Laserfiche WebLink
• <br />DATE: November 14, 1996 <br />TO: Harry Ranney <br />FROM: Dan Mathews <br />iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii <br />RE: Chimney Rock Mine (C-81-023) <br />Revegetation Evaluation for Phase 2 Bond Release <br />Pursuant to your request, I have reviewed the revegetation success <br />documentation included in the October, 1996, Request For Phase II <br />Bond Release At Raiser Ventures, INC. Chimney Rock Mine. My review <br />focused on evaluation of compliance with Rule 3.03.1(2)(b), which <br />states in pertinent part that "up to eighty-five percent of the <br />applicable bond amount shall be released upon the establishment of <br />vegetation which supports the approved postmining land use and <br />which meets the approved success standard for cover...[and] .. <br />productivity standards for alluvial valley floors..." I utilized <br />the Division's 1995 Guideline Regarding Selected Coal Mine Bond <br />Release Issues, and 1990 Guideline for the Management of Noxious <br />Weeds on Coal Mine Permit Areas. Specific review comments are <br />listed below. <br />1. The application contains a brief discussion of the reclamation <br />and management history of the reclaimed area on page 5, which <br />indicates that no management practices other than rill and gully <br />repair and establishment of raptor perches were implemented on <br />dryland areas. Amore detailed discussion of the reclamation and <br />management practices should be provided for the various parcels, as <br />outlined on page 5 of the bond release guideline. The year and <br />extent of gully repair work and associated revegetation should be <br />specified. Any weed control activities should be described. Areas <br />which were extensively re-worked, triggering reinitiation of the 10 <br />year liability period (such as the East Pit, east slope parcel) <br />should be denoted on the Bond Release Area Map, along with the year <br />that the augmentive work was performed. <br />2. Cover sampling methods and the sample size adequacy formula <br />described on pages A-1 through A-3 appear to be appropriate. The <br />sample adequacy formula is consistent with the formula recommended <br />1n the Division .guideline for reference area and reclaimed area <br />parameter estimation without hypothesis testing, with the exception <br />that the two tailed t value was used rather than the one tailed, <br />This is a more stringent test than specified in the guideline. <br />