My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2004-08-19_REVISION - M2000158
DRMS
>
Day Forward
>
Revision
>
Minerals
>
M2000158
>
2004-08-19_REVISION - M2000158
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/15/2021 2:43:09 PM
Creation date
11/21/2007 10:04:56 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
M2000158
IBM Index Class Name
Revision
Doc Date
8/19/2004
Doc Name
DMG Recommendation of Approval with Conditions
From
DMG
To
Platte Sand & Gravel LLC
Type & Sequence
AM1
Media Type
D
Archive
No
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
10
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
July 13, 2004) <br />Division of Minerals and Geology (DMG) Responses- The applicant is required by law to protect any <br />structures located within 200 feet of the affected land (Rule 6.4.19). The statute does not protect structures that <br />have yet to be constructed, such as future oil and gas wells. As previously approved, Platte Sand & Gravel will <br />not cross buried gas lines or use roads with gas lines under them as haul routes until copies of the signed <br />working agreements aze submitted to the Division. In lieu of an agreement, the applicant may submit crossing <br />and road designs showing how the gas lines will be protected. The applicant has provided adequate setback <br />distances to ensure structure aze protected. The applicant will obtain an agreement from the owner of the <br />structure if mining is to occur closer than the approved mining setback distance. <br />Application Exhibit S -Permanent Man-Made Structures: <br />20. "In response to the notification letter dated June 4, 2004, please be advised Duke Energy Field Services, LP <br />operates high pressure natural gas gathering pipelines within the proximity of the mine known as the S & H <br />Mine...In the event conflicts arise, Duke Energy would cooperate in the relocation of our pipelines upon <br />reaching a reimbursement agreement with Platte Sand & Gravel or their successors." (Lew Hagenlock, Duke <br />Energy; June 30, 2004) <br />21. "The legal right to enter and protection of existing structures and easements, Specifically, the protection of the <br />Ft. Saint Vrain historical site. The Fort's original site is not marked by the existing monument. The original site <br />can be determined only by trained, professional azcheologists who can precisely detemtine the original site ofthe <br />Fort and can recommend the appropriate preservation measure required to maintain the historical integrity of the <br />site." (Bruce Rippe; July 13, 2004) <br />22. "The Town is awaze that this site is of historical significance. What measures will be taken to protect the <br />petroglyphs and other sensitive historical features in the azea?" (Town of Milliken; July 14, 2004) <br />Division of Minerals and Geology (DMG) Responses- In the original application for a permit, Platte Sand & <br />Gravel committed to not crossing buried gas lines or use roads with gas lines under them as haul routes until copies <br />of the signed working agreements aze submitted to the Division. In lieu of an agreement, the applicant may submit <br />crossing and road designs showing how the gas lines will be protected. The applicant has provided adequate setback <br />distances to ensure the structures are protected. The applicant will obtain an agreement from the owner of the <br />structure if mining is to occur closer than the approved mining setback distance. <br />Platte Sand & Gravel has provided a document listing the slurry wall contractor's (Envirocon) anticipated utility <br />location and crossing procedures. The list of anticipated procedures states "Envirocon will contact the owners of <br />identified utilities to detemune emergency contacts and procedures, and specific requirements for crossing the <br />utility, if any." If the Operator is unable to obtain either of these notarized documents for any of the proposed <br />slurry wall crossings of utilities, then the utility crossings will be, in effect, forced crossings as anticipated under <br />Rule 6.4.19(b). To implement such a forced crossing, the Operator must provide to the Division a specific <br />engineering plan for each crossing, either implementing one of the methods in the anticipated list of procedures <br />or otherwise, and gain specific Division approval for each forced aossing prior to excavation activities <br />conducted to expose the utility at each specific forced crossing. <br />In accordance with the foregoing discussion, the issues related to 6.4.19 can be resolved by including the <br />following stipulation in the approval: <br />For each crossing of a utility line during slurry wall construction, the Operator mustprovide DMG notarized <br />documents in accordance with Rule 6.4.19(a) or Rule 6.4.19(c). These norarized documents must be accepted <br />and approved by DMGprior to any excavations to expose the utilities. Alternatively, the Operator mayprovide <br />alt engineering plan jor each proposed utility crossing for which an acceptable notarized document is not <br />obtained. Each crossing plan must be approved by DMG prior to any excavations to expose the utilities. <br />7 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.