Two options exist under Montana law for use in determining whether revegetation criteria have been successfully met following reclamation of coal mined lands - reference area comparisons and specific technical standards. Reference areas are communities used as models to which reclaimed areas are compared to evaluate revegetation success. Technical standards are usually numeric or descriptive performance standards derived from a variety of sources such as historical data and USDA range management information. Problems exist with both options. Reference areas are often not used as a reference because of the misconception that they set unattainable standards. Many mines prefer technical standards because they can provide a known standard, reduce costs, and avoid management problems associated with reference areas. Setting suitable performance standards in arid to semiarid environments is often problematic due to substantial climactic variation. In this study, the use of reference areas and technical standards are explored using 16 years of cover and production vegetation data collected from the Big Sky Mine in Rosebud County, Montana. These long-term data allow an exploration of the relationship between vegetation data and climatic variability, i.e., precipitation, and the effect of this relationship on revegetation success as measured by reference areas or technical standards. The technical standards used in this analysis were based on NRCS rangeland ecological site descriptions, a proposed technical standard from another Montana mine in the same region, and simple linear regression models based on precipitation and Big Sky reference area plant cover and biomass production averages. Results show that revegetation criteria are less likely to be achieved when technical standards are used than when reference areas are used.