until the
permittee has met the revegetation requirements of Rule 4.15.
Included in the initial application were vegetation data collected
by the operator to demonstrate that the permittee has met the
requirements of the approved permit with regard to re-establishing
vegetation on the disturbed areas of Block B.
Review of the map and text discussion submitted in conjunction with
the Block B bond release application reveals that the acreage
included in Block B has met the 10 year period for revegetation
responsibility. Data and text review indicates that vegetation
sampling transects were intended to be randomly located using the
proportional allocation method to determine vegetative cover and
production and thereby demonstrate compliance with Rule
4.15.7(2)(c). However, inspection of the data reveals that, in one
case, less than a proportional number of transects were located in
one large reclamation parcel and more than a proportional number of
transects were located in two smaller parcels. In order for a
sample to be representative of a population, it must follow the
principle of randomness (Steele and Torrie, p. 9). Improper use of
the proportional allocation method for Block B thus has added a