Laserfiche WebLink
persons having an interest in the structures, and the agreements are drafted in the format <br />required by Rule 6.4.19 and Section 34-32.5-115(4)(e), C.R.S., the Division's concerns <br />will be satisfied and the setbacks specified in the agreements will be approved. Please <br />state the mining offset distances for all new oil/gas wells and associated lines, or provide <br />notarized agreements. <br />6. Please provide the necessary agreements to mine closer than the approved mining off set <br />distance to structures as indicated in your adequacy response letter of August 2, 2004. <br />7. In an effort to address the requirements of Rule 6.4.19 of the Construction Materials <br />Rules and Regulations of the Mined Land Reclamation Boazd, the Applicant has <br />provided a document listing the slurry wall contractor's (Envirocon) anticipated utility <br />location and crossing procedures. This listing of anticipated grocedures is acceptable to <br />the Division of Minerals and Geology (DMG) from a technical standpoint. However, the <br />document provided does not meet the standazd to fully address the requirements of Rule <br />6.4.19. <br />The list of anticipated grocedures states "Envimcon will contact the owners of identified <br />utilities to deternune emergency contacts and procedures, and specific requirements for <br />crossing the utility, if any.". First, since the list of anticipated procedures was prepared by <br />Envirocon anctis worded as a is o pf rocedures to ~e en y nvirocon, rt must e <br />made cleaz to the Applicant and must be clear in the permit documents that the list of <br />anticipated procedures is a list of permit requirements, enforceable by DMG against the <br />Applicant/Permittee. Second, at the stage where the owners of identified utilities aze <br />being contacted, the Applicant should endeavor to obtain: <br />a notarized agreement with the owner(s) of the utility stating that the Applicant is <br />to provide compensation for any damage to the structure (Rule 6.4.19(a)), or, <br />a notarized letter, on the Utility's letterhead and from the owner(s) of the utility, <br />that the slurry wall construction will have "no negative effect" on their utility <br />(Rule 6.4.19(c)). <br />If the Applicant is unable to obtain either of these notarized documents for any of the <br />proposed slurry wall crossings of utilities, then the utility crossings will be, in effect, <br />forced crossings as anticipated under Rule 6.4.19(b). To implement such a forced <br />crossing, the Applicant must provide to DMG a specific engineering plan for each <br />crossing, either implementing one of the methods in the anticipated list of procedures or <br />otherwise, and gain specific DMG approval for each forced crossing prior to excavation <br />activities 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 <br />by including the following stipulation in the approval: <br />For each crossing of a utility line during slurry wall construction, the Operator <br />must provide DMG notarized documents in accordance with Rule 6.4.19(a) or <br />Rule 6.4.19(c). These notarized documents must be accepted and approved by <br />DMGprior to any excavations to expose the utilities. Alternatively, the Operator <br />may provide an engineering plan for each proposed utility crossing for which an <br />acceptable notarized document is not obtained. Each crossing plan must be <br />approved by DMG prior to any excavations to expose the utilities. <br />