Laserfiche WebLink
MINE ID # OR PROSPECTING ID #: <br />INSPECTION DATE: A/9-,s/,)n <br />OBSERVATIONS <br />INSPECTOR=S INITIALS: II E/MAC <br />On June 25th, 2008 I Jared Ebert and Michael Cunningham of the Colorado Division of Reclamation Mining <br />and Safety conducted an inspection of the Siloam Mine, permit number M-1977-326. This inspection was <br />completed to determine if the current financial warranty in place for this site is adequate. Mr. Greg Knell and <br />Jason McGraw of Robinson Brick Company accompanied us on the inspection. <br />This site is located about 4 miles south <br />is surrounded by a 112 permit held by <br />relationship where they operate on eacl <br />overlies the clay that Robinson Brick n <br />their permit boundaries apart; many of <br />in place or missing, this is sited as a pry <br />on each others permit area. For examp <br />currently being used as a storage area f <br />removed from the Robinson Brick perr <br />Overall, the interaction between these t <br />It may be difficult to release this site it <br />disturbance. It may be beneficial to ha <br />be re-claimed to meet the post mine lai <br />mining activities by Robinson Brick, m <br />to use Robinson Brick's permit area as <br />amendment to the permit application. <br />vest of town of Bronquist, in Pueblo County, Colorado. This mine site <br />iloam Stone, Inc. (M-1997-086). The two operators have a working <br />others permit areas. Siloam Stone, Inc. extracts the sandstone which <br />Ines. Given the nature of these two operations it is hard to distinguish <br />he permit boundary markers for the Robinson brick operation were not <br />blem at this time. Both operators allow the other to stockpile material <br />.28 acres of land under the Robinson Brick permit boundary is <br />r sandstone slabs for Siloam Stone, Inc (See figure 4) and the topsoil <br />it area is being stored within Siloam Stone, Inc. permit boundary. <br />vo operations appears to be mutually beneficial. <br />the future because it will be hard to tell which operators caused what <br />,e an agreement made between the two operators about how the site will <br />d use of rangeland designated for this permit upon completion of the <br />rich may not be for some time. If Siloam Stone, Inc. wishes to continue <br />i storage area, it may be wise to change the post-mine land use with an <br />The current financial warranty in place Ilfor Robinsons Brick permit is $28,000. It appears that very little <br />earthwork will need to be done to reclaim the small pit excavation on this site. The clay stockpiles and the <br />11 <br />overburden are relatively close to the pit excavation. The topsoil stockpile is a little further away from the <br />disturbed area, and there appears to be a substantial amount of volume contained in the stockpile. However, the <br />11 <br />current financial warranty appears adequate at this time. <br />The operation appears to be in <br />overburden piles and the topsoil piles ; <br />any, are in place to allow these stockpi <br />versa for Robinson Brick. If a written <br />Stone, Inc. describing how the two opt <br />the site will be reclaimed upon comph <br />the office. If such an agreement has ni <br />future. <br />ce with the current mining plan except for where the product piles, <br />located. At this time it is unknown by the office what agreements, if <br />s to be stored within the Siloam Stone, Inc. permit boundary and vise <br />geement has already been made between Robinson Brick and Siloam <br />itors allow each other to utilize their respective permit areas, and how <br />on of the mining operations, please submit a copy of this agreement to <br />been established it may be wise to create one to avoid a conflict in the <br />No other problems were noted on this site.