Laserfiche WebLink
---- ~ <br />~II II~~I~II~I~~~ ~~~ <br />899 <br />Memo <br />To: Erica Crosby <br />From: Allen Sorenson ~~ <br />Date: 10/29/98 <br /> <br />Re: Protective Measures for the High Pressure Gas Pipelines, Tellier Gravel Pit, Johnson <br />Excavation, File No. M-98-058 <br />In assessing the adequacy of the initial permit application for the Tellier Gravel Pit, the <br />Division outlined four major issues to be addressed by the applicant to assure the safety of <br />the gas pipelines crossing the proposed permit area., Each of these issues is discussed <br />briefly in this memo, and conclusions related to the status of permitting operations within 200 <br />feet of the pipelines are provided. <br />The Division was concerned with the operational logistics of maintaining maximum <br />1:1 slopes parallel to the pipeline easement. The Applicant has committed to <br />maintenance of these maximum slope angles at all times during the operation of the <br />pit, and has been advised that the Division will consider any slopes steeper than 1:1 <br />to be a serious violation of the terms of the permit. As such, the issue has been <br />adequately addressed. The slope angle parallel to the pipeline is a critical inspection <br />topic for all future Division inspections of the site. <br />2. The applicant has agreed to survey the pipeline easement in the field and to erect a <br />fence or other permanent and clearly visible markers along the easement boundaries. <br />The terms of the permit application specify that a minimum five foot mining setback <br />be maintained at all times from the easement boundaries with the exception of <br />approved haul road crossings as discussed below. This setback and the presence of <br />the easement boundary markers are critical inspection topics for all future Division <br />inspections of the site. <br />3. The Division requested a rigorous demonstration that the proposed five-foot cover <br />over the pipelines was adequate protection at haul road crossings or documentation <br />that the owner/operator of the pipelines concurred with the proposed designs. The <br />Applicant has provided the Division with a copy of correspondence from Public <br />Service Company dated January 6, 1997 stating that five-foot cover is adequate. <br />4. The Division required that the pipeline be monitored for strain in order to provide early <br />warning of any potential problems and allow for mitigation in the form of stress relief <br />for the pipelines. The Operator has provided documentation of an agreement with <br />Public Service Company to install strain gauges and provide for monitoring of the <br />• Page 1 <br />