Laserfiche WebLink
Page 1 of I <br /> <br />Shuey, Steve - - <br />From: Dillie, Jim ~e . , ,o ,,-.. h. <br />Sent: Monday, September 18, 2000 9:59 AM ~ ~ v ~~c~ ~/i'~.'~~ <br />To: Shuey, Steve r''t-~ ''! .tom ~r'6",~ ~®~~~ <br />Subject: RE: Pathfinder's latest version of the TR03 adequacy response 1't _ ~.,~, 9 <br />Steve: '° ~ u <br />Following are my comments to paragraph 9 -contingency plan- Pipe Movement; ~~ ~ ~~ ~~~=Q~ <br />1) The survey points should be repeated within 3 days, weather permitting. <br />2) How will Pathfinder verify notification to PSCo? <br />3) We should have some input into the access/repair issues. <br />4) Pathfinder should submit an as-built report to DMG with details of any repair to the pipeline and/or <br />embankment wthin 30 days. <br />S) Pipeline monitoring should continue after repairs are completed, <br />Leak detected; <br />6) The DMG should be notified pursuant to Rule 8 <br />7) The DMG should be involved in the pipeline and embankment repair methodology <br />8) Again, Pathfinder should submit an as-built report after repairs are made to the pipeline and/or the <br />embankment and pipeline monitoring should continue after repairs are completed. <br />Large leak detected; <br />9) In addition to the requirements noted for a leak, Pathfinder should be notified by PSCo (who will then <br />notify the DMG) as soon as the alarm goes off at the automatic shut-off system. It is imperative that this <br />automatic shut-off system is functional since it is the only early warning system available. If it doesn't <br />work, the pipeline could leak for sometime before being detected. <br />Pathfinders proposed response times, in my opinion, are unrealistic. How can Mr, Smith be assured <br />someone will answer the phone at the PSCo office within the proposed times? If he cannot contact <br />anyone within the proposed time constaints do we issue a Reason to Believe? <br />In paragraph 11 Mr. Smith states that the outslope of the embankment is outside the permit area. If this is <br />the case, he should be required to demonstrate to the Division that the slope is sufficiently stable, or that <br />it will be stabilized, to protect the areas inside the permit area. <br />Let me know if you need anything else. <br />Jim D. <br />-----Original Message----- <br />From: Shuey, Steve <br />Sent: Monday, September l8, 2000 8:08 AM <br />To: Dillie, Jim; Humpluies, Bruce <br />Subject: FW: Pathfinder's latest version of the TR03 adequacy response <br />Importance: High <br />Please let me know by 11:00 this morning if you see any obvious problems with this <br />adequacy response. <br />----Original Message----- <br />From: Scott Smith [mailtoa_smith@telluridecolorado.net] <br />Sent: Saturday, September 16, 2000 7:53 AM <br />To: telluride paper chase <br />Cr. steveshuey@state.co.us <br />Subject: <br />9/ 18/00 <br />