Laserfiche WebLink
(Page 2} <br />MINE ID # OR PROSPECTING ID # <br />INSPECTION DATE - <br />INSPECTOR'S INITIALS CBM <br />OBSER <br />This was an inspection conducted by Carl Mount of the Division of Minerals and Geology in response to a complaint filed by <br />Stanley Odenbaugh on May 17, 2005. Stevan O'Brian, representing the operator, was present at the inspection and readings <br />for disturbance areas were taken with a Trimble GeoXT GPS unit. Data was differentially corrected and it was found that the <br />time. <br />areas of disturbance are greater than allowed by the approved permit, which allowed only 35 acres to be disturbed a! any one <br />Bond for approved amendment number AM01 has still rtot been submitted. This means that changes requested in that <br />amendment cannot be legally implemented until sufficient bond is received and approved by the Division. The amendment was <br />approved on August 25, 2004 so an approvable bond must be received by no later than the close of business on August 25, <br />2005. If it is not received, the Division of Minerals and Geolo <br />to reconsider the previous approval and recommend denial at that hearin <br />received and approved with Technical Revision TR01 or those approved with the total applicztionh Consultation of throseearing <br />and adequacy review answers to TR01 and the initial application reveal several problems w'th theroeed maps are those either <br />the ground conditions existing at the time of this inspection; maps <br />P rmitted activities versus on <br />1 • The site entrance crosses the Western Mutual Ditch at the eastern border of the permit area directly across from <br />County Road 36. Answers to the first adequacy review dated March 26, 2001 at at number 9 states in part that, ".. . <br />The new access road will be constructed from the southeast corner of the site to the Plant Site in the approximate <br />location shown on the mining plan ma <br />P~ - - and number 21 states, in part: "...There is one concrete ditch running <br />parallel to the north/south road that supplies water to various fields along its length. This ditch will not be disturbed by <br />the mining operation." Theo rotor must rovide, b <br />Western Mutual Ditch Company that indicates that crossing the ditch at this I <br />road being within 200 feet of the ditch is acceptable to them, (Otherwise, th"s ould be a possible violation of CRS 34e <br />32.5-116(1} for failure to perform reclamation prescribed by the reclamation plantadopted pursuant to the Colorado) <br />access road bridge antd/ortstop uts ngr~ until such antagreement rs d Nvered to and approved b <br />Problem 1 below. y be re wired to remove the <br />y the Division. See <br />2. Consultation with the approved original permit ma <br />observations indicate that haul roads from the area being mined and near the scale house cross gas lines that traverse <br />the property from north fo south and east to west. Additionally, the main electrrvcal I ne thattcrosses theTR01 and field <br />north and south direction has haul roads located underneath it and crossing it. The operator committed in Exhibit S of <br />the original permit application that "No mining will take place within 200 feet of any structures until we have proven that <br />mining will not affect them or we have an agreement with the owner that will allow us to operate within 200 feet of the <br />structure. The operator committed, in the second adequacy review answers tlated April 4, 2001 and received by the <br />Division on April 5, 2001 under answer number 3 that ", . <br />roads with gas lines under them as haul routes until a co <br />py of the signed working agreements are submitted to the <br />Division. In feu jsic] of the working agreements PS&G may op&to sulbmit c olssong and oaI d desig s9 howin s how th g <br />gas lines will be protected for approval ° During this inspection, haul trucks were seen using the road from the area <br />being mined to go to the scale house and leaving the site after weighing at the scale house. Maps indicate9hat both <br />road sections have natural gas lines under them. The operator must provide agreements with the company (ies) that <br />own these lines or approvable crossing road designs protective of the structures in question, in the form of a change fo <br />the permit, by no later than September 30, 2005.Ofhenvise, this could be a possible violation of CRS 34-32,5.116(1) <br />Reclalmation Act for the Extraction of Constuction Materials. See <br />y the reclamation plan adopted pursuant to the Colorado Land <br />3. Mining is taking place in a different location than where the a problem number 2 below. <br />The operator must file a change to the PPr°ved maps indicate that miriing will be taking place. <br />Division by no later than September 30, 2005. The change must indicate where topsoil and overburden will be <br />stockpiled on site and how these stockpiles w Iltbe stlab li ed if they ahe efr n place folsmoae than one be filed with the <br />without being active. If this change is not filed by no later than September 30 <br />possible violation of CRS 34-32.5-116(1) for failure to perform reclamation rescri growing season <br />below. p bed by the reclamation plan adopted <br />pursuant to the Colorado Land Reclamation Act for the Extraction of Construction MateSials!s Seelproblem number 3 <br />