INSPEC05861 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

• (Page 2) • MINE ID !k OR PROSPECTING ID #: M-77-751 INSPECTION DATE: ns-ni-nn INSPECTOR'S INITIALS: C-RM OBSERVATIONS Carl Mount of the Division of Minerals and Geology (DMG) along with Mark Chalmers of Robinson Brick Company {Robco) conducted this inspection in response to complaint letters received by DMG on March 31, 2000 and April 28, 2000 from Ms. Cynthia M. Beyer-Ulrich of the law offices of Harvey W. Curtis and associates representing the surface landowner of the northernmost tract of land within the permit area covered by Permit M-77-251. A copy of the April 28, 2000 letter was given to Mr. Chalmers during the inspection. Essentially, there were 10 points brought up in the letters that will be addressed in the same order as in the letter received April 28, 2000 and the follow-up letter received May 9, 2000. Comment: "...Robinson and Mr. Stockwell do not have any agreement as to surface damages nor have the parties entered into a surface lease for Mr. Stockwell's property." The Colorado Land Reclamation Act for the Extraction of Construction Materials requires an operator to have the legal right to enter an affected area. In this matter, the operator's legal right to enter is a mining lease from the State Land Board. Therefore, there is no violation of the Act at this time. The Division of Minerals and Geology does not regulate or enforce contracts or agreements between operators and landowners and has no jurisdiction over these matters. 2. Comment: "...the reclamation plan originally filed for the Amended reclamation Permit No. M-77-251 currently unsuitable for the Stockwell property." Reclamation permits are issued for the life of the mine with end land use being determined among the operator, landowner, and local government at the time the permit application is considered. In the present case, the end land use is rangeland and wildlife habitat. Our records indicate that the Board followed the required notice and hearing procedures at the time the conversion application was considered. DMG has no ability to open a permit or require the operator to change the end land use based on the present record. Comment: "...the corporate surety for the Amended Reclamation Permit No. M-77-251 is inadequate and may no longer exist." DMG has examined the reclamation band and contacted the company that issued the current bond for permit M-77-251. Our investigation indicates that Continental Casualty Company Corporate Surety Bond No. 500 836 717 in the amount of $39,750.00 is still in full force and effect. This is a sufficient bond to cover the present amount of disturbance on site at this time. DMG will, however, reevaluate the amount of bond required in the next 60 days to see if it is adequate to reclaim the amount of disturbance allowed under the present permitting scheme. If the mine were developed to its full disturbance then additional bond may be required. 4. Comment; "...there are potential hazards to Mr. Stockwell's property arising from Robinson's mining plan. Robinson has proposed building asteep-sloped high wall on the property which would constitute a permanent hazard on the property. Even though a safety bench is apparently required above the high wall for this mining, the hazards on Mr. Stockwell's property inherent with mining, including the high wall, make continuing use of the land for cattle ranching unacceptable." Our understanding is that the properly is currently zoned for agricultural use. The end land use specified in the permit is for rangeland and wildlife habitat. The final highwall configuration approved under the permit complies with regulatory requirements and is consistent with the permit specified end land use. Please note that the permit requires a safety bench which the Division believes is a reasonable and prudent measure to address safety concerns of the highwall. Please also note that the Division has no jurisdiction over highwalls that were established prior to passage of the Act and not redisturbed thereafter.