Laserfiche WebLink
~~ <br />VCI does not foresee any difficulty in constructing the structure within the 90 day commitment, <br />assuming no obstruction of that activity occws by third parties or acts of God. The as-built <br />engineering firm has yet to be determined, but will reply to the Division respective of <br />engineering standazds in the stated time period, pending any unforeseen circumstances, for which <br />the engineering firm attending can only address. <br />Sheets 6 & 7 indicate approximately 2300 lineaz feet of buried gas pipeline within the <br />existing flood control berm. The exact depth of the pipeline is unknown. Please <br />demonstrate how the operator (VCI) will comply with Rule 6.4.19 during the proposed <br />re-grading and reclamation of the existing flood control berm. The options that the <br />operator may use to comply with Rule 6.4.19 aze either: <br />a) provide a notarized agreement between the applicant and the persons(s) having an <br />interest in the structure, that the applicant is to provide compensation for any <br />damage to the struchue; or <br />b) where such agreement cannot be reached, the applicant shall provide an <br />appropriate engineering evaluation that demonstrates that such structure shall not <br />be damaged by activities occurring at the mining operation. <br />The Division is reminded that VCI obtained approval for our operations from Duke Energy <br />subsequent to the placement of the line for the recently approved Amendment, of which this <br />Technical Revision is designed to update. A copy of that agreement is attached. <br />6. Review of the engineering cross sectional designs (Sheet 16, Cross Sections, Section EE) <br />indicates that a significant portion of the 23001ineaz feet of flood control berm containing <br />the buried gas pipeline will be satwated during a 100-yeaz and a 10-yeaz flood event. As <br />a result, it is likely that there will be differential settling of the berm materials during or <br />after such a flood event. The differential settling, if significant, may affect the structural <br />integrity of the pipeline. In addition, plan view maps (Sheet 6) indicate that the buried <br />gas line is approximately 75-100 feet south of the Cache La Poudre River. Further, it is <br />the Division's understanding that the date of the gas pipeline re-location and exact depth <br />of buried pipeline is unknown. Because of these factors, the Division requests that the <br />operator (VCn provide an engineering stability analysis, per Rule 6.5(2), which <br />demonstrates an adequate factor of safety for the modified emabankment during and after <br />a major flooding event such as a 100-yeaz flood. <br />The Division is reminded that VCI obtained approval from Duke subsequent to the placement of <br />the line for the recently approved Amendment, of which this Technical Revision is designed to <br />update. A copy of that agreement is attached. <br />The segment of the stream bank where the pipeline was placed by Duke, at the request and <br />payment for by the City of Thornton, is in a location where engineering has confirmed was not <br />part of the modification of the floodway or berm; thereby predating extraction permitting. The <br />concern appears to be abated by these facts. <br />Varna Companies, Inc. M1978-056 Durham Sand & Gravel Pit -Technical Revision 2 -Monday 14 November <br />2005 <br />