Laserfiche WebLink
Third Claim for Relief <br /> MCR and the Trustee assert that the Division has caused, and <br /> in the future will cause, reclamation work to be done which will <br /> require significant motorized vehicle traffic over roads that have <br /> already been revegetated. According to MCR and the Trustee, this <br /> traffic will require the roads to be reclaimed for a second time . <br /> They assert that such reclamation is not authorized by the <br /> reclamation plan and that by taking these actions, the Division has <br /> breached the liquidation plan. <br /> Position: This claim should be dismissed pursuant to the <br /> Division' s motion to dismiss . In addition to the arguments <br /> contained in the motion to dismiss, the Division admits that it <br /> will perform reclamation which may require motorized traffic over <br /> areas previously reclaimed. The Division reclaimed roads located <br /> on the north side of Coal Basin in 1996 in order to demonstrate <br /> such reclamation would accomplish (1) minimization of erosion from <br /> the roads; (2) a great reduction of sedimentation to local creeks; <br /> and (3) retention of road prisms in order to allow for possible <br /> future use of the road if deemed appropriate by the USFS . This <br /> 1996 reclamation cost approximately $89, 000 and was necessary <br /> reclamation. <br /> Moreover, any disturbance of this reclamation which might <br /> occur from future reclamation projects will be de minimis, if not <br /> nonexistent . Indeed, if disturbance occurs, the contractor <br /> performing the work will repair the disturbance at his own costs; <br /> no cost will be incurred by the Division, and hence, the Trustee, <br /> 16 <br />