My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2015-02-06_INSPECTION - M1978009
DRMS
>
Day Forward
>
Inspection
>
Minerals
>
M1978009
>
2015-02-06_INSPECTION - M1978009
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 5:57:17 PM
Creation date
2/11/2015 8:50:04 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
M1978009
IBM Index Class Name
INSPECTION
Doc Date
2/6/2015
Doc Name
Inspection Report
From
DRMS
To
General Shale Brick, Inc.
Inspection Date
2/12/2014
Email Name
TC1
Media Type
d
Archive
No
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
18
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
PERMIT #: M- 1978 -009 <br />INSPECTOR'S INITIALS: TC1 <br />INSPECTION DATE: February 12, 2014 <br />OBSERVATIONS <br />This inspection was conducted as part of the regular monitoring program. The Operator (General Shale Brick, <br />Inc.) was represented by Mr. Jason McGraw who was present for the inspection. This is a 112c clay mine. The <br />mine was not operating at the time of the inspection. <br />The Apache 9 Pit north entrance is located approximately 3 miles southwest of Calhan, off Soapweed Rd, 1.5 <br />miles south of Hwy 24. The south entrance is %2 mile south, also off Soapweed Rd. <br />Inspection: <br />A few inches of snow covered most of the site. A permit sign was posted at both site entrances (see Photo 1). <br />However, the signs list the previous Operator, Robinson Brick Company instead of General Shale Brick, Inc. <br />The wrong name is cited as a problem on page 1 of this report. There are three active pits (North Mine, <br />Middle Mine, and South Mine) within the permit boundary. Each pit is a ridge top mine operation and the <br />proposed affected area is limited by topography, all well inside the permit boundary. There are no roads <br />along most of the permit boundary. A review of Google Earth images indicated most if not all the permit <br />boundary is fenced. <br />Mr. McGraw indicated the North Mine was the most recently excavated pit (ca. 2006). A stockpile of riprap <br />(see Photo 2) was observed on the east side o the North Mine. Mr. McGraw stated this was overburden and <br />used for riprap in drainage improvement /erosion control on site. Evidence of riprap use was observed in the <br />North Mine (see Photo 3) and Middle Mine (see Photo 4) stormwater ponds. Clay stockpiles (see Photo 5) <br />and topsoil stockpiles (see Photo 6) were observed at each of the three mines. Pit highwalls varied in height <br />between the three mines and were estimated to be between 5 and 15 feet <br />Mr. McGraw indicated the Middle Mine had the most reclamation work completed. Due to the snow cover it <br />was difficult to assess the extent of vegetation establishment. <br />Due to snow cover, the Division was unable to determine if water was ponded in the South Mine pit. Mr. <br />McGraw indicated they had submitted well permit paperwork to the Division of Water Resources, but had had <br />no feedback as of the date of the inspection. <br />Records: <br />• The total permitted area is 1,691 acres, with a maximum affected area of 85 acres per the Amendment <br />approved in 2000. <br />• The previous inspection was performed on 6/9/2008. A problem was cited for exposed groundwater in <br />the South Mine area. This was resolved on May 5, 2010. <br />• The anniversary date is August 14. Annual reports and fees are current through 2014. <br />1. The 2013 annual report indicated 69.8 acres had been affected. The 2014 annual report (not <br />available at the time of this inspection) indicated 70.7 acres have been affected and that 14.6 <br />acres have been backfilled, topsoiled, fertilized, mulched, and seeded. <br />2. The DRMS has no record of an acreage release being requested, which is required to reduce <br />affected area. The Operator should consider requesting a release for reclaimed areas that will <br />not be mined in the future in order to keep the disturbed area below the maximum allowed 85 <br />acres. <br />Page 2 of 7 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.