PERMFILE44448 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

~, Memo to Gary Curtiss -3- June 20, 1997 20 feet and a maximum of 40 feet horizontally to the pipeline location, and that the pipeline is located 5 feet closer to the east easement line than the west line. How were these locations determined? Has the pipeline alignment been surveyed and staked through the proposed permit area, and have the easement boundaries been precisely surveyed? Precision surveying of these features must be a minimum requirement if the applicant wants to mine at O.SH:1V within 30 ft. of the easement. 4. It was stated in the Division's adequacy review memo dated 10/18/96 that "It must be recognized by the applicant that whatever set-back is approved will define a zero excavation zone where all excavation, including cut-and-fill to create finished slopes, will be prohibited." The applicant must affirmatively state their concurrence with this requirement. Inadvertent disturbance of the set-back area caused by shallow slumping would not necessarily be a violation of this requirement as long as the operator instituted repairs of any slumping in a timely manner. Any encroachment on the pipeline easement caused by the mining operation would be considered a violation of the permit. 5. It was further stated in the Division's adequacy review memo dated 10/18/96 that "The applicant must commit to carefully marking the set-back line on the ground so that equipment operators do not inadvertently excavate within the set-back." The applicant has not yet provided such a commitment. Once again, I would recommend that the applicant mine to a slope that is no steeper than 3:1 as the pit progresses to within 200 ft. of the pipeline. With such a commitment in hand, the Division could approve the proposed 30 ft. set-back to the easement boundary with no further review. In areas of the pit that are more than 200 ft. away from the pipeline, the Division would impose no restrictions on the pit slope (highwall) angle. C:\W P51\OWENS.MM2