My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
REV12130
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
Revision
>
REV12130
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/25/2016 1:23:06 AM
Creation date
11/21/2007 10:28:59 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
M1977193
IBM Index Class Name
Revision
Doc Date
1/26/1996
Doc Name
FAX COVER
From
TOM SCHBEIROT
To
AZURITE INC
Type & Sequence
TR3
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.
/
3
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
• den 1~ 1 ~~ • <br />q~uri+E,Tn~. <br />January 25, 1996 ~.],p-tya-- ~ti]$ <br />Mr. Ken Klco ^ ~~ <br />Azurite, Inc. K <br />P.O. Box 338 <br />Cotopaxi, CO 81223 <br />RE: T.H.E. Aggregate Source, Technical Revision No. 3 <br />Blasting Survey & Monitoring Program <br />Permit No. M-77-193 <br />Dear Mr. Klco: <br />I have reviewed your January 16, 1996 application for a technical <br />revision regarding a blasting survey and monitoring program at the <br />Canon City Quarry. The decision date on the application will be <br />Februrary 16, 1996. Therefore, the following adequacy concerns <br />should be addressed on or before February 16, 1996: <br />1. The application specifies that the maximum peak particle <br />velocity is 1 inch/second (OSM). Please verify the source of this <br />limit, how it was derived, and its applicability to both air and <br />ground vibration at the Canon City Quarry. <br />2. The water filtration plant and the residents along Tunnel Drive <br />are in excess of 1,000 feet away from the highwall a:cea where <br />future blasting will occur. Assuming a powder factor of 0.14 <br />lbs/ton is used and a delayed (sequential) blasting technique is <br />applied, it appears that any detectable ground or air vik~ration at <br />the proposed monitoring locations will be less than the safe limit <br />of 1 inch/second. Please verify if this assumption is correct. <br />3. It is not clear to the Division whether the operators of the <br />water filtration plant and the residents along Tunnel Drive will <br />still "feel" the affects of an air shock wave when the peak <br />particle velocity limit of 1 inch/sec is adhered to. Please <br />comment. <br />4. The application specifies that Tunnel Drive residents will be <br />notified prior to future blasts. Please indicate how the residents <br />and personnel at the water filtration plant will be notified (ie, <br />air horn, telephone) and how much advance warning will be given <br />ie, 1 min., 5 min., 15 min., etc.) /~~~ <br />5. The proposed monitoring locations include 2 si~t~es~the water <br />filtration plant aac} 6 sites along Tunnel Drive, ~ aff at the <br />quarry highwall.~ The Division will require that T.H.E.. have a <br />minimum of 5 monitoring instruments operational at all times. The <br />monitoring locations along Tunnel Drive and the water filtration <br />plant may be altered~as long as there are at least 3 instruments <br />d4,~,~ ~~~, J~ccessba b~.st <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.