My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
GENERAL31893
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
General Documents
>
GENERAL31893
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 7:54:45 PM
Creation date
11/23/2007 7:08:00 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1982057
IBM Index Class Name
General Documents
Doc Date
10/23/1985
Doc Name
DRAFT STIPULATION 12 (Stip 9)
From
MLRD
To
PEABODY COAL CO
Permit Index Doc Type
Stipulation
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
Richard D. Lamm <br />Governor <br />DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES <br />DaviO H. Getches, Executive Director <br />MINED LAND RECLAMATION DI\ <br />DAVID C. SHELTO N, Director <br />DATE: October 15, 1985 <br />T0: Steve Renner <br />FROM: Jim Pendleton <br />RE: Peabody Coal mpa s Response to Seneca II-W Draft Stipulation No. 12 <br />(Permit N C- 57) <br />In response to your request I have reviewed the submittal made by Peabody Coal <br />Company in response to Stipulation No. 12, included in your proposed Findings <br />for Seneca II-W application. I forward the following comments for your <br />consideration. <br />Stipulation No. 12 required that Peabody Coal Company "demonstrate that <br />blasting operations within 500 feet of the oil well will not damage the <br />integrity of the well casing and detail the safety precautions which will be <br />utilized to insure that vented gas is not ignited". The company proposes in <br />its response to "contact the owner of the well to see what limits of vibration <br />casing will withstand". Until that demonstration has been completed, it is <br />impossible to determine whether compliance with the standard loading <br />limitations of the scaled distance equation W=(D/60) will suffice. <br />Therefore, the operator statement of intent to comply with the regulations <br />does not satisfy the Division's concern expressed in original Stipulation <br />No. 12. <br />Further, the company proposes to take steps to control sparks and other <br />sources of ignition, which should definitly reduce the hazard of vented gas <br />ignition. However, I believe it would also be appropriate to determine what <br />level of vented gas actually exists prior to blasting. It should not be <br />difficult to monitor the area of the proposed blast with an appropriate <br />hydrocarbon sniffer prior to detonation. I do not believe that the operator's <br />response in this regard is sufficient to satisfy the Division's concerns. <br />For both the above reasons, I believe the company's response to be inadequate <br />to satisfy the Division's concerns regarding the detonation of explosives <br />within 500 feet of a petroleum or gas producing well. Therefore, I recommend <br />that Stipulation No. 12 be retained as originally drafted. <br />/ph <br />cc: Mike Savage <br />Doc. No. 4144 <br />423 Centennial Building, 1313 Sherman Street Denver, Colorado 80203 Tel. (303) 866-3567 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.