Laserfiche WebLink
of completing the relevant reclamation plan. 2 CCR 407-2 , Rule <br /> 3 . 02 .2 (5) . If the amount of the bond is insufficient to pay for <br /> the full cost of reclamation, the permittee remains liable for <br /> the balance and the Division can bring suit to recover amounts <br /> necessary to complete reclamation. 2 CCR 407-2 , Rule 3 . 04 .2 (6) . <br /> The rules specifically provide that the amount of the bond does <br /> not operate to any extent as a limitation upon the obligation of <br /> the permittee to complete the reclamation plan, the cost of which <br /> may exceed or be less than the amount of the bond. 2 CCR 407-2 , <br /> Rule 3 . 02 . 2 (5) . <br /> As parties dealing with the government, the defendants are <br /> charged with knowledge of these regulations . Delohery, supra; <br /> see Trapper Min. Inc . , supra; Emery Min. Corp. , supra. Thus, any <br /> review of the bond amount done by the Division or any statement <br /> by the Division about the bond amount was a good faith estimate <br /> of the cost of reclamation. It was not a representation by the <br /> Division of a final determination of the amount that would be <br /> necessary to complete reclamation. This is especially relevant <br /> here since, prior to this case, the Division' s last review of the <br /> bond amount was conducted in 1991 (v. 2 , pp. 302-04, 319) . The <br /> Division never represented to the defendants, nor could it, that <br /> those costs would not change. It would have been impracticable <br /> to have done so. <br /> Consequently, the estimate contained in the proof of claim <br /> filed in bankruptcy proceeding in 1993 was the best estimate that <br /> the Division had at the time. In addition, the statement in the <br /> 16 <br />