Laserfiche WebLink
violation of any law, rule, or regulation of the United States, or any State law, rule, or <br />regulation, or any provision of the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act or the <br />Colorado Surface Coal Mining Reclamation Act (2.07.6(2)(g)(i)). <br />8. The Hayden Gulch Coal Company does not control and has not controlled mining operations <br />with a demonstrated pattern of willful violations of the Act of such nature, duration, and <br />with such resulting irrepazable damage to the environment as to indicate an intent not to <br />comply with the provisions of the Act (2.07.6(2)(h)). <br />9. The Division finds that surface coal mining and reclamation operations to be performed <br />under this permit will not be inconsistent with other such operations anticipated to be <br />performed in areas adjacent to the permit area (2.07.6(2)(1)). <br />10. The Division has, in place, an existing bond in the form of a surety, in the amount <br />$2,300,000. This bond has received final approval. <br />The operator has received final approval of a bond reduction through Technical Revision <br />No. 63, SL-O1, SL-02 and SL-03 to $27,437.27. At the time of the writing of this <br />findings document, the operator has not submitted a new bond instrument that would <br />reflect only the current bond liability. <br />11. The Division has made a negative determination for the presence of prime farmland within <br />the permit azea. The decision was based on a letter from the Soil Conservation Service <br />that demonstrates that no prime farmland mapping units are found within the permit azea <br />(2.07.6(2)(k)). <br />12. The Division has made a negative determination for the existence of alluvial valley floors <br />within the permit area. This determination is based on information provided by the <br />applicant, which demonstrates that there are no alluvial valley floors in the Hayden <br />Gulch or Dry Creek drainages. This information was contained in a July, 1981 report by <br />Bishop Associates, Inc (2.07.6(2)(k) and 2.06.8(3)(c)). <br />13. The Division has approved the post-mining land use of the operation. It was determined that <br />rangeland and wildlife habitat meets the requirements of Rule 4.16 for the permit area <br />(2.07.6(2)(1)). <br />14. Specific approvals have been granted. These approvals are addressed in the following <br />section, Section B (2.07.6(Z)(m)). <br />15. The Division finds that the activities proposed by the applicant would not affect the <br />continued existence of endangered or threatened species or result in the destruction or <br />adverse modification of their critical habitats (2.07.6(2)(n)). <br />16. The Division has performed a check of the Applicant Violator System. As of 7 May 2002, <br />the operator is current in the payment of reclamation fees required by 30 CFR Chapter <br />VII, subchapter R (2.07.6(2)(0)). <br />9 <br />